Year of Award
2022
Document Type
Professional Paper
Degree Type
Master of Science (MS)
Degree Name
Resource Conservation
Department or School/College
College Of Forestry And Conservation
Committee Chair
Alexander L. Metcalf
Committee Co-chair
Chad J. Bishop
Commitee Members
Alexander L. Metcalf, Chad J. Bishop, Michael Mitchell
Keywords
Grizzly Bear Conflicts, Grizzly Bear Management, Ursus arctos horribilis, Recovery Zones, Grizzly Bear Populations, Grizzly Bear Distribution
Publisher
University of Montana
Subject Categories
Animal Studies | Environmental Policy | Recreation, Parks and Tourism Administration
Abstract
Edmo, Kenneth, M.S, Autumn 2022 Resource Conservation
Grizzly bear attractant policies in Montana: how regulations, recommendations, and resources differ among and between recovery areas
Chairperson or Co-Chairperson: Alexander L. Metcalf & Chad J. Bishop
Abstract
Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) are a keystone species and play an important role in their environment. After near extinction, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service implemented a recovery plan of six recovery zones to increase grizzly populations. Although these efforts allowed grizzly bear numbers to increase, so too have human-grizzly bear conflicts, significantly challenging agencies in charge of bear management. A concern from some agencies is the perception that inconsistent regulations on attractants (e.g., food,-garbage) across jurisdictions diminishes public compliance. To help address this issue, I conducted a policy inventory across federal, state, and local agencies that pertain to recreation, landowners, and several municipalities in Montana. I categorized agency policy information into one of three categories: requirements, recommendations, and resources available (the “3Rs”). I assessed how those policies differed across jurisdictions and made recommendations towards consistency for grizzly bear management across jurisdictions. Results showed substantial policy consistency among the 3Rs for recreation, landowners, and municipalities, but exceptions existed, especially with respect to managing recreational conflicts. Most agencies prohibit individuals from burning attractants, however, the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) and the National Park Service (NPS) recommend burning attractants. I found that resources available to help people mitigate conflict were highly variable. I found evidence suggesting regulations can be easier to enforce for recreation rather than for landowners. Agencies managing human-grizzly bear conflicts may benefit from simplifying regulations and recommendations for landowners, municipalities, and recreationists. Making the 3Rs more consistent, particularly when recreating (e.g., having the same regulations and recommendations for every state or national park), could make it easier for people to know what is required and what they should do to prevent bear encounters while making enforcement easier for authorities. My work highlights opportunities to improve consistency of the 3Rs for those living and recreating in Montana.
Recommended Citation
Edmo, Kenneth J., "Grizzly Bear Attractant Policies In Montana: How Regulations, Recommendations, And Resources Differ Among And Between Recovery Areas" (2022). Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. 12020.
https://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/12020
Included in
Animal Studies Commons, Environmental Policy Commons, Recreation, Parks and Tourism Administration Commons
© Copyright 2022 Kenneth J. Edmo