feasibility study<\/a> published last year by Alagona and his colleagues estimated that California could support nearly 1,200 grizzlies.<\/p>\nArticle continues below this ad<\/p>\n
Alagona believes reintroduction could start with a handful of bears, transported from the northern Rockies, released annually, or every other year, in one of a few appropriate spots, such as the remote southern Sierra Nevada. The bears and their locations, diets and preferred habitats would be closely monitored by wildlife managers.<\/p>\n
\u201cThis isn\u2019t just, \u2018Oh, wouldn\u2019t it be fun to have a couple grizzlies in Sequoia National Park,\u2019\u201d Alagona said. \u201cIt\u2019s about thinking about how we can support a healthy population.\u201d<\/p>\n
Having bears in the wild again, he says, would not only satisfy the deep nostalgia for wilderness that grizzlies have come to represent but help bring balance to ecosystems and fulfill the hopes of many Native Americans who consider the animal sacred.<\/p>\n
The vision of Alagona and his colleagues, however, is still a long way from becoming state policy, if it ever does.<\/p>\n
Senate Bill 1305, the legislation that seeks to get the state moving on reintroduction, faces stiff opposition, namely from rural areas where newly released bears might reside.<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
Some communities are already fed up with the return of gray wolves to California, blaming the state for letting wolf packs prey on cattle and harm ranching livelihoods. They don\u2019t want another predator added to the mix.<\/p>\n
![\"Two]()
<\/p>\n
Two grizzly cubs tussle in Yellowstone National Park in\u00a0Wyoming on June 21, 2024.<\/p>\n
Jonathan Newton\/Getty Images<\/p>\n
\u201cIt\u2019s really easy to get support for this (reintroduction) from people who are not affected by it,\u201d said Rick\u00a0Roberti, president of the California Cattlemen\u2019s Association. But \u201cthe wolf situation woke people up to the fact that we\u2019re just not ready.\u201d<\/p>\n
The California Department of Fish and Wildlife, which is managing wolf recovery and would be similarly responsible for monitoring the new bears, has warned that grizzly reintroduction would be too much for the agency to handle. The department doesn\u2019t officially comment on pending legislation.<\/p>\n
A fiscal analysis of the bill presented this week by the Senate Appropriations Committee suggests that studying and preparing for grizzly bears could require 15 new employees at the Department of Fish and Wildlife, at a cost of more than $4 million a year.<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
\u201cI hope we can use some common sense and say maybe this isn\u2019t the right time,\u201d\u00a0Roberti said.<\/p>\n
To try to appease critics, the author of the legislation, Democratic Sen. Laura Richardson who represents parts of Los Angeles County, recently weakened the bill. She eliminated language offering the state\u2019s outright endorsement of grizzly reintroduction, choosing to stick with just studying it.<\/p>\n
Specifically, her legislation calls for developing a \u201croadmap\u201d by 2030 that evaluates \u201cwhether, and under what conditions, reintroduction of the grizzly bear is feasible and advisable.\u201d It does not authorize releases.<\/p>\n
Richardson\u2019s office declined to take calls to answer questions from the Chronicle.<\/p>\n
![\"A]()
<\/p>\n
A grizzly bear and her cub tear up a downed tree in search of food in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming on July 18, 2024.<\/p>\n
Jonathan Newton\/Getty Images<\/p>\n
SB 1305 is sponsored by California\u2019s Yurok and Tejon tribes. Both view the bear as a cultural and spiritual kindred. Tejon Chairman Octavio Escobedo, at a committee hearing on the legislation last month, said, \u201cthe grizzly is not just a symbol, it\u2019s a relative.\u201d<\/p>\n
Article continues below this ad<\/p>\n
Environmental groups, including the Sierra Club and National Parks Conservation Association, also are backing the bill. Many note the ecological importance of the missing predator, which ranges from aiding seed and nutrient dispersal across forests and plains to feeding scavengers and reshaping the behavior of other animals.<\/p>\n
The bill\u2019s next step is a May 14 hearing by the Senate Appropriations Committee. The committee members will weigh the fiscal impact of the legislation and decide whether the bill should advance to a full vote of the Senate.<\/p>\n
Brendan Cummings, conservation director at the nonprofit Center for Biological Diversity, says even if the recent cost estimates published by the committee were accurate \u2014 he believes they may be overstated \u2014 the cause would be worth funding.<\/p>\n
\u201cFor less (annually) than the cost of a house in the Hollywood Hills, we could bring our state animal back,\u201d he said, calling the expense \u201cdust\u201d in the massive state budget. \u201cIt seems absurd that we as a state wouldn\u2019t do what we can to bring the animal back. It feels like an essential part of California is missing.\u201d<\/p>\n
Before the Gold Rush, an estimated 10,000 grizzlies are believed to have lived across the state, including in coastal hills, interior valleys and inland mountains. As California was settled, however, the bears became viewed increasingly as a threat and commodity. They were eventually wiped out by hunters and trappers in the 1920s.<\/p>\n
The 2025 feasibility study by Alagona and his colleagues cites three regions where grizzly reintroduction could be successful: the southern Sierra; the mountains of the state\u2019s northwest, including the Klamath range and the Trinity Alps; and the Transverse Ranges that span from San Bernardino County to Santa Barbara County.<\/p>\n
![\"A]()
<\/p>\n
A sign warns visitors and residents about the presence of grizzly bears in\u00a0Cooke City, Montana on August 30, 2024.<\/p>\n
Natalie Behring\/Getty Images<\/p>\n
The chosen sites are based on modeling of where grizzlies lived historically in California, the types of areas that bears elsewhere live in and where other predators in California have succeeded.<\/p>\n
The study also found that the danger the animals present to humans is minimal, a concern that\u2019s often front and center in the discussion of the grizzly, which is up to 8 feet tall when standing. The authors noted additionally that if bear management is done right, livestock loss would not be a major problem.<\/p>\n
\u201cLarge predators can be scary, but they can be among the most magnificent encounters with wildlife,\u201d said Cummings, who contributed to last year\u2019s feasibility study. \u201cMillions of people go to Yellowstone (in Wyoming) to see grizzly bears. Virtually none have encounters that go awry.\u201d<\/p>\n
Still, some people have been killed by grizzlies. The study estimates about 1.5 fatalities annually in North America.<\/p>\n
Speaking at a recent Senate committee hearing, David Bess, a retired deputy director and game warden at the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, said the threat posed by the bears is part of the reason he remains opposed to the reintroduction.<\/p>\n
\u201cHuman-wildlife conflict will increase,\u201d he said. \u201cPutting grizzlies on the landscape in California will create a public safety risk in addition to creating a significant workload that the department is not funded for or staffed for at this time.\u201d<\/p>\n
![\"A]()
<\/p>\n
A grizzly bear cub walks on a log, trying to keep up with its mother near Lake Butte overlook in Yellowstone National Park in\u00a0Wyoming on June 6, 2024.<\/p>\n
Jonathan Newton\/Getty Images<\/p>\n
For reintroduction to proceed, state officials would have to ultimately support the effort. Under most scenarios, the federal government would also need to consent. The grizzly bear, which has persisted in parts of Montana, Idaho, Wyoming and Washington (as well as Alaska), is listed as threatened in the Lower 48 states per the U.S. Endangered Species Act, giving federal wildlife officials management discretion.<\/p>\n
The National Park Service and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service rolled out a plan two years ago to reintroduce grizzlies to the North Cascades in Washington, though that effort has not moved forward under the Trump administration.<\/p>\n
As Alagona and his colleagues conclude in their study, bringing the animal back is not about logistical or ecological impossibility: \u201cWhether the bears return depends on the choices people make.\u201d<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"A female grizzly bear walks in a meadow near Pelican Creek in Yellowstone National Park in Wyoming on…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":629145,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[51],"tags":[2356,192,6632,111,79,201],"class_list":["post-629144","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-wildlife","tag-california","tag-environment","tag-outdoors","tag-politics","tag-science","tag-wildlife"],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/629144","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=629144"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/629144\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/629145"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=629144"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=629144"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.newsbeep.com\/us\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=629144"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}