Bring Back the Bears to California
WHO REALLY BELONGS ON CALIFORNIA’S FLAG?
For years a grizzly bear has graced California’s state flag — but there hasn’t been a grizzly in the wilds of the Golden State since 1924, when the last one was shot. But maybe it’s time to bring them back to parts of the state.
CENTER for BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY
The Center has launched a series of fun PSAs to raise the profile of grizzlies in California and encourage people to sign a petition urging the California Fish and Wildlife Commission to consider bringing these bears back to their native home in the Sierra Nevadas, where there are 8,000 square miles of prime habitat.
Of course, we like having the grizzly bear on the flag. It’s just time to bring it back to California too. Returning these incredible animals to remote portions of the state would be a key step in rewilding parts of California and saving one of America’s most iconic animals.
Grizzly bears once roamed across California for centuries, from the state's mountains to its valleys and beaches. But decades of persecution drove them off the landscape.
Today they survive in just a few pockets in the Rocky Mountains — roughly 4 percent of their historic range in the lower 48 states. If these endangered bears are going to recover, they need to be returned to more of their native homes in the American West (remote places typically far away from people).
In 2014 the Center filed a legal petition today calling on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to greatly expand its plans for recovering grizzly bears , including returning the iconic animals to vast portions of the American West. The petition identified 110,000 square miles of potential grizzly habitat in places like the Gila/Mogollon complex in Arizona and New Mexico, Utah’s Uinta Mountains, California’s Sierra Nevada and the Grand Canyon in Arizona.
Returning bears to some or all of these areas is a crucial step toward recovering them under the Endangered Species Act and could potentially triple the grizzly bear population in the lower 48 — from a meager 1,500 to 1,800 today to as many as 6,000.
And as for California? Well, it’s time to get the conversation going about bringing bears back to the Golden State.
[ LINK TO ARTICLE ] (Watch video)
Tags
Who is online
182 visitors
Historically, there were around 50,000 grizzly bears in North America. Today, there are an estimated 1,800 grizzly bears remaining in five populations in the lower 48 states. Most of these bears are located in the Northern Continental Divide Population (including Glacier National Park) and the Yellowstone Population.
California still has habitat for about 500 grizzlies, and if the North Cascade population recovers and expands, it may be introduced to California. There are, however, only about 20 of these bears remaining in that ecosystem. In 2014 the US Fish and Wildlife Service received a petition to reintroduce the grizzly to California. This reintroduction would be from the very closely related Rocky Mountain grizzly. [ Source ]
I would love to see grizzlies back in Cali. In fact, I think we could do a lot more in the way of natural conservation.
I think we could do a lot more in the way of natural conservation.
I agree. There is much regarding natural conservation that requires more time and effort from the people that are destroying this planet.
@Bobby-Nguyen :
From your other comments made on this site, I figured that would be your speed. However, this is not the place for discussions about your preferred sexual partners.
In reality, my seeds and articles are particularly not the place to play games. That asinine comment has been reported as being off topic.
The Native Tribes have been fighting the delisting of the Grizzly from the endangered species list.
It is time to do with the Grizzly what has been done to the American Icon, the Bison. Expand their territory, help increase their numbers.
Go California, go Grizzly.
The Native Tribes have been fighting the delisting of the Grizzly from the endangered species list.
The Naive Tribes do much in this country to help preserve our natural conservation.
Thank you for that.
Kav , good evening , problem with fighting the delisting is as long as the Yellowstone group is still listed as protected , they cannot be used to expand territories in other areas such as California .
the other optuion is to use bears from Alaska which are not indigiounous to the areas being looked at for repopulation , sorta like using the wrong subspecies of wolf they did with that reintroduction here.
"......they cannot be used to expand territories in other areas such as California ."
Why is that the case? At one time the Grizzly inhabited both sides of the Rockies. Wouldn't the Grizzlies that now occupy territories east of the Rockies have the same DNA as those that used to dwell in California?
Not nessisarily jerry , that's why I mentioned sub species , those little genetic differences that happened over a long time of evolution , the coastal bears , or even the bears of the sierra madres , may have the same basic genetics , but they evolved differently than inland bears or even bears that made it to the great plains.
That's one of the arguing points when they reintroed the wolves to Yellowstone, the closes genetic match was the southern rocky mnt wolf or the plains wolf , both sub species are critically endangered , that's why they used the wolves out of northern Canada , they couldn't use the wolves here because of listing and numbers . the wolf they did relocate is non native to the northern rockies and entirely the wrong subspecies for the area , since it evolved for a different environment .
Some will say I am nitpicking but I'm not , when it comes to reintroducing something , humans more or less actually screw things up more than if they had left it alone in the first place.
So if they start talking another similar subspecies( because they cant find a closer genetic match) , be careful , that's not what you will get , and that's coming from experience with wolf reintroduction.
both a nile croc and a saltwater croc are crocadiles , but they are definitely NOY the same even though they are both crocs. imagine reintroing either of them for an area that once held caymans( another smaller crocadillian).
So if they start talking another similar subspecies( because they cant find a closer genetic match) , be careful , that's not what you will get , and that's coming from experience with wolf reintroduction.
I am willing to leave those decisions up the experts. The problems they had with the wolves most likely have taught them some things that will help with any reinto plans with bears.
I agree with Kavika, as the wolves are making a comeback to the point where they are allowing hunting in some states.
both a nile croc and a saltwater croc are crocodiles , but they are definitely NOT the same even though they are both crocs. imagine reintroing either of them for an area that once held caymans( another smaller crocadillian).
IMO, the croc argument is a false comparison, because there there is a huge difference between a Nile Croc and a Saltwater Croc, compared to the current subspecies of bears that at one time lived in an area from Alaska to Mexico and from the Pacific coast to as far west as Wyoming. Their eating, migration and other habits had to be different, but their basic DNA would be much less different than that of a saltwater vs non-saltwater species of crocodiles.
Hi Mark,
A couple of things we wouldn't have to re introduce grizzly if we hadn't killed most of them off. Same goes for the wolf, although the incorrect sub species can create a problem, in some states the wolf is making a come back. Although some states have opened hunting them once again.
Now that I have that out of my system, that being the wanton killing of predators to satisfy the ''urge'' we have created an imbalance in nature.
With our ability to destroy, I would think that we could/should do what is possible to re introduce the grizzy or any animal to back to a small portion of their former range.
Kav , the hunting was allowed in Mont. and Id because the states agreed to a specific kind of situation favorable to the USFG. Wyoming had only 1 hunting season before it was shut down ( yes I got a wolf tag and a pelt that year). and the main reason there is hunting of the wolves is because they became a pest, a nusance and a public danger.
when thinking of reintroduction of any large predator species , it is most likely a good idea to consider the animal human interaction ratio and what the usual outcomes are ( something learned here with wolf reintroduction), now grizz have recovered to the point in the Yellowstone area over the past 40 years ( 25 of which I have been here to witness first hand) that unless the Yellowstone grizz gets even just partial delisting off the ESL , they will become OVERPOPULATED, to the area that is feasibly available for them to be in , with delisting , bears here would become PRIME candidates for relocation that people such as jerry and yourself are advocating, they would be a far better choice than say bears from further north in Canada or Alaska, and it would also be at a rate that real data can be collected for any future reintroductions.
Jerry the example I gave was for effect, but it still holds true , you cant take something not from an area because it has the same DNA sequences to a certain point and plant them in a totally different geographical area.
As I already explained , when they decided to reintro wolves here , the closest matches were the red Mexican wolf( also known as the southern rocky mnt wolf) , and the prairie wolf , both of those sub species don't get large (100 pounds is considered large for them )but both are endangered so they cant be taken from their original habitat until there are sufficient numbers to remove them from the endangered list. Both these sub species do not run in packs either , they act more like coyotes and pair up with mates . the wolf they did transplant is a grey wolf , but it is a subspecies that evolved to hunt caribou herds over literally thousands of square miles of uninterupted tundra and forests , that when they reach adulthood , go upwards towards 175 pounds for a healthy animal. that do run in packs .
Now don't get me wrong , I am all for the recovery of species back to native habitat, IF it can feasibly be done safely taking into account todays real world realities and dangers , for both the animals AND humans. remember animals don't abide by lines drawn on some map , and because of that there will be conflicts eventually .
Mark, I grew up in an area that had thousands of gray wolves, and black bear. I remember in the 1950's where they used planes in the winter to drive them onto frozen lakes and slaughter them. The result of that was that the deer herds started to starve to death from over population. It upset the balance of nature. And you are correct the gray wolf can and does get quite large and live in packs.
I trapped and hunted for food for many years, and find that the destruction of our environment is greatly concerning to me.
The few successes that we've had are due to people finally realizing that if we don't live in balance with nature, and seek to destroy it at our whim, without any forethought of the results we are on a road to an unlivable planet.
Kavika , they still use aircraft methods to bring the numbers down in both Alaska and in some Canadian provinces, they have been using that method here this past spring and summer on a problem pack just north and west of Lander ,Wy. And it has been the US government that has been doing it since the state has no authority to do so,
I guess success is dependant on who you ask and on what species your talking about , the successes I can look at and smile about is the bald eagle , protected because of mans use of pestisides that caused their numbers to decline so that seeing them was once a rarity, today they can be seen all over , but even as the national bird , they are not protected , I found out last winter that the local arapoaho tribe sued and won the right to trap and kill eagles for their feathers ( instead of using the eagle repository located in Colorado where eagles killed are sent for use by native peoples for their ceremonial customs) so far 4 eagle carcasses have been found on the reservation here with nothing but the tail feathers missing. (Think that says a lot about making the bison the national mammal, hunting is still allowed and will continue). Something about it being bigger medicine…….
As I stated I have watched the grizzly recovery here for the last 25 of the 40 years its been in place , and can smile that there are now more grizz that if they become delisted that can be transplanted like was initianally being discussed , but it will only happen if they are delisted because transplants into former ranges cannot by ESA rules come from one endangered or protected group to someplace they don’t exist currently., And yes I am for delisting of the Yellowstone grizz, not for the hunting opportunity , but because currently the Yellowstone area is coming close to optimal saturation of how many bears the land can support, once delisted , bears can be transplanted into other areas but not until then , We remember the mom and cubs from a year or 2 ago , that’s really why she was killed , because the ESA and being listed prohibited her being moved out of this local eco system. And that was a tragedy.
Now here is where we will differ my friend , the reintroduction of the wolf species they did transplant has been a governmental CLUSTRERFUCK , and proof the government will say just about anything to do as it pleases.
The initial agreement was that each state affected would only have to maintain a certain limit of packs once the federal government turned over responsibility to the states , and that was SUPPOSE to happen once a set number of pack numbers was reached ,
Another part of the agreement was that the reintroduced wolves were NOT to be covered by the ESA and the were to be listed as experimental AND expendable , meaning if they became problems , shooting one would not bring down the full penalties of the ESA on the person involved , guess what? didn’t happen that way.
I will break this post up since this is getting long in the tooth.
Oh another reintroduction from last weekend locally , up in Meteesee wy , black footed ferrets were reintroduced into the local habitat.
The wolves dropped into Yellowstone Park were not Rocky Mountain wolves, known in the scientific community as Canis Lupus Irremotus, a smaller animal that hunted in pairs and was the indigenous species in the Yellowstone Ecosystem. Rather, they were the Canadian Grey Wolf,(Canis lupus occidentalis) a super sized predator hunting in super sized packs that evolved to chase caribou herds for hundreds of miles.
Federal implementation of wolf introduction has violated the Endangered Species act (ESA) on virtually every count. Dr. Richard Mitchell, PhD., one of the original authors of the ESA, traveled from Washington, D.C., on January 11, 2000, to testify in Billings [Montana] at the Predator Management Symposium. Dr. Mitchell stated to an audience of several hundred, including Sen. Conrad Burns, that it was a violation of the ESA to dump the Canadian Grey[wolf] on top of the Rocky Mountain wolf.
The Rocky Mountain wolf didn’t need to be ‘re-introduced’ — because it was already there. Locals testified at the aforementioned event to having seen the native wolf in and around the park prior to the “soft” introduction of this “experimental-non essential” predator that was already migrating into Montana naturally from Canada.\
Northern Rocky Mnt wolf ( canis Lupus Irremotus) the wolf that originally inhabited Yellowstone and the wolf recovery area.
* Highly secretive behavior. Very sensitive to roads and highways. Largely nocturnal.
* Usually found either as dispersed individuals or pairs.
* Packing activity was very rare except during the months of January-February.
* Pack size at breeding time was usually 4-7 individuals.
* Females (breeding bitches) retained pups for an average of 18 months.
* Pack dispersal was very consistent after breeding season.
* Litter size consistently was 1-3 pups. Bitch bred at 2-year old stage.
* Extremely selective as to food source. Rarely fed on old carcasses or kills of other species, except in the most harsh winter conditions.
* Very much an opportunist when different prey was available. Spent great percentage of hunting effort on rodent acquisition, (moles to rabbits).
* Sport-Reflex Killing almost negligible. Most ungulate depredation was consumptive, not surplus. Typical kill had hams and shoulders consumed.
* Territory of individual or pairs was quite large. Average 2 week return cycle.
* Wolf body size: Female 55 lbs.-70 lbs. Male 85 lbs.-105 lbs.
* Competition with other predator species including coyote and fox was low. Other canine species co-existed and thrived in presence of Resident Wolves.
* Habitat utilized consistently: Mid to high elevation, with forest and mixed forest. Resident Wolves were very resistive to utilizing large areas of open range land with grass or sagebrush cover.
* Older mature males almost always solitary except at breeding intervals.
* Conflict with domestic dogs very minimal except in rare cases.
* Livestock depredations extremely rare but do occur in remote areas.
* Consistent avoidance of man made structures, roads, vehicles, and humans.
NON NATIVE WOLF : Introduced Canadian Grey Wolf,Canis lupus occidentalis 1996 to present.
* Exhibits low level of fear of humans. Non-secretive behavior. Minimal avoidance of humans, vehicles, domestic animals. Will cross large open terrain at will even when other options for cover are available.
* Canadian Grey Wolf is found in small to very large pack sizes. Small packs of 5 individuals are common as are large packs with over 20 members.
* Pack merging, the condition of 2 or more packs combining is being observed in many areas in the west and is not uncommon. Merged packs of over 40 wolves have been observed in the Central Idaho Wilderness.
* Females (breeding bitches) can be bred even at 1-year of age, and produce from 5-9 pups per season. The pups usually remain with the pack but can disperse or be driven off by other pack members.
* All females of breeding potential in the pack are usually bred. There is absolutely no indication that any females are kept from breeding by the theoretical “Alpha-female.” Large packs are quickly produced and can disperse and merge several times within a week.
* Canadian Grey Wolves show a diet preference for elk but will switch at will to a secondary prey species. Low preference is shown for rodent species, but wolves do sporadically hunt rodents.
* Sport-Reflex Killing is highly developed in Canadian Grey packs. From observations in the field, 3-5 ungulates are killed for each ungulate consumed. This surplus killing is greatly increased if the pack size is large or packs have merged. Often small wintering herds of deer or elk are completely extirpated in one hunting event.
* Body Size: Females 60 lbs.-85 lbs. Males 90 lbs.-120 lbs. wolves in the 150 lbs range and up are not uncommon due to diet.
* Competition with other predatory species is extreme and often fatal. Both mountain lion and bear have been impacted by attacks and from reduced available prey. Other Canines such as Coyotes and Fox have been severely impacted in most of their habitats. Fox are only able to survive in habitats that include lots of willow or dense underbrush. Coyote populations have been reduced by are persisting at lower than historic levels.
* Canadian Grey Wolves have been found to utilize all available habitats, from high elevation alpine to sagebrush deserts. This has allowed this variety of wolf to be opportunistic in all ecosystems available to it.
* Large mature male wolves remain with the pack threw out the year, sometimes dispersing for short periods of time.
* The Canadian Grey Wolf is highly predatory on all domestic canines. Hunting hounds are especially vulnerable to attacks and are usually killed outright in a confrontation by wolves.
* Canadian Grey Wolves have shown a preference for predating on domestic livestock even with abundant natural prey present. Beef calves are the most common victims of wolf depredation.
* Canadian Grey Wolves show a high level of habituation to humans, and man-made structures. It is not uncommon to find Canadian Grey Wolves in very remote areas eating out of dog dishes and coming onto porches of homes when the owners are present.
Canis lupus occidentalis
Conservation Status: Least Concern
They are also known as the Rocky Mountain Wolf, Alaskan Timber Wolf or Canadian Timber Wolf. They can be found in Alaska, the Northern Rockies, western and central Canada and they were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho in 1995
LOL they arent even endangered…….and as is being shown , you can call 2 things the same , but they can be entirely different .
Mark, I'm fairly aware of all the ramifications of non native animals being introduced to the environment.
My point has been from the beginning that humans destroyed the balance, there is no doubt about that. And working to re introduce some of these animals is, IMO, the right thing to do. Again it has to be done correctly, (species, sub species, range etc).
Regarding the Arapahoe getting the right to kill eagles. You are aware that the windmills kills hundreds of bald and golden eagles every year. Or that hunters (illegal), kill dozens of them. Let me point out to you of the 10 eagles killed in one day by ''hunters'' in MN. Seems that they were non Indians.
It wasn't only pesticides that nearly destroyed the eagle, hunting was also a contributor to the near demise.
I'm aware of the program to introduce the black footed ferret to some of the plains states. In fact the Dakota tribes are working with the govt.
Here is an interesting link to the program.
Maybe, some day they will try to bring the elk back to MN. The last elk was killed in MN in the early 1900's. Just a little information for you...The headwaters of the Mississippi is Lake Itasca. This lake was named by the Ojibwe Elk Lake, (Bakegamaa) because at one time the elk were plentiful in MN.
We can debate this subject for the next 10 years and probably will never agree on it.
my friend , I wish Wyoming had some elk to send your way , when I first moved here in 93 , they were doing just that except the elk were sent to Pa. but since the reintroduction of the non native wolves , that seems unlikely to happen since elk numbers have declined along with deer and moose and part of the decline can be attributed to winter mortality , but not that much since winters haven't really been that harsh . least so's I have been told.
Yellowstone:
Elk Population
1994 19,045 (year before wolf reintroduction)
1995 16,791 (reintroduction began)
1996 no count taken
1997 no count taken
1998 11,742
1999 14,538 (prior to late season elk hunt)
2000 13, 400 (prior to late season elk hunt)
2001 11,969
2002-03 9,215
2004 8,335
2005 9,545
2006 6,588
2007 6,738
2008 6,279
2009 6,070
2010 4,635
2011 4,174
2012 3,915
2013 no count taken
Now I didn't hunt elk in the area but just south of there and the numbers reflect where I did hunt to what happened in Yellowstone and surrounding areas . What I did notice happening is more and more elk hunt areas further and further away were being required to have a feed ground permit to hunt those areas even if no feed ground was present .
What that feed ground permit was for was to feed the elk during the winter since their winter range( historical) has been converted to human usage. What it now for all intensive purposes is used for is to feed the elk to feed the wolves IMHO as well as in the opinion of many that have worked to bring ungulate numbers up. : In 1907, only 41,000 elk remained in North America. Thanks to the money and hard work invested by hunters to restore and conserve habitat, today there are more than 1 million. and that was as of 2010 . Its hard to watch 100 years of conservation go down the tubes because of a governmental decision to introduce a non native species .
Sadly what is happening to the elk in WY is happening to the moose in MN. for totally different reasons.
The population has fallen by over 50 percent in the last 5 years. Studies have been done and there was no concrete reason for this happening. At first it was thought that is was ''wasting disease'', like deer will get, but it was not the reason. This is where the govt, (state) made a really stupid decision. The governor of the state would not sign for more research to be done. He said (paraphrasing) they are dying off and you haven't found out why, so no more money, they will die off....A frickin' brilliant move by an idiot.
At times, one has to wonder WTF people are thinking. If moose disappear from MN it will be nothing less than a disaster.
Non native species of animals/fish/reptiles/birds are destroying our country. The Burmese phyton in the everglades, snakehead fish in the NE. Asia carp, etc etc etc.
First wolf pack found in California in nearly a century
Five gray wolf pups captured on a trail camera in Northern California in early August are members of the first established pack in the state in decades.
Five gray wolf pups captured on a trail camera in Northern California in early August are members of the first established pack in the state in decades.
(California Department of Fish and Wildlife)A gray wolf pack has established itself in Northern California, state wildlife officials confirmed on Thursday, the first family of wolves known in the state in nearly 100 years.
The group — two adult black-furred gray wolves and five 4-month-old pups — will be known as the Shasta Pack.
The announcement came after trail cameras in remote Siskiyou County captured a series of photographs in May and June of what appeared to be a wolf. Biologists retrieved scat samples and placed more cameras in the area, hoping for a better look.
On Aug. 9, the cameras photographed two separate black-furred wolves, believed to be adults. Five black wolf pups were photographed in the same spot. The evidence was in: It was clearly a pack.
State wildlife authorities last year added gray wolves to California's endangered species list, even though no wolves were known to be in the state. Officials said they anticipated that wolves beginning to establish in Oregon would eventually find their way into California’s northern counties.
California wildlife officials believe a gray wolf has been moving through a remote part of Siskiyou County.
The state Department of Fish and Wildlife announced Monday that evidence points to the presence of a male wolf in the far northern area of the state, although DNA testing on scat collected...
California wildlife officials believe a gray wolf has been moving through a remote part of Siskiyou County.
The state Department of Fish and Wildlife announced Monday that evidence points to the presence of a male wolf in the far northern area of the state, although DNA testing on scat collected...
(Julie Cart)But biologists did not anticipate discovering an established pack in the state this soon. California’s plan to manage wolves is not yet complete.
LINK.....