FREE ESSAY ON GRIZZLY BEARS

GRIZZLY BEARS

Grizzly bears in British Columbia represent many things to different people. To a large
percentage of the population, they represent all that is still wild about our province, a
link to the past before humans came and logged much of the forests, put roads over the
mountains, and dammed the rivers. This view of grizzly bears as somewhat of a 'flagship'
species is reflected in the naming by environmental groups of the large wilderness area
of the Central Coast as the Great Bear Rainforest. Certainly there are many other species
that inhabit the coastal rainforests from the Upper Squamish Valley north to the Alaska
Panhandle, such as blacktail deer, Pacific salmon, and grey wolves, but it is the grizzly
bear that is the symbol that is attached to this area by people the world over. It is the
presence of healthy grizzly bear populations that displays a preservation and care for
our forests to the world, and it is for this reason that there are strong pressures on
those who manage grizzly bear populations in B.C. to protect them from future declines in
population and range. This is a very complex task, as grizzly bears have very strict
habitat requirements, and pressure from all sorts of encroaching developments require
care to be taken in the planning process. Today in British Columbia grizzly bears do
still exist in viable wild populations throughout much of their historic range. Prior to
European settlement in British Columbia ca. 1793, grizzly bears ranged throughout the
entire mainland of B.C., save for areas of icefield. While much of their historical
habitat has been extensively altered, grizzly bears still occupy the coastal areas of
mainland B.C. from just north of Powell River all the way to the Alaska Panhandle. The
entire northern half of the province contains large tracts of suitable habitat, as do the
Rocky, Purcell, and Selkirk Mountains. The central interior plateau area of the province
from Quesnel north to Prince George still contains depressed numbers of bears, while the
Southern Interior and South Coast/Lower Mainland no longer has grizzly bear populations
(British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks ,1995). The institution
charged with managing grizzly bears in British Columbia is the Wildlife Branch of the
Ministry of Environment, Land, and Parks. The Wildlife Branch has an official mandate
relating to its management of grizzly bears, which was published in the British Columbia
Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy in June of 1995. The mandate that is given is "....to
ensure the continued existence of grizzly bears and their habitats for future
generations." (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995). This is
a very wide ranging mandate, and when coupled with the first of the four goals stated
under the mandate, "To maintain in perpetuity the diversity and abundance of grizzly
bears and the ecosystems on which they depend throughout British Columbia." (British
Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995), it is apparent that this is a
goal easier said than done. The Wildlife Branch of MELP participates in both the direct
management of bear populations (ie. hunting) and in indirect management processes such as
land use planning that affects grizzly bear habitats. In direct management processes the
Wildlife Branch has more power than in other processes that involve more user groups.
Hunting pressures represent the largest direct issue that the Wildlife Branch deals with,
and it is with hunting regulations that the Wildlife Branch wields the most power. In
1996, grizzly bear hunting in British Columbia moved to a limited entry basis known as
LEH permits, or limited entry hunting permits. This process allows the Wildlife Branch to
control how many permits are issued on an annual basis, in theory allowing the total kill
to be monitored. This option is available only to residents of British Columbia, while
non residents must hire a licensed guide outfitter who has also been issued a permit.
According to the Grizzly Bear Harvest Management Policy, released in 1999, harvests are
determined as follows: allowable harvest = (max allowable total human caused
mortality)-(estimate of unknown human caused mortality)-(estimated known non-hunting
human caused mortalities that are predicted to occur based on past experience). The
maximum total human caused mortality can range from 3% to 6%, depending on the average
habitat capability for the area as determined by the Regional Wildlife Section Head
(RWSH). The habitat capability is used to estimate populations based on the potential
that an area is assigned in terms of supporting grizzly bears. These habitat carrying
capacities are reviewed every three years by the RWSH in conjunction with the provincial
Large Carnivore Research Biologist. Prior to 1989, the annual allowable harvest was
solely based on being 5% of the provincial population, but with concerns of
concentrations of overharvesting, a review was conducted in 1989, and it was determined
that during the period 1984-1988, 52 of 118 management units inhabited by grizzlies had
total kills exceeding the annual allowable harvest. After this a guideline was
established throughout the province that set the allowable harvest from all sources at
about 4% of the total population (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and
Parks,1999). Limited entry hunts for grizzly bears are allowed throughout the province's
management regions except for regions 2 and 8 (the Lower Mainland and the Okanagan,
respectively). Since LEH was implemented in 1996, the total grizzly bear harvest by
hunters has been under 300. In 1999, a total of 154 grizzlies were legally killed by
residents, and another 110 bears were killed by non-residents, which totals 264 grizzlies
taken legally by hunters, and in 1998 only 207 bears were killed (Brooke, 1999). An
additional 82 bears were reported killed for posing a threat to people or property,
although it is certain many more went unreported (Pynn, 2000). These harvest numbers do
show a decline from traditional hunter harvest. For example, from 1965 to 1970, the total
legal hunting kill ranged from 340 to 460, with a total legal kill of 2440 grizzly bears
over this 6 year period (Finegan, 1971). Additionally, the annual average kill was 350 up
until 1992 (Brooke, 1999). The total number of illegal and unreported kills of grizzly
bears remains unknown , but estimates have put it anywhere from 25% to 100% of the known
kill, depending on the area and access (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands,
and Parks,1995). One other significant factor affecting some grizzly bear populations in
B.C. is the translocation of bears. In 1973, the B.C. government , along with Alberta,
Wyoming, Idaho, and Montana established the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee, which was
charged with managing cross border populations of grizzlies. The IGBC recognised that ,
with the exception of Yellowstone Park, the lower 48 states could not maintain viable
populations of grizzly bears without help from Canadian provinces via habitat and
bears(British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995). Habitat mapping
was conducted in the 4 areas that were identified as containing suitable habitat (
Northern Continental Divide, Cabinet-Yaak, Southern Selkirks, and the North Cascades),
and British Columbia has also relocated several bears from healthy populations to these
regions. Excluding the North Cascades, the Canadian portions of these ecosystems still
maintain fairly strong populations, some of which have been relocated to U.S. portions of
the Cabinet-Yaak ecosystem to augment the populations in the southern reaches. Grizzly
bear populations in the North Cascades area have been severely reduced, so in an attempt
to augment populations there the Wildlife Branch relocated 10 bears from the Lillooet
Valley (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995) . This met with
some success, but one adult male who was radio collared was observed to have returned to
his home range by way of the Chilliwack River valley, crossing the TransCanada highway
and the Fraser, and heading north through Golden Ears Park. This information could be
very important in determining future land use processes involving grizzly bears. While
decisions regarding hunting and relocation of grizzly bears falls under the jurisdiction
of the Wildlife Branch, decisions involving the management of grizzly bear habitat are
much more complex. Maintaining high quality grizzly bear habitat is of the utmost
importance to the long term viability of grizzly bears, as they have very specific
requirements that must be met in order to avoid alienation of bears. First off, grizzly
bears require vast amounts of land to live upon, usually in the 50 to 100 square km
range, and sometimes reaching up to nearly 900 square km in less productive habitats
(Thornton, 1999). The Khutzeymateen Valley, which is believed to contain the highest
densities of grizzlies in B.C., was shown to have had densities of 16.4-23.3 square
km/bear (not including young) throughout the year (MacHutcheon, A.G., et al. 1993). This
study area is an ecosystem in near pristine condition, but in areas where impacts have
been greater, bears will avoid developed areas and require a greater range. It is for
this reason that the preservation of intact tracts of habitat are crucial to the survival
of grizzly bears. The majority of the land base that grizzly bears are present on in B.C.
is administered by the B.C. Ministry of Forests (British Columbia Ministry of
Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995), and to a lesser extent areas have also been
influenced by government departments such as the Ministry of Highways, as well as the
Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. In 1995, the Ministry of Environment, Land,
and Parks published the British Columbia Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy, which was
designed to be a blueprint for managing affairs regarding grizzly bear conservation in
British Columbia, and ultimately to reverse the loss of bear numbers and habitat that had
been occurring over the past several hundred years. Three main areas of improvement were
identified in the Strategy that were needed to secure the long term viability of the
grizzlies:The conservation of grizzly bear habitat, the establishment of an independent
Grizzly Bear Scientific Advisory Committee, and improvements in research and population
inventory methods (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995). The
tool that is to be used by the Wildlife Branch in the protection of key grizzly bear
habitat is the establishment of Grizzly Bear Management Areas (known as GBMA's). This
initiative is designed to preserve a network of key, relatively intact grizzly bear
ecosystems as special management areas. Once an area is to be designated as a GBMA, it
can then be managed to limit activities that are detrimental to grizzly bear populations.
Once an area has been designated as a GBMA, it will be closed to grizzly bear hunting, it
will control other recreational activities that could conflict with grizzly bears, and if
possible it will be linked to other GBMAs by corridors that contain habitat necessary for
grizzly bears. Selection of areas as GBMAs will be occur with priority to areas that
contain suitable habitat, areas that are in close proximity to existing protected areas,
and areas where grizzly populations are threatened (British Columbia Ministry of
Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995) . While in theory the idea of GBMAs sound like an
effective management tool for conserving grizzly bear populations, the actual designation
of an area as a GBMA must be done through the opportunities within existing land use
initiatives, such as Land and Resource Management Plans (LRMPs), Protected Areas Strategy
(PAS), and the Commission on Resources and Environment (CORE). In areas where any of
these processes are occurring or proposed, Wildlife Branch staff may provide relevant
information and, if desired, recommend the establishment of a GBMA through the landuse
designation process. These processes require public consultation and many different
stakeholder groups would have to be included in the decision. Representatives of First
Nations groups as well as public stakeholder groups such as the B.C. Wildlife Federation
(a notably pro-hunting group), the Guide Outfitters Association of BC, the federation of
BC Naturalists, the Canadian Parks and Wilderness Society, and the Outdoor Recreation
Council of BC would all have to be included (British Columbia Ministry of Environment,
Lands, and Parks,1995), in addition to local interest groups and environmental groups
such as the Rainforest Conservation Society. Clearly within this gathering there would be
very different viewpoints on grizzly bear management, with some of these groups at
opposite ends of the spectrum on some issues (most notably hunting). Once all of these
interests were established, it would be the decision of the LRMP or the CORE table
itself, not the Wildlife Branch, to designate a given area as a GBMA. In areas where
there have been no land use planning processes occurring, and there are not any proposed,
the Wildlife Branch may only propose a no-hunting zone after consulting with local
interests. These no-hunting zones would not be protected from any other types of
activities such as resource extraction and industrial road building, as well as
recreational activities such as camping and skiing. While closing an area to hunting does
require consultation by the Wildlife Branch, a step could usually be taken unilaterally
be the Branch if it was determined to be in the best conservation interests. The creation
of GBMAs through land use planning processes is an important step in conserving grizzlies
according to the Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy, but due to the long-winded nature of
the processes, as well as the possible lack of consensus amongst stakeholders, other
management processes are identified as being necessary in order to better protect
grizzlies (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995). The Forest
Practices Code contains a provision that gives special attention to Red and Blue listed
species (identified as endangered/threatened and sensitive/vulnerable species,
respectively. Special species 'guides' are in the process of being completed for 104
animal species (including grizzlies) that will contribute to a special Forest Practices
Code field guide for grizzly bears. A provincial review of all Timber Supply Areas is
also given as an avenue for the protection of sensitive grizzly bear populations,
according to the Ministry's Background Report (British Columbia Ministry of Environment,
Lands, and Parks,1995). A second key component of the 1995 Grizzly Bear Conservation
Strategy is the establishment of an independent Grizzly Bear Scientific Advisory
Committee (GBSAC ) to advise the MELP on conservation issues regarding grizzly bears. The
GBSAC was charged with advising government on issues such as research priorities,
inventory priorities, hunting regulations, population status and trends, new and emerging
biological and ecological information, and international considerations (British Columbia
Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995). The Committee was formed in 1995 out of
12 members who were provincial, national, and international grizzly bear experts, as well
as First Nations representatives, appointed by the Minister of Environment, Land, and
Parks. This committee was to meet regularly to provide an objective, third party opinion
on matters affecting grizzly bears, and then report to the Minister directly. On October
1 of this year the first Committee was dissolved, and a second committee has yet to have
been appointed for the next five years. Since the Grizzly Bear Conservation Strategy was
completed in 1995 a great deal of effort has been put into analysing the success of the
measures taken by the provincial government to stabilise its grizzly bear populations.
Establishment of conservation areas has been occurring as part of the provincial
government's pledge to protect at least 12% of its total land base (which has occurred
just recently). The Khutzeymateen Provincial Park was established in 1995 as Canada's
first park set aside specifically for grizzly bears and their habitat
(www.env.gov.bc.ca/bcparks/explore, 2000). It is located north of Prince Rupert on the
North Coast, and is comprised of an intact old growth valley that holds a 443 sq. km
Class A park, with additional no hunting zones surrounding the core park bringing the
total protected area to 3850 sq. km (British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and
Parks,1995). Further down the coast, the Kitlope River valley is a 3887 sq. km Protected
Area that is co-managed with the Haisla First Nation. This park encompasses the world's
largest intact coastal temperate rainforest, but in the government's Background Report,
it states that "....grizzly bear populations are not high..." but that it "...represents
a significant watershed that might serve as a grizzly bear conservation area." (British
Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks,1995, p. 35). The largest conservation
area that has been established in British Columbia, and the one that shows the most
promise for establishing a large enough area that does not isolate small populations of
grizzly bears is the Muskwa-Kechika region of the Northern Rockies. In 1999, 1.1 million
hectares of land were protected as a provincial park, with an additional 666, 000
hectares added through the Mackenzie LRMP this year (Pynn, 2000). The protected area of
the Muskwa-Kechika prohibits mining activities that have threatened the area, as well as
blocking a proposed mining access road from Fort Ware north to the Alaska highway. This
protected wilderness area has been trumpeted by the provincial government as a major step
in linking protected areas for grizzly bears from the Rockies to the coast, although part
of that corridor of protected area is very narrow areas along the Stikine River. Other
areas identified as having potential to serve as GBMAs are the Mitchell Lake/Niagara PA
(which connects Bowron and Wells Gray parks), Sustut-Babine, and Koeye-Namu. With the
additions to protected areas in B.C. now at 12% of the total land base, it is possible
that government and industry could stop creating new protected areas, yet for grizzly
bears, the productive low elevation rainforest that they favor on the coast has less than
6% protected (Thomas, 1998). A great deal of the new protected areas were classified as
high alpine rock and ice, which offers very little use to grizzly bears, or many other
species for that matter. Land use decisions such as the creation of the Khutzeymateen
sanctuary must be continued if the grizzly bear is not to be reduced to small, isolated
populations which will be even more sensitive to encroachment and the so called 'edge
effect' (Jeo, Sanjayan, and Sizemore,1999). Unfortunately, it appears that the 1995
Conservation Strategy could quite possibly do just that. An independent report in 1998 by
three American scientists concluded that the strategy was likely to "...reduce grizzly
populations into islands of habitat or refugia from which large, wide-ranging carnivores
like the grizzly are the first to disappear" (Hume, 2000). The government policy of
establishing GBMAs will likely accomplish this unless the strategy is revised to
explicitly provide adequate corridors between the protected ares, as well as
concentrating on protecting areas of greater size that can provide the vast amounts of
space required to sustain grizzly populations. The existing strategy relies too heavily
on local land use planning processes to designate areas as GBMAs, when what is needed is
an effective, independent committee that can report directly to the Minister of ELP in
order to recommend the required areas to be protected. The Grizzly Bear Scientific
Advisory Committee that was established in 1995 should have been a blueprint for the type
of action needed, but due to powers beyond its control, it was largely ineffective. When
the GBSAC was established, it was to provide objective advice on management issues
regarding grizzly bears. As time passed on, it became apparent that high level government
interests within the Wildlife Branch were only interested in maintaining the status quo,
and when the committee did attempt to make recommendations that were different than the
government's agenda, they were quashed. When the GBSAC opposed a ski resort development
in critical grizzly habitat, the advice was ignored by the NDP government, and instead an
internally drafted paper by a Wildlife Branch staff member supporting the development was
issued (Hume, 2000). Government interference proved to be so intense that many of the
panel members, including Wayne McCrory, who is one of B.C.'s leading grizzly biologists,
are considering declining reappointment on the new committee due to frustrations from
their ineffectiveness in enacting change. Wildlife Branch interests have had a history of
taking actions that are seen as not being in the grizzly's best interests for many years
now. One of the most contentious issues affecting the grizzly bear hunt in British
Columbia has been the accuracy of population estimates used in determining the total
allowable annual kills. In 1989, external pressures on the Wildlife Branch concerned
about a chronic overkill of bears, a fact that was backed up in the government own
Background Report in 1995 that stated that from 1984-1988, 52 of 118 Management Units had
total kills over the maximum allowable annual harvest. A new guideline was adopted
stating that the total provincial harvest level should be reduced from 5% to 4%, but at
the same time the Wildlife Branch revised its population estimates for the grizzlies,
nearly doubling on paper the population to between 10,000 and 13,000 grizzlies (Thornton,
1998). Instead of reducing the number of grizzlies harvested, it actually may have
increased the total number of kills. Independent scientists continue to estimate the
population at 4,000 to 7,000 bears province wide, and it seems likely the actual
populations does in fact lie somewhere below the government estimates. The reason for
government overestimating populations is due to the poor methodology used to determine
populations. Local biologists from each region were left to assess the number of bears
that each habitat could potentially support, and adjust estimates accordingly. No field
checks are actually done for the majority of populations, and the Ministry itself even
admits that population totals were based on 'best guesses' of local biologists (Thornton,
1998). Since hunting regulations are based on population estimates, uncertainty over
numbers has led to questions about the hunt that continues today. A manual count of the
Limited Entry Hunting Regulations Synopsis for this hunting season shows that a total of
1151 LEH permits were available for fall and spring hunts. Without going into statistical
models, this shows a lack of adherence being paid to following the precautionary
principle. Even according to the top end of the Wildlife Branch's estimates, this allows
for permits to be issued for nearly 9% of the province's bears to be legally killed,
without accounting for non-hunting mortalities. Also, in MU 6-14 which encompasses the
Ishkheenickh River valley which borders on the Khutzeymateen, 15 LEH permits are
available. According to the Khutzeymateen Valley Grizzly Bear Study completed in 1993,
this valley is easily accessible to the Khutzeymateen via a low elevation pass in the
Khuzeymateen's headwaters. Given the press that has been given to the creation of the
Khutzeymateen as a grizzly bear sanctuary, it does not seem prudent to allow a hunt
within such close proximity to the Khutzeymateen. In order to effectively conserve
grizzly bear populations into the next century, there are institutional barriers that
must be overcome to effect any positive change. A shift from the current frame of thought
of trying to meet the estimated minimum needs of the grizzly bears to a school of
thinking that will provide hunting regulations and habitat protection that is more than
enough to protect the bears. The current framework of the Wildlife Branch in MELP does
not provide the opportunity for efficient regulation, as the Wildlife Branch does not
have the authority required to compete against the many other interest groups that have a
stake in grizzly bear habitat. There needs to be a better working relationship between
the Ministry of Forests and the Wildlife Branch with regards to logging practices in
order to provide adequate habitat in areas that are not within any officially protected
area. Management of a species such as the grizzly bear that has requirements that are not
compatible with most types of human activities provide a challenge for modern management
institutions in that the multi stakeholder process that land use planning involves does
not favor the protection of grizzlies. If habitat is to be genuinely protected, it cannot
be subject to compromise between groups such as resource extraction, road building, and
to a lesser extent tourism. Other than in a few select instances such as the
Khutzeymateen, it is unlikely that many land use decisions will be made to set aside
large tracts of productive land exclusively for grizzly bear habitat, and more than
likely the majority of grizzly bear habitat will continue to be subject to encroachment
from commercial and recreational uses. If the provincial government is committed to
keeping a relatively stable and widespread grizzly bear population throughout the
province, it must work to ensure that the few protected areas large enough to protect
grizzly bear ecosystems are added to and connected to ensure biodiversity and to avoid
isolation of populations which will eventually lead to extirpation (see Fig. 1). An
effective independent panel must be in place to advise the province on matters affecting
grizzly bears, and the province must listen to suggestions that are in the interests of
conserving bears if it is to have any chance of saving the grizzlies. Finally, the
grizzly bear hunt in B.C., that is already the center of controversy, must be scaled back
dramatically, so that there is no question that the hunt is not endangering the long term
viability of grizzly bears in B.C.. This would also send a strong signal to the
international community that B.C. is committed to conserving grizzly bears, instead of
the current system that claims to be bear friendly but in reality pays only lip service
to taking strong action. Most likely the only way that sweeping, effective changes will
take place will be if the economy in B.C. eventually moves away from being so resource
dependent, because if the government continues to have to choose between grizzly bears
and logging, mining, and farming, the grizzlies don't stand a chance. Grizzly Bear
Management Institutions in B.C. 
Bibliography 
References British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks(1995), Conservation
of Grizzly Bears in British Columbia:Background Report, Ministry of Environment, Lands,
and Parks, Victoria, B.C. British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands, and
Parks(2000), British Columbia Limited Entry Hunting Regulations Synopsis, Ministry of
Environment, Lands, and Parks, Victoria, B.C. British Columbia Ministry of Environment,
Lands, and Parks(1995), A Future for the Grizzly: British Columbia Grizzly Bear
Conservation Strategy, Ministry of Environment, Lands, and Parks, Victoria,