How the reintroduction of grizzly bears could look in Washington

SEATTLE - Grizzly bears roamed Washington state for thousands of years, but grizzlies disappeared off our landscape many moons ago, and efforts to re-introduce the species to the North Cascades have people split.

Depending on who you are, imagining a grizzly bear roaming the North Cascades can spur thoughts of a gentle giant or a monster foaming at the mouth. To scientists, the idea of a grizzly returning to Washington state is less hyperbole and more about completing an ecosystem that humans tore apart decades ago.

In the final days of the latest comment period, FOX 13 News dug into the debate surrounding the efforts to re-introduce an apex predator.

Upwards of 12,000 people and groups sounded off online, while public meetings packed locations in the areas that would be affected.

The biggest concerns of introducing grizzly bears back into Washington’s ecosystem surrounded a few key themes: safety, recreation and economic impacts tied to our state’s farm community.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE: Plans to restore grizzly bears in Washington has people drawing a line in the sand

Grizzly bears currently occupy roughly 2% of their former range, which has led to a push to find suitable habitats for their recovery. The location under discussion is largely without motorized access, and there is hope that reintroducing grizzlies would bring back positive ecological impacts from their digging and foraging behaviors for berries and edible roots.

While a final Environmental Impact Statement won’t be available until Spring 2024, we’re getting a better idea of what the efforts would look like on the ground.

A BLUEPRINT FOR SUCCESS

Wayne Kasworm, a biologist with U.S. Fish and Wildlife, has spent decades working in the Cabinet Mountain range augmenting a population of grizzly bears that were dwindling before U.S. Fish & Wildlife intervention.

Today, that same population is in the 30-35 range—a far cry from the single digit number when he and other biologists began their work. Some of the initial bears moved into the area are now in their third generation.

Kasworm told FOX 13 News that they’re still monitoring the genetics of the population, and there is hope that the population will eventually connect with other nearby populations of grizzlies.

"We’re using this as a model for what can happen here," said Kasworm. "In terms of placing bears and growing a population, I think the Cabinets represent an example of how it can occur."

Bringing grizzly bears into the Cabinet Mountains took time. It involved traveling to areas with healthy grizzly bear populations, and finding young bears. In the case of the bears moved to the Cabinet Mountains, those populations were pulled from Glacier National Park and in backcountry areas.

As Kasworm explained, bears have to meet certain criteria. You want a young bear because they’re more adaptable to a new location, and they have the bulk of their reproductive years ahead.

It’s also important that bears are being moved into a location that has a similar food source. You wouldn’t want to move a bear that relies on fishing to an area like the North Cascades, where the majority of their diet would rely on root vegetables, plants and bugs.

HOW TO TRAP A BEAR

Once a bear is identified, the work to capture them begins. A common way to capture a bear uses what is referred to as a culvert trap.

The trap looks like a large pipe with a sliding door on either end. The trap can be baited with some type of enticing food for a grizzly bear, once the bear enters and pulls on the bait it triggers a door that closes before they can escape.

While moving bears to augment, or in Washington’s case re-start, a population is rare – trapping bears is quite common for scientific research and when bear/human interactions are becoming a problem in a given area.

Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks has a number of videos that showcase both captures, and releases, of grizzly bears.

WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

It’s unclear what the next steps will be for Washington in terms of the re-introduction of grizzly bears. The options that are being reviewed now include: doing nothing, working towards restoring a population of 200 grizzlies, or creating what’s known as an ‘experimental population’ which would offer the parties involved more flexibility moving forward.

The recommended option in the draft Environmental Impact Statement released earlier this year was to move towards an experimental population.

If grizzlies are introduced, the ultimate goal is to bring several bears a year for 5–10 years, with an initial population of 25 bears being introduced. A 200 bear goal would take up to 100 years to reach, given the slow reproduction rate of a small number of bears.

While the opposition has been loud and vocal, Kasworm said he lived through a similar process in his own worth in Montana. The biggest difference, he said, was that grizzlies were still on the landscape. There were a lot of frustrations voiced, but people were already familiar with grizzlies.

"It’s not that the public was 100% supportive," said Kasworm. "In the early days we had a lot of concern from the public, those concerns have diminished quite a bit."

A final environmental impact statement is expected to be released in Spring 2024.

Kasworm will be among the people working to respond to the thousands of comments that were offered up by locals and people from around the U.S. The final report will address concerns that were raised, and explain the final recommendations.

PREVIOUS COVERAGE: Darrington locals say 'no' to reintroducing grizzlies to the wild

THOSE FOR AND AGAINST GRIZZLIES

While public meetings had heated moments, the plans to reintroduce grizzlies to the Pacific Northwest have wide-ranging impacts beyond Washington state. As an endangered species under the Endangered Species Act (ESA), it’s believed that grizzlies could become an endangered species within the foreseeable future without intervention. Under the ESA, the federal government was required to hatch a recovery plan to recover the grizzly bear; the North Cascades ecosystem is one of six identified areas that can be recovered.

Groups like Conservation Northwest have estimated that if each recovery area were restored, the grizzly bear population would occupy 4% of its former range—or double what it does now.

Scott Schuyler, the policy representative for the Upper Skagit Tribe, which is in the North Cascades recovery zone, has publicly applauded the efforts to return grizzly bears to its historic range.

The tribe was among those who publicly supported the planning in the latest round of public comment, writing: "We respect the Grizzly Bear's right to coexist, just as it did with our ancestors for thousands of years before contact with the first Europeans to enter our homeland."

Other tribes within the state have pushed back. The Saulk-Suiattle Tribe sent a letter of opposition, while stating they were prepared to sue depending on the outcome of future recommendations.

"The Saulk-Suiattle Indian Tribe does not hesitate in initiating litigation and all other means necessary to preserve the promises made in its treaty with the United States," wrote Chairman Nino Maltos II.

You can read additional comments online here—the comment period wrapped up last month.