The first mortality investigation occurred last spring in Idaho, but by the first week of September, the description appeared with increasing regularity in the database federal biologists use to track grizzly bear deaths in the Yellowstone region.
By mid-October, the words “UNDER INVESTIGATION” had been entered 16 times, nine of them in relation to dead Wyoming grizzly bears.
Details will be held tight for months until investigations are complete, but those two words usually mean that a grizzly bear was shot and killed with a claim of self-defense. Typically, somebody is out hunting something else, like elk, and there’s an altercation: On average, hunter gunfire ends the lives of 10 grizzlies a year in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem.
The handful more under-investigation deaths that have already been logged with weeks to go before grizzlies den up for the winter is one sign that 2024 is shaping up to be an exceptionally deadly year for grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem, potentially even the deadliest to date — an unwelcome benchmark.
“We’re not necessarily shooting for the record,” said Dan Thompson, who leads large carnivore management for the Wyoming Game and Fish Department.
As of Tuesday, the database tracking grizzly bear mortalities reached 65 deaths this year. That trails only 2018, a conflict-filled year that ended with 69 mortalities for the large carnivores, which remain federally protected by the Endangered Species Act after decades of population growth and range expansion. The figure swings significantly — mortality can be related to grizzly bear food sources, like berry crops. Two years ago, 54 grizzly deaths were logged. The 2023 toll was 47.
While there’s no one reason for the higher-than-usual death toll for Ursus arctos horribilis, the leading cause this calendar year has been depredation on livestock — an often unshakable habit that becomes a death sentence for bears.
“Livestock-related removals basically doubles the average from over that decade [2014-23],” Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team leader Frank van Manen said. “It’s about 14 a year, and currently we’re at 28.”
Killing grizzly bears to stem livestock conflict in Wyoming started up on private land in April far outside of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem near the Bighorns. It didn’t let up until Oct. 3, when an adult male met his end south of Cody.
Although livestock conflict and suspected self-defense shootings are the leading causes, there’s a good-sized list explaining what’s been killing the Yellowstone Ecosystem’s grizzly bears, which last numbered an estimated 1,030.
A sow and her two cubs in August died in the cement-sided Heart Mountain Canal — a long-running cause of grizzly deaths. There was an unusually high number of cropland damage-related deaths: Seven mortalities fell into that bucket.
“There’s been unique situations this year,” Thompson said. “We had a couple of bears in Yellowstone that died of electrocution — scavenging cow elk that were electrocuted.”
In another situation, he said, a grizzly bear in the Beartooths took a liking to preying on domestic dogs.
“When we went in to investigate, it was specifically seeking out dogs to kill them and eat them,” Thompson said. “It went after our guys’ dogs and went after other people’s dogs — just very aggressive behavior.”
In addition to the near-record number of grizzly bear mortalities, the region is also touching on its record for conflicts, Thompson said.
The conflicts and grizzly bear deaths have not occurred uniformly across the landscape.
On the northern end of the biologically isolated ecosystem in Montana, the 10 grizzlies documented to have died makes for a pretty normal year, said Jedediah Smith, a grizzly bear specialist for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks.
“Morality varies,” Smith said. “We’re usually in, around or under 10 [deaths]. But sometimes we’ll go as high as 15 to 19.”
A significant portion of the grizzly mortality has also occurred on the fringes of the ecosystem. Grizzly bear numbers are only monitored in what’s called the “demographic monitoring area,” a 19,279-square-mile zone dominated by federal land. This year, 24 of the 65 grizzly bear deaths — 37% — occurred outside the monitoring area.
When wildlife managers take stock of the ecosystem’s population annually, deaths outside of the monitoring area don’t count toward thresholds that the three Northern Rockies states agreed to in their grizzly bear conservation strategy. In fact, van Manen doesn’t expect that the near-record mortalities will exceed any of the limits in place for independent females, males and dependent young.
“I think we’re still going to see population growth, because we also had a pretty good year for females with cubs,” van Manen said. About 200 cubs, he said, are born into the population every spring, and about 30% of those survive to independence.
“That’s pretty solid recruitment into the population every year,” van Manen said. “That’s what keeps this whole dynamic on the positive side — still having population growth.”
The Montana and Wyoming biologists shared the belief that the relatively high mortality rate is not concerning from a population standpoint.
“We have a healthy, recovered grizzly bear population that’s going to sustain mortality,” Smith said.
The numbers are all relative, Thompson stressed. More living bears means more dying bears. The Yellowstone region’s grizzly population has steadily grown inside the monitoring area, and outside it’s swelled to an unknown degree.
“It’s a high number, but I still don’t think it’s limiting the bear population,” Thompson said about mortality. “We’ll be able to demonstrate that with our annual assessment.”
Whether the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem reaches 70 grizzly deaths and sets a new record depends on how the last month or so goes while bears are out of the den.
“Some are already close to denning up,” van Manen said. “Their movement rates are starting to be reduced substantially, and that alone makes them less vulnerable.”
Nevertheless, 2024 “clearly has the potential” to set the high mark, Thompson said.
“I thought we’d hit it [the record] a few weeks ago, quite honestly,” he said.
The slowdown in grizzly bear conflicts and mortalities since mid-October has been welcomed — and not just for the bruins’ sake.
“It’s been a very mentally and physically stressful year for our people,” Thompson said.
If yellowstone grizzlies are de-listed their survival outside of core recovery zone(s) are dubious at best. It will then be imperative to bring more restricted management action(s) in the core recovery zone(s), both inside the park and adjacent environs. This includes greater restrictions on recreation and human entry of any kind , including hiking , backpacking , and other intrusions not consistent putting grizzlies first. Our mere presence in grizzly habitat puts the bear(s) on the defensive which creates conflict , and conflict means grizzly mortality. I hope we can be less selfish and do the right thing , but i’m not optimistic…..Gene Robinson Carson Valley NV
Not trusting Wyoming with wildlife, I am wondering what is really going on. Wyoming does not respect predators, obviously, and in my opinion lot of this occurs on MY LAND, it is public land. Not cattleman’s property. I will boycott Wyoming and hope.other people do the same.
Get cattle off federal land !
Not having much faith that any of the animals under the “management ” in wyoming are being honestly handled. The green river bar torture and killing of a young wolf was basically given a slap on the hand,how many other animals in your “Predator” zone have been subjected to unnecessary pain and suffering that is legal!
Mike has always been a little “anti-hunter” in his reporting, but this article might top them all. There’s no reason fir the higher number of bear deaths?? I’m not a biologist, but I would say it’s probably because there’s a higher number of bears. The total number of grizzlies is highly under estimated. Realistically, it would be safe to say, the number is more than 1500. Way too many bears for the square miles their range encompasses. State allocated hunts would help better control the overpopulation and over time, reduce the number of bear person conflicts and livestock conflicts.
Too many tourists , traffic needs to be controlled especially time of year for denning. Ranchers are reimbursed for loss and whose land was it before they started destroying the range. Too many people I wonder who is getting paid off with Federal government involved .
They know damn well what’s going on those stinkin cattle ranchers are shooting them because of cattle. Selfdefense my ass. They are paying the fish and game to keep it quiet. That’s what you get when you hire YES men…….
The numbers presented in this article are extremely deceptive, creating a narrative that is a fabrication.
Example: None of the numbers are adjusted for a skyrocketing bear population. The number of yearly “conflicts” fluctuates but stays around 200 for a decade when the bear population grew by 31%. That is a drop in conflicts of 25% per bear, which is quite significant.
A “record” 70 deaths is fearfully cited for 2024, but that does not consider the population increase, overcounting from an expanded area or the 35 bears deliberately killed as pests. The implication is of natural deaths, for which the correct number is 26 – occurring while the population actually rose by
27.
A grizzly population that has gone from 200 to 1080 since 1982 does not exactly suggest a mortality problem. Shame on all of you!
Grizzly Bears are slow to reproduce and losing just 2 adult female Grizzlies can have a negative impact on the population for a long time.
Dan Thompson the Large Carnivore guy at WG&F normalizes the loss of up to 70 bears. His insistence that these grizzly bear deaths won’t impact the population is overly confident. How Thompson can say that Grizzlies are fully recovered ignores all the expert current science which affirms that there is no connectivity to other populations. Chris Servheen stated just today at The Wilma talk In 2024, that “Montana black bear hunting regulations (again) allow hound hunting of black bears where FWP itself says grizzly bears may be present. This is being done while grizzlies are still listed under ESA”. Also- “There is a disconnect between human population growth, suburban sprawl, and the ability of wildlife to adapt to this ongoing development.
Land development decisions should consider the impacts of such development on valuable wild animals like grizzly bears.”
Wildlife governance in WY, MT & ID as relates to Apex species are dictated by anti carnivore politicians, not state biologists. Keep Grizzlies on the ESL.
We just lost 399 this AM……23 Oct 2024
RIP 399
We will miss you…..
A Life Well-Lived….
With bear numbers steadily rising, I would expect conflicts to steadily rise as well. The fact that they are down or level is a testament to the people living there and those visiting that area. This article title is a bit click-baity because overall, it’s good news (more bears and less conflict).
Spot on. This article is deceptive nonsense.