Montana

Montana to start trucking grizzlies into Yellowstone region

Published

2 years ago

January 9, 2024

Montana to start trucking grizzlies into Yellowstone region

Mike Koshmrl

(WyoFile) Fresh grizzly bear bloodlines are expected to arrive in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem this summer, adding genetic diversity to a population of animals that’s been isolated for a century.

The infusion of genetics will come from the North Continental Divide Ecosystem, and it will roll down the highway in the form of a slumbering grizzly or two.

Why truck in grizzly bears to a population last estimated at nearly 1,000 animals?

Montana and Wyoming — which have hashed out an agreement — are translocating bears as part of the effort to convince the federal government that they’re responsible stewards of a large carnivore species, which the states contend no longer requires Endangered Species Act protections.

“We’re trying to demonstrate to everybody, the courts included, that connectivity isn’t an issue that should impede delisting,” said Ken McDonald, wildlife division chief for Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks. “Until it’s happening regularly, naturally, we can cover this with human-assisted movements.”

The two grizzly bear populations aren’t far from each other — the leading edges are just 35 miles apart — but there’s never been a documented case of a Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem grizzly traveling to the Yellowstone Ecosystem and procreating. Grizzlies have gone the other direction, trekking north well into Montana, but that doesn’t accomplish the goal of creating gene flow into the isolated population.

Firm plans are in place to force the issue as soon as this summer. Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks has staffed up, adding two employees who will be used during the summer and fall to assist with the grizzly translocation project, McDonald said. Those expert grizzly trappers will be targeting animals with specific attributes.

“Ideally, it’d be a bear that has no history of any conflict,” McDonald said. “And ideally, a younger aged female.”

Two conflict-free females

Wildlife officials intend to move the bears as soon as mid-June, but no later than mid-August. “We don’t want to move them too late, when they’re not ready to den,” McDonald said. “So it’s a pretty finite window.”

Other parameters of the genetic augmentation pilot project are described in an appendix of Montana’s draft grizzly bear management plan. That document estimates the frequency of translocating grizzlies at two to four animals every decade.

The grizzly-moving operation in the absence of a natural dispersal is also a commitment included in the tri-state memorandum of agreement that Wyoming, Montana and Idaho struck to guide management of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem’s grizzly bears.

“In the tri-state MOA, we’re committed to translocating at least two grizzly bears from outside by 2025,” Wyoming Game and Fish Department large carnivore supervisor Dan Thompson told WyoFile.

Neither Thompson nor McDonald identified exactly where the Glacier-region grizzlies would be released, but there are some requirements and goals. It will need to be within the “demographic monitoring area,” which is a 19,278-square-mile zone in the Greater Yellowstone region’s core where bear numbers are estimated.

Ideally, McDonald said, the release site will be in a low-density grizzly bear habitat. Translocating the grizzly farther south — possibly into Wyoming — is another ideal, he said, because it’s farther geographically from where the bear will have been captured in Montana, and it’ll make the animal more likely to stay.

“We’ve been working with Wyoming on potential places,” McDonald told members of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee’s subcommittee for the Yellowstone Ecosystem, which met in Jackson in November.

Although state wildlife managers have committed to translocating grizzlies into the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, the current level of genetic diversity is not “in dire straits,” Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team Leader Frank van Manen said.

“We have a little bit lower genetic diversity than other populations, but it’s not declining further,” he said. “It’s moderate genetic diversity, is how I would classify it.”

The genetic augmentation appendix of Montana’s draft grizzly bear management plan calls the ecosystem’s genetic isolation a “long-term conservation concern.”

“The rate of inbreeding has been very low (0.2% over 25 years),” the document states, “and no inbreeding effects have been detected.”

Genetic concerns?

Nevertheless, U.S. District Court Judge Dana Christensen sided with environmental groups in 2018 on the question of genetic diversity, ending a short stint where the Northern Rockies states had jurisdiction over their Ursus arctos horribilis populations.

Thompson pointed out that genetic diversity was an issue decades ago when the Yellowstone region population was much lower and “bottlenecked,” but nowadays, with many times more bears, it isn’t much of a concern, he said.

“We’ve demonstrated it is not an issue anymore,” Thompson said, “but (translocation) is another way to address the issues that some people have.”

Thompson made a “Star Wars” analogy out of environmental groups leveraging genetic diversity during the last round of litigation over grizzly delisting.

“It was the thermal exhaust port in the Death Star,” he said. “Opponents of delisting look for weaknesses and try to exploit them. We don’t feel that genetics are a weakness, but (translocation) is just another thing that we can do.”

There are indications that trucking animals into the Yellowstone region won’t placate groups opposed to the states having control over — and potentially hunting — their grizzly bear populations.

“My perspective would be that it undermines their claim of recovery, if they have to translocate bears,” said Matthew Bishop, a senior attorney with the Western Environmental Law Center who argued the last delisting litigation for WildEarth Guardians. “The goal should really be to get bears back in the Bitterroot (recovery area), and get some connectivity between subpopulations. Then maybe start thinking about delisting and recovery, but I don’t think we’re there yet.”

To address some parties’ concerns about genetic diversity, wildlife managers aren’t waiting for a grizzly bear from the Glacier National Park region, like this bruin pictured in Lunch Creek in 2017, to disperse to the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. They plan to facilitate the movement in 2024. (National Park Service)

Retired U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service grizzly recovery coordinator Chris Servheen told WyoFile he conditionally supports the step that state managers plan to take in 2024.

“I’m OK with them doing it in the interim until the bears are naturally connected,” Servheen said, “but I do not want trucking bears to be the alternative to minimizing mortality in the intervening areas. The optimum is for the bears to naturally connect.”

Source link

Click to comment

Montana

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

Published

5 hours ago

March 11, 2026

Press Room

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

It’s the talk of the town this week — powerful winds ripped the roof off Lincoln Elementary School on Sunday, leaving students, teachers, and residents in shock.

The incident has sparked concern among homeowners who are now worried about how such weather damage could impact their own homes—and what their insurance would cover.

According to Tauna Locatelli, owner of Advantage Insurance, most insurance policies have a set deductible for things like fire or theft, but wind and hail damage deductibles are often much higher, or even based on a percentage of a property’s value.

Quentin Shores reports – watch the video here:

Wind damage highlights insurance challenges for Montana homeowners

“Right now our industry is going through a really challenging time, especially when it comes to wind and hail in Montana. Several carriers are going to a standard ‘all peril’ deductible for everything other than wind and hail. So, it could be $1,000 for all but wind and hail, $2,500 wind and hail,” Locatelli explained.

A deductible is the amount homeowners must pay before insurance covers the rest. For wind and hail, that deductible can be steep.

“Some companies are going 1 or 2% of a coverage value, so that’s the building value. If it’s insured for $500,000 and you have a 1% deductible, you’re looking at a $5,000 deductible for wind and hail, which is what we get in Montana,” Locatelli said.

It’s important for homeowners to know their deductible—if repairs cost less than the deductible, insurance won’t pay anything.

Filing small claims can also impact your rates; Locatelli said, “Because if you have a $3,000 patch job claim and you have a $5,000 deductible, you really don’t want to file that because you’re not going to get anything in. That claim is going to follow your insurance record for five years.”

Age of property factors in as well. If you have an older roof, insurance may not fully cover its replacement.

“You’ve now lived half the roof life. Well, insurance is about indemnity and putting you back in the same condition you were in before the loss. You can’t put a 16-year-old roof on a home, so at 16 years, they’ll now pay 50% of that roof instead of 100% because it’s already lived half of its life. And then it drops each year as it goes by,” Locatelli added.

The bottom line: Keep your property maintained, review your insurance policy, and think carefully before filing a claim—especially as Montana faces more intense weather.

Source link

Montana

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

Published

17 hours ago

March 11, 2026

Press Room

Missoula and Western Montana neighbors: Obituaries for March 11

State

Zip Code

Country

Source link

Montana

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

Published

1 day ago

March 10, 2026

Press Room

Montana AG letter alleges Helena violates law banning ‘sanctuary cities’

HELENA — On Monday, Montana Attorney General Austin Knudsen sent a letter to the City of Helena claiming the municipality is not in compliance with the state’s law banning “sanctuary cities.” The letter comes just under a month after the State of Montana launched an investigation into a city resolution on Helena Police policy and Helena’s involvement in federal immigration enforcement.

In the letter, Knudsen laid out the ways he believes the city’s resolution violated state law. The attorney general gave Helena 15 days to respond or reverse the policy. If the city does not comply, his office will pursue legal action.

“Helena’s resolution appears to contain blatant violations of this law,” wrote Knudsen.

MTN News

On January 26, 2026, the City of Helena adopted a resolution clarifying when and how the Helena Police Department will cooperate with federal immigration officials. The vote was 4 to 1. The Helena commission seats and the mayor are elected in non-partisan races.

In the letter, Knudsen alleges the resolution established “a broad sanctuary city policy” that seeks to protect every illegal immigrant, regardless of whether the individual had committed a serious crime or not. The state further claims the resolution gives illegal immigrants “special privileges” in plea deals and establishes a “free-for-all policy” where a police officer can request the unmasking of Department of Homeland Security and ICE officers.

Knudsen has requested that the City of Helena, in their response, specifically describe in detail how the resolution complies with Montana law, provide emails and correspondence from city staff and the commission regarding the resolution.

Helena City manager Alana Lake told MTN in a statement: “The City of Helena is aware of the issues being raised by the Attorney General’s Office and is reviewing the matter. While we cannot discuss the details of a potential legal issue, the City is committed to transparency and compliance with the law. The City takes these matters seriously and will continue to cooperate with the appropriate authorities while remaining focused on serving our community.”

Passed in 2021, Montana House Bill 200 prohibits a state agency or local government from implementing any policy that prevents employees or departments from communicating with federal agencies regarding immigration or citizenship status for lawful purposes. It also states governments must comply with immigration detainer requests if they are lawfully made.

HB 200 was backed by Republicans and passed with only Republican votes. Gov. Greg Gianforte signed the legislation into law on March 31, 2021.

Passage of the resolution by the Helena City Commission has drawn ire from conservative voices in Montana politics and on the national level.

The resolution said the commission supported the Helena Police Department avoiding “committing its resources to federal action for which it has no authority,” such as entering into an agreement with the federal government to directly enforce immigration laws. Under federal law, immigration enforcement is conducted by federal agencies under the Department of Homeland Security. However, under the Immigration and Nationality Act, state and local governments can voluntarily enter into 287 (g) agreements with the federal government that allow them to enforce immigration laws.

The commission further supported HPD’s policy not to stop, detain, or arrest a person solely on suspected violations of immigration law, including assisting other agencies in an arrest based solely on immigration law.

DEEPER LOOK: Helena has seen a growing debate over ICE and local police involvement

In the resolution, the commission also supported an HPD officer, using their own discretion, requesting the identification and unmasking of a Department of Homeland Security Officer if the HPD officer “feels it will not be interfering with the actions of federal officers exercising their jurisdiction.”

“This adversarial relationship by local law enforcement toward federal officers itself undermines public safety and forces immigration officers to fear for their safety when they are simply carrying out their lawful duties,” wrote Knudsen.

The resolution further supports the City of Helena’s policy not to consider immigration consequences in a plea agreement with a defendant.

The commission also supports the City of Helena not disclosing any sensitive information about any person – including immigration status, sexual orientation, or social security number – except as required by law.

“This is a restriction that directly conflicts with Montana’s prohibition on sanctuary jurisdictions, specifically ‘sending to, receiving from, exchanging with, or maintaining for a federal, state, or local government entity information regarding a person’s citizenship or immigration status for a lawful purpose,’” the attorney general wrote.

If a government is found to be violating Montana’s law banning “sanctuary cities”, the state could fine them $10,000 every five days, prevent them from receiving new grants from the state, and have their projects with the state re-prioritized. A government in violation can avoid penalties by becoming compliant with the law within 14 days of being notified of the violation.

Read the full letter from the Montana Attorney General to the City of Helena:

Source link