REI supporting Vital Ground

Buying something from REI online? Now you can do that and help protect grizzly habitat by going to REI.com from Vital Ground's link... no extra cost! Go to http://www.vitalground.org/main.php and look for...

Shop REI through this special link or logo and 7% of your purchase total will be donated to Vital Ground!

High Five REI!

A call to follow in Mowgli's footsteps

“There is more in the Jungle now than Jungle Law, Baloo.” The old bear said nothing, but he thought many things.^[1]

Check out the statistics presented by Chuck Schwartz in a Jackson Hole Star Tribune article about the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) grizzly bear population from this year. [This story is also available here with comments.]

• 25 "known and probable" grizzly deaths have occurred in the GYE this year against a population of ~571. If that mortality rate were applied to the USA, 12 million people would die. That's most of the NYC metro area (more than the New York City, White Plains NY and Wayne, NJ combined).
  
• 94% of those deaths were caused by humans.
• Of the female deaths older than 2 yrs, (i.e. sexually mature or within a few years of sexual maturity) 44% were caused by hunting "incidents" so they probably were defending either a food source or cubs and got shot in defense.

  This seems to be a common theme, as seen in a 10/26 Great Falls Tribune article where a hunter killed a sow with a cub near an elk carcass in self defense. Although obvious, it's worth quoting; "Survival of adult females is particularly critical to the recovery of grizzly bears" says Chris Servheen of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (grizzly bear recovery coordinator). Note that when a female with a cub is killed, the cub is often also counted as a mortality due to their almost zero survival rate. Also note that in this NW Montana population, totally separate from the GYE population, 23 grizzlies have been killed this year.

The biggest obstacle to restoring grizzly bear populations is to minimize human/bear interaction. This is stated clear as day at http://www.grizzlybear.org/bearbook/grizzly_or_brown_bear.htm:

Although tigers, wolves, and mountain lions may have the ability to kill brown bears (especially cubs) their only real enemy is man. And men are such effective killers of bears that even though an area may have everything else that brown bears need, if it is easily accessible to people, brown bears will probably not use it. The exception to this is in areas where bears are totally protected such as National Parks.

You can see by the map below, from The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST), that the mother grizzlies of the GYE do not wander beyond federal lands were human activity is limited and habitat/food sources/etc is protected (compared to, the city limits of Jackson, WY, let's say).


It seems from these articles and data, the best way to minimize human/bear encounters is to reduce hunting in grizzly territory. I know that some people would mind this, but I think it comes down to making utilitarian decisions and acting as good stewards of the land. [A heavy dose of Aldo Leopold's land ethic would go a long way in this regard.] Although it's been said that sometimes the bear wins, the bear never really wins because if a bear kills a hunter it is usually trapped and killed too.

We are at a time right now when we have the opportunity to fix something that was broken. We came into the west and we fragmented the habitat through roads and human development and various other things. We have the tools, we have the partnerships in place, and we have the knowledge to fix this.^[2]

Reducing roads in National Forests would also be a way to limit human reach in wild areas. I also wouldn't be opposed to this alternative, even though it would make it harder for me to access wild areas I'd like to enjoy. That's a price I'd pay if it meant grizzlies would be able to search wider for food in lean years and wander further for mates to increase genetic diversity and co-mingle disparate populations.

In a bit of good news (have to end on a good note, right?) grizzlies have recently been discovered in an area where they had previously been considered extinct for 60 years and rumored to be seen in the last decade. [I'm currently reading Rick Bass' THE LOST GRIZZLIES, A Search for Survivors in the Wilderness of Colorado and it seems it will be a while before that population is confirmed.] Last month, as reported in the Missoulian, a hunter (surprised?) killed "a large grizzly bear in a roadless area of north-central Idaho." Note the word roadless in that quote, and the fact that evidence often comes in the form of a dead body. This kind of news re-emphasizes the need for efforts such as Vital Ground and Yukon to Yellowstone to piece together connected roadless (read: lacking humans) areas where grizzly populations can safely thrive undisturbed. It would be nice if one day there was a San Juans to Yukon initiative, and the rumors of San Juan grizzly populations become true... I can hope, right?

In my opinion the only way to get grizzlies back in the San Juans and other previous home ranges is to "let in the jungle" just like Mowgli by removing hunters and roads. Some people may call this irrational or extreme, but I think we can give back a bit. I say rape and pillage Manhattan forever -- no bear will ever live there again -- but give back what could be used again by the original inhabitant when we don't necessarily need it. Colorado is working to reestablish a lynx population in the San Juans, and may attempt wolf reintroduction. I don't know if anyone would attempt to reintroduce Grizzlies, so I think their best shot is to let them wander in on their own.

--
[1] Letting in the Jungle (click title to read) from The Second Jungle Book, first published 1895, by Rudyard Kipling. This story is highly worth the read, and definitely NOT in the Disney cartoon movie due to the violence against man handed down by the animals. It's probably my favorite in the entire Jungle Book collection though.

[2] Chris Servheen, quoted at http://www.focuswest.org/predators/intro_preds.cfm

on giving, purchasing, and snow

Tonight I did two things that I thought I would share here.

1.
I watched 20/20. I normally don't do that, but this particular episode was about charitable giving. They started off pointing out the fact that Salvation Army collected more in front of a Wal-Mart in a small North Dakota town (a more conservative blue-collar town with less money) than in front of Macy's in San Fransisco (a liberal city with a lot of money). Apparently it was a surprise to report that wealthy liberals (aka San Fransisco at large) might, based on their political stance, hope for a better dispersement of wealth but fail to actually step up and help disperse their funds. [Note that this is a gross stereotyping and does not cover 100% of those who might define themselves as either liberal or conservative. Also note that Wal-Mart and Macy's are two different buying environments, and it might have had something to do with the fact that people walking in to Wal-Mart are psychologically "in a different place" than those preparing for Macy's... or something like that. At any rate, it could be cited as not very scientific, but made a point nonetheless. p.s. I was in San Fransisco last August, and there are homeless people there too.] I think this may stem from the fact that a liberal perspective inherently assumes placing the responsibility on the government rather than the citizen. I'm not going to get into liberal vs conservative here (or try not to, since I don't vote based on whether someone's proclaimed mascot is an elephant or jackass, and encourage against voting down party lines when nobody truly subscribes entirely to one party or another...) but this segues nicely into another important point I thought worth re-emphasizing: you cannot count on the government to do anything other than govern. The example cited was New York's Central Park. Apparently there's a non-profit which has raised Central Park from a scar to a highlight of the city. I applaud them and wish others would realize you can't just sit around on your leather couch and hope mighty Uncle Sam will kiss the boo-boo and make it feel better. Organizations protecting wilderness areas that should be Wilderness Areas also highlight this. So do Katrina volunteers. Both hippies and Jesus also prove this point, and I aspire to be like both. [I've thought recently about posting something on here about the similarity between "real" hippies and Jesus but have yet to actually do so... maybe this will force the issue and produce a defense of how I can possibly pray to God in thanks for my organic vegan lunch without some kind of vortex melting my frontal lobe.] I thought this was fairly pertinent since this month's focus at church has been "making an impact" and how to effectively do so. I could share more about that if anybody reading would like to hear more. Enough on this; closing comments -

• Ted Turner is a freaking idiot.
  
• There was one moron billionaire who claimed he "couldn't find enough good charities to invest in... otherwise [he'd] invest more." What hypocrisy! You're an ass. Bill Gates obviously has not had this problem. Hey buddy, give it to me and I'll write a check right now to Vital Ground to buy up what's for sale in Montana for PERMANENT wildlife habitat. (They happen to be holding a matching gift challenge right now, so your money would go twice as far!) ... or Compassion International to sponsor children throughout the Third World. If you don't want to let me spend it for you, why not hold a contest for all your employees. Americans love a good "reality" contest. You could take your favorite employee suggestions and "invest" in those charities as you say. While you're at it, you should also give a reward to the winner. Jerk.
• Apparently there is scientific proof that your brain likes giving more than receiving. I think that's pretty accurate. It feels like Christmas morning every time I get a translated letter in the mail from Ketha in southeast India making me realize what $30 means to him compared to what it means to me.

The only other thing I'd like to point out about giving which was not related to 20/20 is that C.S. Lewis states in Mere Christianity, "I do not believe one can settle how much we ought to give. I am afraid the only safe rule is to give more than we can spare."

2.
Secondly (and yes I do appreciate the juxtaposition here...) I bought a new bike this week. I ended up with a 2008 Trek Fuel EX 8. I took it up to the Switzerland Trail for a pre-Vail ride tonight. I'm still getting used to my clipless pedals, which I've never ridden before, but all in all feel ready for the ski lift. Here's hoping I can get myself unclipped if I need to bail prior to smashing my face into a tree tomorrow. Tonight it was just before dusk, and although I didn't get to ride for long, the setting was perfect. Seriously, I don't know what it is, but I feel at home on a bike. That statement goes back to before I went to Woodward (who now have a camp at Copper Mtn) for BMX or rode trails in Hueston Woods at Miami U. I haven't ridden in a while. For some reason I didn't ride much in Austin. That might be because I have yet to get into road riding (will I if I didn't in the kingdom of Lance?). Anyways, it's good to have a full suspension bike now that I'm surrounded by more technical (not to mention containing-black-bears-and-mountain-lions) terrain. Tonight I had to stop to admire the silence, Longs Peak, and the bright pink clouds above a purple Continental Divide backdrop with the moon coming up before the sun is completely down... next time I'll take my camera. Happy times in the Boulder hills! By the way, I'll still ride my oldie-but-goldie Trek to work every day... I don't plan on letting the newbie gather moss though.

Finally, and totally unrelated, last night it snowed in Summit County. In August. Pardon me while I take a minute to enjoy that thought. ... Ok, so what am I going to do tomorrow? Take my new bike up to Vail (a few minutes west of Summit County) and ride down the ski resort mountains before it really snows hard.