Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee
www.IGBConline.org

Meeting Summary - April 24 & April 25, 2007

NCDE Meeting Summary

April 24 & April 25, 2007
Stage Stop Inn
Choteau, MT

Jim Satterfield welcomed all present to the spring 2007 NCDE meeting, reviewed the agenda and timelines.  Introductions commenced all around the room.

Gary Olson / FWP Conrad Biologist

Gary gave a general overview of activities and short hikes in the near vicinity in case anyone wanted to get together and explore some sights after the meeting.

Gary also talked about the significance of the Rocky Mountain Front and the volatile issues surrounding the area pertaining to oil & gas leases and the changes in land use and ethics affecting private land in the area.  The window for conservation is closing quicker than we’d all like to think.

General Updates

Dave Carr/The Nature Conservancy (TNC) / Real Estate

1. TNC came to the Rocky Mountain Front in 1988 because of the wetlands and Pine Butte. 
2. The Front stands out as a unique large system that ranges roughly from 4000’to 9000’ in precipitation and ecological gradient.  The Front is habitat for approximately 1/3 of Montana’s plant species, 220 bird species.
3. The keystone specie that holds everything together is the multi-generational rancher.
4. At first, ranchers weren’t too keen on conservation easements.  As time goes on, more & more ranchers are seeking this option as a way to hold a ranch together or expand its operation.  Currently there are 98,000 acres of protected private land in The Front.  Lack of funding is an issue that now needs to be addressed.
5. The goal is to continue to see “working landscapes” of private, state and federal land. 

Gary Sullivan / USFWS / Montana Habitat Program / Division of Realty
Primary funding source is:

1. Land & Water Conservation Funds (Appropriations)
2. Migratory Bird (Federal Waterfowl Stamps)
3. Conservation easements are the emphasis with preferences to entire landscapes vs. island situations.
4. Rocky Mountain Front goal is to acquire 170,000 acres and hopefully keep the ranchers intact and able to make a living.

Mike Madel / Grizzly Bear Management / Rocky Mountain Front

1. It’s been a great early spring as we haven’t had any conflicts and it’s been unusually quiet.
2. The Livestock Carcass Redistribution Program is just getting started and has proved successful.  On average approximately 130 livestock carcasses are moved to areas closed to the public.
3. Currently also working with Rick Mace and NCDE. 
4. Working with Hutterite Colony to deliver panels to keep carnivores out and sheep in.

Gary Olson added that now all 3 WMA’s on The Front are synchronized and all open at Noon on May 15^th.  This is a positive move.

Tim Manley / Grizzly Bear Management / West of the Divide

1. Recent train in Whitefish that was thought to have hit 2 grizzly bears actually hit three.
2. There has not been any conflict calls…yet.
3. All 16 management and trend monitoring bears are out of their dens (except for one).  Flew yesterday looking for the collared bears.
4. Cost-sharing electric fences with Defenders of Wildlife.
5. Will be beefing up bear augmentation in Cabinet Yaak.
6. Hiring a bear conflict specialist in the Libby area.
7. Went to British Columbia to talk about bear management and options they may have.

John Waller / Glacier National Park

1. 1 Dealing with a few habituated bears and continuing with trend monitoring.

After the break, Jim Satterfield shared the following memo from Ken McDonald, FWP Wildlife Administrator, with the group to open the dialogue regarding possible funding sources for the NCDE Trend Monitoring and lead into Dr. Mace’s update regarding same.

April 19, 2007

TO:  NCDE Interagency Coordination Committee

FROM:  Ken McDonald, Wildlife Division Administrator

SUBJECT: NCDE Trend Monitoring

As you are aware, a monitoring program was initiated in 2005 to determine grizzly population trend in the NCDE following the comprehensive genetic sample collection/population estimate that was completed.  The monitoring plan calls for completing at least 100 bear years of monitoring spread throughout the NCDE to determine the initial survival and trend estimate.  It was expected it would take approximately four years to complete, with the expectation that monitoring efforts will continue to annually assess population trend status. 

We have completed two years of monitoring, and are just beginning the third year.   However, funding for the 2007 field season has come up considerably short of what is necessary, so to complete a minimal monitoring effort, we will need to spend all available funds.  Funds FWP budgeted for Spring 2008 will need to be used to complete Fall 2007 monitoring.  What this means is that there currently is no funding ($0.00) available for the 2008 monitoring season and beyond other than that for Dr. Mace’s time.  We have requested federal funding assistance through Congressional appropriation, but it is unknown if that will be successful or when it would be available if successful.

The intent of this note is to make all of the partners aware of the funding shortfall associated with NCDE monitoring, as well as provide a heads up that the monitoring effort is in jeopardy unless additional funding is secured.  The full monitoring effort requires approximately $250,000/year.  I encourage the NCDE Committee to discuss this issue and possible solutions so that we can maintain this important effort.

Dr. Rick Mace / FWP Wildlife Research Biologist/Trend Monitoring Update

2  Follows the fate of ≥? 25 females annually via radio telemetry.

• Documents cause-specific mortality
• Calculates reproductive rate
• Estimates population trend

3 Reviewed techniques:  culvert trap to catch, collar and monitor
4 Mortality of Trend females

• 2004 – 3 in Swan Valley
• 2005 – 1 capture
• 2006 – 2 illegal (1 NF, 1 Swan)
• 2006 – 1 unknown (HH)
• Swan Valley is a dangerous place for grizzly’s

5 Reviewed the fate of the management bears
6 Reviewed the link between the NCDE and CYE
7 Yellowstone Grizzlies and Delisting

• What will it take for delisting to happen in the NCDE?
• Change in size, mortality and reproductive rate of population trend over a period of time = LAMBDA
• Accurate trend monitoring also depends on the  “confidence intervals” of each category
• Improving Precision of Monitoring
• Increase the size of the sample each year
• Monitor dependent bears better
• Decrease collar failure
• Lengthen length of time the collars are on the bears
• Maintain proportion of geographic distribution of the collars based on bear density = this aspect is a target this year
• $$$$$ = Money…we need more of it
• Other values to Long-term Monitoring
• Density dependent effects
• Habitat selection
• Access management
• Habitat quality
• Cumulative effects
• Cause specific mortality (Poaching? Poisoning?)
• Movement
• Conflict management
• Consequences of Stopping the Trend Monitoring Project
• 0% prospect for delisting
• Limits the value of the DNA work
• Loss of public support
• Loss of management knowledge
• Loss of infrastructure

Kate Kendall / USGS / Progress Report

1. Overview of Greater Glacier Bear DNA Project (overlaps NCDE)
2. Reviewed hair snag samples (hair corrals), trail surveys and rub trees
3. 545 unique grizzly individuals were detected at corrals and rubs.  Of that 56% females were detected in hair corrals.
4. Reviewed mortality as it reviewed to sampling
5. Has worked on database with the bear managers
6. 2004 sampling grid caught 62% of all known bears
• Most bears were caught only once at corrals or rubs
7. Northern Divide Modeling Workshop was held 4/16 – 4/18/07 in West Glacier. 
• Discussed the best approaches for estimating density. 
• The issues were: 
• How to best use the Rub data;
• How to model variation in capture probability due to
• Distance from the north edge of study grid
• Rub tree survey effort
• Sex
• Previous capture history
• Process determined
• Use step-wise modeling approach
• Model snags and rubs separately
• Select top models
• Combine in joint model
• Management bears could be their own sampling session
8. 8 News just in = 547 more samples were just received from University of Idaho
• Genetic analysis will be taking place soon on 130
• This process will cause another delay as 1995 & forward are the ones that have not been genotyped.

Chris Servheen / USFWS / YELLOWSTONE DELISTING – How do we get there?
The Yellowstone Grizzly population is increasing at 4% to 7% per year and is currently at 600+ bears.  This knowledge was achieved by developing strong and scientifically sound population data.  1998 was the base year (and year when trend was increasing) of the population data; the objective was to maintain a healthy and secure population after delisting.

1. Habitat Criteria has been amended into the Recovery Plan
• No increase in motorized access w/o mitigation
• No increase in site developments w/o mitigation
• No decrease in secure habitat w/o mitigation
• No increase in livestock allotments
• No decrease in habitat effectiveness
• Mitigation basically means that if you’re going to put one in, you must take one out.  Example:  No increase in motorized access (from the base year 1998…if anyone wants to add another motorized access, they must remove an equal one.

Important Note:  Delisting does not create a “free for all” – Delisting means that the same strategies that brought us to delisting will remain in place.

5-factor analysis as in Sect 4(a) (1) of ESA has been addressed.  Had to define Distinct Population Segment (DPS).  DPS analysis of ecosystems outside of Yellowstone in ’07 and should be completed in mid-’08.  Who knows the outcome? – Perhaps it will make sense for several ecosystems to be combined.

Yellowstone Delisting has happened because the money has been spent on the SCIENCE.

2.  Population estimate
3.  Telemetry monitoring
4..  Key foods monitoring
5.  Mortality monitoring
6.  Population monitoring
7.  Database management

NCDE is $214,300 short in FY07 and will be $457,400 short in FY08 to implement actions that will get us to recovery and delisting in NCDE.

4/25/07

Mike Munoz / Lewis & Clark National Forest / Progress Update

1. Reviewed motorized access guidelines from Birch Creek to the south
2. Reviewed spring/summer habitat effectiveness
3. Compared stats from existing situation to the Decision that will be forthcoming which will allow for about 60 miles of road to be open to motorized access
4. Badger/Two Medicine will come late after further negotiations with the tribe
5. Food storage order – no concerns since revised in 2000 and have added an additional layer of bear protection regarding food storage within the forest service cabins.

Ellen Davis / IGBC Executive Assistant

1. Reviewed the members of the I&E subcommittees
2. IGBC gives out $36,000 annually and we currently get more requests than there is money.
• NCDE received $6,800 of which $3,800 went toward the delisting process and $3,000 went to the Swan Valley Bear Smart program
3. IGBC Summer Meeting is coming up 5/15 – 5/17/07 in Missoula at the Double Tree Hotel.  The final agenda has been distributed.
4. IGBC Winter Meeting date has also been set for 11/6 – 11/8/07 in Missoula. 
• Substantial amount of the biologists interjected that the date of the winter IGBC meeting is a problematic date due to the same timeframe as the International Bear Association (IBA) Conference.
• A second note was made that the winter IGBC meeting scheduled in November is quite a bit earlier than usual (usually held in December) and that it is important that the next NCDE meeting be held BEFORE the winter IGBC meeting.
• Calendars were checked and tentative date of 10/3 & 10/4/07 is on hold for the next NCDE meeting that will take place in Kalispell.  Since the Forest Supervisors had a conflict with the date of the current April meeting, Martha will check with them first to see if 10/3 & 10/4 works with at least the majority before it’s a final date.

Funding Strategy / Action Items

1. Agencies don’t have a lot of money sitting around therefore important to engage delegation in D.C.
2. NCDE should also write a letter to IGBC highlighting the importance of needed funding and the fact the state can’t carry this funding issue alone. – Jim Satterfield, NCDE Chair
3. Contact Chris Smith to get on IGBC agenda for 5/15 – 5/17/07 – Jim Satterfield, NCDE Chair
4. Need a briefing paper / talking points for all agencies involved so that everyone has the same information regarding the budget shortfalls, etc. – Servheen & Mace

Public Comment Portion:

Minnette Johnson / Defenders of Wildlife / www.defenders.org

1. List of annual payments made – handout
2. Ranchers and private landowners may be interested in partnering with us – handout
3. Vision of bears in lower 48 – handout
4. Press release on Yellowstone Delisting – handout
5. Funds will be shifted to prevention instead of compensation once grizzly bears are delisted.

Brian Peck / Great Bear Foundation

For three different perspectives on Yellowstone delisting, check out

1. www.greatbear.org
2. www.nrdc.org
3. www.sierraclub.org

John Mundinger

Question:  If NCDE had $750,000 per year would it actually be spent on Recovery Plan or something else?  We don’t need to write more reports, we need money on the ground.

Next NCDE Meeting is scheduled for
10/3 & 10/4 in Kalispell at FWP Regional HQ
located at 490 N. Meridian Rd.

Printer Friendly PDF

Subject: Need for funding to maintain the NCDE population-monitoring program

Date: April 27, 2007

Background

• With more than 500 grizzly bears, Northwest Montana’s Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) holds what appears to be the second largest grizzly population in the lower 48 states.
• The population was listed under the Endangered Species Act as threatened in 1975.
• The NCDE grizzly population is expanding in range and now inhabits public lands, private lands, and reservation lands where the grizzly has been absent for 50 years or more.
• The public throughout the ecosystem sees expanding numbers of grizzlies as evidence of recovery and generally supports moving toward eventual delisting.

Current Activities

• The U.S. Geological Survey recently invested 4 years and $4.5 million to determine the size of the NCDE grizzly bear population. The results are expected in early 2008.
• A NCDE trend-monitoring program, led by Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, began in 2004. Cooperators include the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, USGS, the federal Bureau of Land Management, the Blackfeet Nation, and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes.

Requirements for Delisting

• To obtain the first trend estimate with acceptable confidence, monitoring of at least 25 females each year is required for at least six to eight years.
• Monitoring of population trends requires continuous data collection for multiple years.
• Such trend monitoring is part of a comprehensive population and habitat-monitoring program to generate the data necessary to build a scientifically sound foundation for recovery and delisting.
• The USGS population-size estimate must be combined with population trend data to credibly assess recovery progress and build toward eventual delisting.
• Trend data must be linked in time to the population size estimate to be scientifically credible.

Issue—Lack of Funding

• Like the Yellowstone Ecosystem, an annual grizzly bear population-monitoring program is necessary to determine population trend, and progress toward recovery and delisting.
• As of 2007, federal funding is not available for the trend-monitoring effort.
• Montana FWP does not have the resources to continue to fund these trend-monitoring efforts without contributions from partner agencies.
• If the monitoring sequence is interrupted due to lack of funding in 2008 and beyond, previously collected data will become obsolete and the trend-monitoring program will come to an end.
• If the state-led trend monitoring efforts ends due to lack of funding, the federal $4.5 million population estimate’s value will be limited to a point estimate for the year the data were collected - 2004.

Funding Needs

• Overall annual costs for a comprehensive monitoring program are about $673,000, which includes annual trend-monitoring program costs of approximately $250,000.
• Montana FWP alone does not have the resources to continue to fund these trend-monitoring efforts.

Public Expectations

• A comprehensive monitoring program, including trend monitoring, is necessary to achieve recovery and delisting.
• Failure to fund this monitoring will result in the collapse of the recovery effort, public resentment toward agencies and grizzly bears, and a significant loss of agency credibility.

Potential Solutions

• An interagency study team is needed to build the foundation for a recovered and delisted population and to guide monitoring, provide accountability through annual reports, and ensure the involvement of all agencies.
• Funding for a study team could come from each key agency (FWP, NPS, USFS, FWS, USGS, BLM) contributing an equal share of $112,000 per year, with 2.5% added each year for inflation.
• Other alternatives for funding a study team include increased appropriations for the State Wildlife Grants program or approval of significant, secure funding for the Wildlife Conservation and Restoration Program authorized by Congress in 2001 as part of pending climate change legislation.
• Creation of the Northern Rocky Mountains Grizzly Bear and Gray Wolf Trust would also provide a means for both government and private interests to support the work of a study team.