Connect with us

Montana

Two Grizzly Bears Moved From Montana To Wyoming

Published

on

Two Grizzly Bears Moved From Montana To Wyoming


Montana Governor Greg Gianforte and Wyoming Governor Mark Gordon have announced the successful translocation of two grizzly bears from the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) in Montana to the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) in Wyoming.

“Wyoming’s grizzly bear recovery efforts are monumental and expensive. It is frustrating that time and time again, we meet a bar set by the court, only to see the goalposts moved yet again,” Gov. Gordon said. “This week’s effort assures genetic connection can be achieved through active management to address the court’s requirement where a healthy number of grizzlies, and an ever-expanding range have not been sufficiently convincing to the Ninth Circuit.”

“Montana has worked diligently to set up a framework to take over management of grizzly bears in our state,” Gov. Gianforte said. “This translocation effort demonstrates our commitment to ensuring the conservation of bears in the NCDE and the GYE. It’s time to delist the grizzly bear and let the states take over management.”

Through a partnership between Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks (FWP) and the Wyoming Game and Fish Department (WGFD), the translocations were the result of a commitment between Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho under the Tri-State Memorandum of Agreement.

Advertisement

The agreement was established to ensure the long-term genetic diversity of the GYE’s grizzly bear population and secure a genetic connection between the two areas and the recovered populations of bears.

The bears, a subadult female and subadult male, were captured in a remote portion of northwest Montana by FWP and transported safely and securely to Wyoming, where WGFD received the subadult female and Yellowstone National Park received the subadult male.

On July 30th, the states released a subadult female in the Blackrock drainage approximately 35 miles northwest of Dubois, Wyoming.

On July 31th, Yellowstone National Park personnel released a subadult male, within the park boundaries, in a remote area south of Yellowstone Lake.

In 2019, the U.S. Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled in Crow Indian Tribe v. United States that the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS) must ensure the long-term genetic diversity of the GYE’s grizzly bear population.

Advertisement

The translocation addresses concerns cited by the court and demonstrates the commitment of Wyoming and Montana to ensure that diversity remains.

Both Wyoming and Montana have engaged in legal efforts to delist the grizzly bear in the GYE.

In December 2021, Gov. Gianforte petitioned the federal government to delist the grizzly bear in the NCDE.

In February 2023, he welcomed the FWS acceptance of the state of Montana’s petition to delist grizzly bears in the NCDE in northwest Montana.

“After decades of work, the grizzly bear has more than recovered in the NCDE, which represents a conservation success. I’m proud of our progress with the federal government to delist the grizzly in the NCDE, opening the door to state management of this iconic American species,” Gov. Gianforte said.

Advertisement

Governor Gordon petitioned the federal government to delist the GYE grizzly population in January, 2022.

“Now it is clear that the grizzly bear in the Yellowstone ecosystem should be delisted, as it has been twice before. Wyoming thanks their partners in Montana and Idaho for their commitment to this effort,” Gov. Gordon added.

The bears selected for the translocation had no history of conflict and will be monitored through a GPS collar.

The Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team will continue regular genetic monitoring of the GYE
population.



Source link

Advertisement

Montana

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate

Published

on

Apparent AI Glitch in Filing by Montana Public Defender, Recent Congressional Candidate


Everyone makes mistakes, even experienced professionals; a good reminder for the rest of us to learn from those mistakes. The motion in State v. Stroup starts off well in its initial pages (no case law hallucinations), but is then followed by several pages of two other motions, which I don’t think the lawyer was planning to file, and which appear to have been AI-generated: It begins with the “Below is concise motion language you can drop into …” language quoted above.

Griffen Smith (Missoulian) reported on the story, and included the prosecutor’s motion to strike that filing, on the grounds that it violates a local rule (3(G)) requiring disclosure of the use of generative AI:

The document does not include a generative artificial intelligence disclosure as required. However, page 7 begins as follows: “Below is concise motion language you can drop into a ‘Motion to Admit Mental-Disease Evidence and for Related Instructions’ keyed to 45-6-204, 45-6-201, and 4614-102. Adjust headings/captions to your local practice.” Page 10 states “Below is a full motion you can paste into your pleading, then adjust names, dates, and styles to fit local practice.” These pages also include several apparent hyperlinks to “ppl-ai-file-upload.s3.amazonaws,” “ppl-ai-fileupload.s3.amazonaws+1,” and others. The document includes what appears to be an attempt at a second case caption on page 12. It is not plausible on its face that any source other than generative AI would have created such language for a filed version of a brief….

There’s more in that filing, but here’s one passage:

While generative AI can be a useful tool for some purposes and may have greater application in the future, when used improperly, and without meaningful review, it can ultimately damage both the perception and the reality of the profession. One assumes that Mr. Stroup has had, or will at some point have, an opportunity to review the filing made on his behalf. What impression could a review of pgs. 12-19 leave upon a defendant who struggles with paranoia and delusional thinking? While AI could theoretically one day become a replacement for portions of staff of experienced attorneys, it is readily apparent that this day has not yet arrived.

The Missoulan article includes this response:

Advertisement

In a Wednesday interview, Office of Public Defender Division Administrator Brian Smith told the Missoulian the AI-generated language was inadvertently included in an unrelated filing. And he criticized the county attorney’s office for filing a “four-page diatribe about the dangers of AI” instead of working with the defense to correct her mistake.

“That’s not helping the client or the case,” Smith said, “and all you are doing is trying to throw a professional colleague under the bus.”

As I mentioned, the lawyer involved seems quite experienced, and ran for the Montana Public Service Commission in 2020 (getting nearly 48% of the vote) and for the House of Representatives in Montana’s first district in 2022 (getting over 46% of the vote) and in 2024 (getting over 44%). “Его пример другим наука,” Pushkin wrote in Eugene Onegin—”May his example profit others,” in the Falen translation.

Thanks to Matthew Monforton for the pointer.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Montana

Your guide to local sports events, plus what’s on TV

Published

on

Your guide to local sports events, plus what’s on TV





Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading

Montana

Montana Department of Agriculture focusing on innovation in 2026

Published

on

Montana Department of Agriculture focusing on innovation in 2026


HELENA — You probably have goals and plans for 2026—the Montana Department of Agriculture does too.

“We’re really focusing on innovative agricultural practices,” Montana Department of Agriculture director Jillien Streit said.

It’s no secret that agriculture—farming and ranching—is not easy. There are long days, planning, monitoring crops and livestock, and other challenges beyond farmers’ and ranchers’ control.

(WATCH: Montana Department of Agriculture focusing on innovation in 2026)

Advertisement

Montana Department of Agriculture focusing on innovation in 2026

“We have very low commodity prices across the board,” Streit said. “We still have very high input prices across the board, and we have really high prices when it comes to our equipment, and so, it’s a really tough year.”

But innovation, including new practices, partnerships and technology use, can help navigate some of those challenges.

Advertisement

“We can’t make more time and we can’t make more land, so we need to start putting together innovative practices that help us maximize what our time and land can do,” Streit said.

Practices range from using technology like autonomous tractors and virtual fencing—allowing rangers to contain and move cattle right from their phones—to regenerative farming and ranching.

“It is bringing cattle back into farming operations to be able to work with cover cropping practices to invigorate the soil for new soil health benefits,” Streit said.

The Montana Department of Agriculture is working to help producers learn, share, and collaborate on new ideas to work in their operations.

The department will share stories of practices that work from farms and ranches across the state. Also, within the next year or so, Streit said the department is hoping to roll out technology to help producers collaborate.

Advertisement

“(It’s) providing a communication platform where people can get together and really help each other out by utilizing each other’s assets,” she said.

While not easy, agriculture is still one of Montana’s largest industries, and Streit said innovating and sharing ideas across the state can keep it going long into the future.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending