Idaho Can’t Bear Grizzly Restoration

A quiet battle is being waged between Idaho and the federal government over federal plans to reintroduce grizzly bears in the central Idaho mountains.

But there is more to the matter.

For Gov. Phil Batt and leaders of the Idaho Legislature, the proposed Endangered Species Act protections are an example of excessive federal interference in state affairs.

Batt has nothing against grizzly bears. But he worries that transplanting a new population in the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness will endanger the ability of people in the area to make a living - or even threaten their safety.

Federal officials were in Idaho this past week for a round of meetings to ease some of the concerns. Ralph Morgenweck, Denver regional director for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, called it an effort to obtain comment from Idaho residents while the program is still in the developing stages.

“This is a very important new way to put forth an environmental impact statement,” he said, describing his Boise meetings as “a good exchange.”

Morgenweck and other Fish and Wildlife workers involved with the grizzly plans met with congressional staffers, representatives of the timber industry and legislators. Later in the day, Morgenweck talked with representatives of the Idaho Association of Counties.

Legislative leaders and county officials say the Fish and Wildlife Service faces a formidable task if it aims to drum up much support in Idaho for grizzly reintroduction.

The Legislature passed a resolution supporting Batt’s efforts to slow or stop the process. The county association passed a similar resolution and Morganweck was told last Wednesday that the opposition hasn’t eased.

As an example of the problems linked with the grizzly project, Bonner County Commissioner Merle Jennings said his people can’t get access to public lands because of grizzly-caused road closures.

Lemhi County Commissioner Heber Stokes said his constituents fear grizzlies reintroduced in the Selway-Bitterroot will drift over the mountains into the Stanley Basin.

Stokes said county officials, who will bear the brunt of enforcing restrictions to protect transplanted grizzlies, are annoyed because they can’t get any information.

And state Senate Resources and Environment Chairman Laird Noh and his House counterpart, Golden Linford, suggest that federal officials may finally be starting to understand.

“It appears they are trying to seriously deal with some of the issues raised by legislators,” Noh said.

Linford still sees concern over “federal heavy-handedness” that can only be overcome through significant Idaho involvement in any reintroduction scheme.

But, he said, “I think they realize they have got to make the process work.”

Both lawmakers, and Batt, expressed frustration that Idaho is having to deal with restrictions caused by efforts to protect salmon, and now bull trout, and next will come even more restrictions to protect grizzlies.

Steve Mealey, Idaho Fish and Game director, told the federal officials that Batt “very clearly” opposes grizzly reintroduction as a protected species.

Morgenweck and other Fish and Wildlife Service workers aren’t saying much about what will be in the draft environmental impact statement. That preliminary analysis will be out before the end of May.

The subsequent 120-day public comment period could be extended. Public hearings are planned in Boise, Orofino and Salmon following release of the draft.

It is unlikely the preferred alternative will be the “no action” option relying on the prospect that grizzlies could re-establish themselves without federal help.

But one option would be to transplant grizzlies as an experimental population. That carries fewer restrictions than if they are brought in as an endangered species. And it would allow the state a greater voice in how the animals are managed.

Morgenweck, however, said the Fish and Wildlife Service has some responsibilities under the Endangered Species Act that it can’t relinquish to the state or anyone else.

Just what role the state will play if it can’t stop the process dead will probably be clearer by month’s end with release of the draft.

Typically, those assessments interest only insiders, environmental groups and resource users.

But the grizzly study could get far more scrutiny.