Page 12 - WCA Ketch Pen August 2020

12
WCA Victory
History by Dave Duncan, WCA Wildlife Committee Chair
In 1975 the USFS (U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service) listed the grizzly bear as Threatened under the ESA (Environ- mental Species Act) and in 1995 USFS listed 6 recovery zone ecosystems, one of which is the NCE (North Cas- cades Ecosystem).
The discussion on reintroduction of grizzly bears into Washington State has gone on for years. WCA has been in the battle to stop reintroduction of grizzly bears into the North Cascades going back to the Morten legislation in 1995, which prohibited reintroduction of grizzly bears into Washington State. The Feds have since declared that they can override the Morten Bill and reintroduce grizzly bears on federal lands only.
WCA has attended many meetings, written public com- ments, lobbied the Secretary of Interior in Washington DC, and asked for and received legal advice on this issue. WCA has worked tirelessly with NCBA on lobbying this issue and we were successful in defunding the Economic Impact Study (EIS) in 2016 but it only lasted for a year.
The ridiculous and unrealistic scope and size of the NSE became the landscape definition for the NCRZ (North Cascades Recovery Zone). The NCRZ contains over six million acres, most of which is Federal, some State land and 600,000 acres of private lands including rural towns and rural residents. The actively leased allotments in 2015 just within the Okanogan Wenatchee National Forest contained over 773,000 acres with 4,552 cow/calf pairs and 4100 ewe/ lamb pairs just on National Forest land within the NCRZ.
Even if the NCRP (North Cascades Recovery Plan) listed the grizzly bear as non-essential experimental (10J) they would still be fully protected on State and private lands within the NCRZ.
The NCRP did not consider any loss of this grazing land or economic loss to the cattle and sheep industry through “agency action” to protect “critical habitat” for the reintro- duced ESA threatened grizzly bears or losses to depredation when grizzly bears are on or wander off the NCRZ.
The NCRP did not consider any future loss of timber sales, to protect “critical habitat” and/or from restriction on total road mileage in the NCRZ. Timber sales are critical to jobs and cash flow in rural counties.
Tens of thousands of acres of apple, pear and cherry orchards adjoin the NCRZ which would draw grizzly bears, as will the honey in thousands of hives used to pollinate these orchards. This will create a large economic loss for orchardists and this also, was not considered along with a public safety problem for pickers. The WCA informed the USFS along with the National Park Service of the inad- equacies contained above in the NCRP and EIS that will create a “significant risk” of “irreparable harm” to livestock producers, timber companies, orchardists, rural commu- nities and county governments. Furthermore, had the EIS been completed, the WCA would have filed an injunction to stop the reintroduction of grizzly bears into Washington State until the NCRP and EIS produced a thorough and final Regulatory Flexibility Analysis, defining the significant economic and social impact to rural communities of a final agency action.
Ketch Pen www.washingtoncattlemen.org
August 2020