January 14, 1998 Bitterroot Star Article by Pat Rhodes: Burns gets support on grizzly question
Members of the Concerned About Grizzlies organization told Sen. Conrad Burns last week they want the U.S. Congress to assume some kind of control over the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Forest Service Support regarding the introduction of grizzly bears into the Selway-Bitterroot Wilderness Area.
The local organization that is opposing introduction of the big bears in this area met with Burns at the Ravalli County Courthouse on Wednesday afternoon and vented its collective frustration with the introduction process which, members said, is not taking into consideration the wishes of people living here. Decisions regarding the bears are being made to please out-of-state interests, they told Burns, and he agreed.
A letter written and signed by Concerned About Grizzles co-chaiimen Ray Karr and Harold Maus in 1995 and re-read at last week's meeting said their experience with the Endangered Species Act as it applies to grizzly bears is that it "has been used in the northern Rocky Mountains and Pacific Northwest to restrict and deny use by local folks of the national forests, national parks and adjacent private lands under the guise of the protecting certain endangered species as the spotted owl, gray wolf and grizzly bear. "We have also observed that animal rights groups and wilderness special interest groups use the Endangered Species Act to push their own goals of restricting and denying traditional forest uses [such] as forestry, grazing, water use and recreation." The men added that local people suffer the consequences of economic recreational, and natural benefits traditionally expected from pubic lands.
They added that the "faceless bureaucracy" and a coalition of special interests are a serious threat to the existing rights of use of forest lands in Montana and Idaho. The men said they see nothing but "No Hunting," "No Fishing," and "No Camping," signs in western Montana.
They said they support wildlife and feel there is more wildlife today than ever in this country. "We're the folks of this century who have cared for and hunted and financed the wildlife programs that made this possible. But, we are strongly against the nonsense management and restrictions that have been going on under authorities of the Endangered Species Act. If the Bitterroot is a good habitat for the grizzly bear, he'll eventually find it"' they concluded.
The organization told Burns at the meeting that it had conducted a survey of Bitterroot residents and found that local opposition to grizzly introduction was three to one. And earlier Fish and Wildlife Service survey showed 60 percent support of introduction. "That survey was flawed," according to Maus. In addition, the organization presented Burns with almost 4,000 signatures of local people opposed to bear introduction. Burns said he was in the valley to listen. "Our position is well known. We are worried about large, intrusive government. Before you introduce a species into an area you have to have broad support or it won't be good for the animal or for the people."
Burns said reintroduction of wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Idaho is a case in point. "It was too broad. There is a tolerance there but they went over the tolerance level. And, if you combine the wolf with bears and big cats, you have a cumulative effect on working ranches."
He found no voice of disagreement at Wednesday's meeting. The group was composed of farmers and ranchers, retirees, and outfitters and guides whose concerns range from safety for people using the back country, to threats to livestock to possible closure of the wilderness to use by individuals and outfitters.
Burns said the government is not being truthful with the people. "They the (government agencies) have an agenda set by supervisors who don't live in this area. There are some awfully good (lower level) supervisors who live here and who will be straight with you-off the record. But they are in a bind because of pressure from their superiors." As an example, Burns said the government is not saying to anyone that 1,400 buffalo starved to death in Yellowstone Park last year "because of federal policy. We don't hear that," he said.
Karr asked Burns "what we can do to hold this thing at bay." Burns recommended reaching out to other Montanans for support as well at to outof-state people. He said to enlist the support of friends from other areas of the country to contact their congressmen. When asked what kind of Republican support Burns finds in congress, he replied: "There are lot of greens among the Republican senators," he said. Burns said he would look into public money being used by environmental organizations to promote their agendas. He said he didn't know about federal grants used for those purposes but would run down information on that possibility before appropriations committee hearings. He said "the power of the purse" was about all the Senate has in controlling the activities of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the U.S. Forest Service.
Members of the organization were irate about what they identify as misinformation about bear introduction in the grizzly bear Environmental Impact Statement as well as in other publications about the issue. Rosemarie Neuman of Stevensville cited a statement that $40 million to $60 million will be injected into the local economy as a result of bear introduction. Neuman said the economic impact was a fallacy and based on misleading information from environmental organizations. Ravalli County Sheriff Jay Printz attended the meeting and said he is "totally opposed to grizzly bear introduction. Grizzles ultimately will be part of locking the wilderness to public access. It's probable that will happen."
Burns advised the group to "keep scrappin." He said the environmentalists have "tons of money and not much else to do. They also have another agenda but I won't say much more about that right now." He added he has the figures of the cost of wolf reintroduction and will make them available to the media and to local interests.