Dean Weingarten : “WA Grizzly Reintroduction: Confrontation Ahead?”

A recent Facebook post by the City of Leavenworth in the east-Central Cascades of Washington State has warned residents about “heightened bear activity,” leading to the closure of a popular local trail. The public was advised to steer clear of the trails in the area for the time being.

Interestingly, the alert was not regarding grizzly bears but black bears, whose population has surged since a ban on hunting them with hounds nearly 30 years ago. Additionally, spring bear hunting has been halted by the Washington Fish & Wildlife Commission while the general season commences on August 1.

Although the trail has since reopened, the city has reported that the bear remains in the vicinity. In a previous incident in 2010, a Bellevue man was attacked by a black bear near his vacation cabin close to Leavenworth, near Lake Wenatchee.

Leavenworth, situated along U.S. 2, lies approximately a hundred miles south of where the U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service and National Park Service plan to reintroduce up to 25 grizzly bears into the North Cascades of Okanogan and Skagit counties over the next few years. This move has sparked excitement among proponents, largely residing in distant urban areas, about introducing another apex predator into someone else’s territory.

Discussions on using firearms for defense against bears have been raised, with varying outcomes. While hikers often carry bear spray as a deterrent, its effectiveness is not guaranteed in every situation.

But are apprehensions regarding grizzlies in the North Cascades warranted, or are critics exaggerating? While bear attacks are infrequent, a single incident could trigger blame and scrutiny.

Recent reports from Wyoming indicate that the potential selection of Wyoming grizzlies to repopulate Washington State’s remote North Cascades region may not be well-received by locals.

Furthermore, the Cowboy State Daily recently documented the first “verified” grizzly attack of the season in Wyoming, involving a 35-year-old man from Massachusetts who encountered two bears unexpectedly, resulting in severe injuries and hospitalization.

Given such occurrences, concerns from residents in the Evergreen State, where the bears will be released, are understandable.

During a public comment period last fall, over 12,000 comments were submitted. However, the government did not provide a breakdown of opinions in its official statement.

One Omak resident, Chance Cornell, emphasised, “They are a major apex predator, at the top of the food chain,” indicating the potential risks posed by introducing grizzly bears into the region.

Social media platforms have not overlooked the controversy, with discussions on carrying firearms during hikes generating numerous responses on Facebook groups like “Washington Hikers and Climbers with Guns.”

The Seattle Times has portrayed the grizzly reintroduction as a positive step, highlighting the potential benefits of the bears in restoring ecosystem balance amidst climate changes. However, Republican Congressman Dan Newhouse has expressed discontent with the NPS/FWS decision.

“Today’s announcement reinforces what we feared: no amount of local opposition was going to prevent these federal bureaucrats from doing what they wanted all along,” Newhouse remarked in a message posted on “X” (formerly Twitter).

When NBC reported the decision in April, Rachel McClure, secretary of the Okanogan County Cattleman’s Association, voiced concerns about the addition of another apex predator amidst existing predator challenges in the state.

Nevertheless, with the decision finalised, individuals such as ranchers, orchardists, hunters, and backcountry hikers will need to consider the implications of the grizzly reintroduction.

The NPS highlighted that the last confirmed grizzly bear sighting in the North Cascades ecosystem was in 1996. They have outlined specific conditions under which killing a grizzly would be justified, such as self-defence or defence of others to prevent bodily harm.

In Washington State, under RCW 9.41.060, individuals engaged in lawful outdoor activities like hunting, fishing, camping, hiking, or horseback riding are permitted to carry concealed weapons without a license.

In the Facebook discussion among hikers and climbers with guns, firearms like the .44 Magnum and 10mm Auto were recommended for bear country. Other suggestions included the .41 and .357 Magnums, with one individual proposing a .500 Smith & Wesson Magnum.

Recent incidents in Montana and Wyoming involving grizzly attacks serve as stark reminders of the risks associated with human-bear encounters. Advocates stress that such attacks are rare, yet individuals closer to the affected areas feel their concerns have been disregarded.

About Dave Workman

Dave Workman serves as a senior editor at TheGunMag.com and Liberty Park Press, and is the author of multiple books focusing on the Right to Keep & Bear Arms. He was formerly an NRA-certified firearms instructor.