Thank
you, and thanks for the opportunity to speak to you today.
I greatly appreciate your invitation to have this discussion.
In my nearly 30 year career in the National Park Service,
I can remember no other issue in which I have felt such a
personal and professional stake. As superintendent of Yellowstone
National Park I carry the responsibility of conserving the
park unimpaired for future generations. Bison and brucellosis
management are the most difficult issues facing Yellowstone
National Park, its neighbors, and its partners.
So I am here to consider with you the matter of brucellosis—as
a disease, but perhaps more importantly, as a test of our
combined wisdom and vision for the future that best honors
our common heritage.
Those of us here today represent much more than a gathering
of individual or institutional points of view about brucellosis.
We represent much of the history and culture of the American
West. It is a heritage that the rest of the world respects
and greatly admires. Livestock and wildlife are both fundamental
parts of that heritage.
For a few moments, I ask you to consider our common heritage.
We, You and I, Rangers and Ranchers, Conservationists and
Sportsman, start each day in the same way—with dirt,
water, weather, grass, and animals. We deeply share with the
livestock industry, conservation groups and sportsman, the
basic stewardship values of the West. While the park doesn't
ride herd on livestock, park rangers have been riding the
landscape in all weather for more than a hundred years. Rangering
at Yellowstone National Park is not a bureaucratic exercise.
Park Rangers, as well as all park employees, are in the business
of rolling up our sleeves and getting on with the hard, hot,
cold, windy work of the park. Past experience has repeatedly
shown that once the agencies collectively choose a brucellosis
management direction, our field staffs work together smoothly
and professionally to get the job done.
From this common ground, the park's business is free-ranging
wildlife, clean water, and clean air for the vast number of
publics who cherish these precious and treasured resources.
This is the common ground we must continue to work from if
that heritage is to be passed to the next generation of land
stewards.
We agree that these western values must be honored and conserved.
All of our ideals, goals, and values are essential to this
region's heritage. All must have an important place in the
region's future. The second thing that we agree on is that
brucellosis has compromised that heritage, and that it does
not belong in that future. Let there be no doubt that this
is my position and the position of the National Park Service.
This year we celebrate the 125th anniversary of a great event
in western American history. In 1883, a few forward-looking
sportsmen persuaded the Secretary of the Interior to close
Yellowstone National Park to public hunting. Those visionary
hunters saw the park not as a separate entity, but as a regional
reservoir of wildlife. This vision guarantees that as long
as the park is protected, migratory wildlife will be available
in perpetuity for public use on the lands outside and surrounding
the park.
We
in the National Park Service have no more fulfilling responsibility
than the protection of this wildlife legacy. Every day in
my role as superintendent, I am reminded that there is no
other part of our regional heritage that has a larger and
more energetic set of constituencies watching over it than
does our wildlife.
Some of Yellowstone's neighbors seem happy about wildlife
that move across the park boundary and bring easy joy and
reliable commerce to the surrounding lands. But some of these
neighbors are often quick to condemn those same animals when
they complicate things or cause trouble. The troublemaking
species are then referred to as "Yellowstone bison,"
or "Yellowstone elk" or "Yellowstone wolves."
In 1917, brucellosis was detected in bison, and thereafter
in elk, with the original transmission from infected cattle
that had been brought into the greater Yellowstone area. Today
all of the elk and bison populations in the greater Yellowstone
area, which is about the size of Indiana, are exposed to brucellosis
to some degree. The park comprises about ten percent of the
greater Yellowstone area, and we take our role in brucellosis
management very seriously. But brucellosis management must
also be taken equally serious in the other ninety percent
of the region.
Brucellosis management is not, and can not be about livestock
versus wildlife. This misconception perpetuates the fundamental
error of attacking the animals rather than the disease. It
pits two cherished elements of our heritage against each other
to no good purpose. Simply removing wildlife or livestock
from our landscapes will not solve the problem. Nor does it
honor our common heritage, and nor will it define an acceptable
future.
We are eager to get on with this essential work. But we believe
that progress is hampered by fiction and folklore that prevent
us from working together as we need to. There are some beliefs
that we must get past before we can move forward.
First, there is no simple answer. If you harbor a belief about
this situation that starts out with, "All we got to do
is . . . ," you're wasting time. Simplistic ideas appear
across the spectrum of opinions about brucellosis. On the
one hand, we need to accept that bison are not going to be
allowed to repopulate the Great Plains. On the other, we are
not going to depopulate the Greater Yellowstone of its elk
and bison in order to eliminate brucellosis. We need to expand
and improve the tools in the brucellosis toolbox. We are committed
to our common heritage of livestock and wildlife, and we are
all here to stay.
Second, there is a misunderstanding by some that this bison
population is endangered, it is not. This belief may be inspired
by the stupendously wasteful destruction of bison in the nineteenth
century. We must continue to realize that for many people,
bison represent extraordinary spiritual and cultural values.
Those values deserve our demonstration of sincere and genuine
respect. Still, in the twenty-first century, bison are wildlife
and must be managed as such. Management must be both hands
on and science-based. In this spirit, the National Park Service,
like many other conservation agencies and organizations, endorses
the principles of the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation.
This is the time-tested model in which wildlife belongs to
the citizens and is managed by the state, and in which management
can include appropriate hunting harvest on lands surrounding
the park.
Next, Yellowstone National Park is not overgrazed. The proposition
that bison only migrate from the park because it is an overgrazed
ranch, is just plain wrong. Yellowstone National Park is not
managed as a ranch. Just like other wildlife, bison migrate
beyond the park boundary in winter because food is easier
to get to in the low country. The National Research Council
of the National Academy of Sciences—our nation's highest
scientific court—has found no evidence to support claims
of catastrophic overgrazing. This is a fact we need to accept
and stop trading in "overgrazing" rhetoric. I am
highly conscious of and appreciate the regional and national
economic significance of the Montana livestock industry.
I also call your attention to the clear understanding that
the foremost economic asset in the greater Yellowstone area
is the natural environment. Livestock and wildlife both require
a healthy natural environment. Just as wildlife is not more
important than livestock, livestock are not more important
than wildlife.
Let me reaffirm that I believe brucellosis does not belong
in our future. And let me tell you why this issue should not
be framed as livestock versus wildlife. Any suggestion that
the brucellosis issue can be resolved through a massive wildlife
test and slaughter campaign is raw, unrealistic and simply
naive. If you were to sit in my chair, you would find that
you never underestimate the park's hold on the American heart.
Combine the power of the name Yellowstone with the conscience-searing
symbolism of free-ranging wild bison and you have a mighty
force for public mobilization. There are millions of Americans
whose lives are enriched by the greater Yellowstone area elk
and bison herds. All these millions of people may not have
anything against the regional livestock industry right now,
but I'm pretty sure we do not want them too, either.
We now have the opportunity to move ahead together on brucellosis
management. As for the Interagency Bison Management Plan,
we are at a turning point and it is time to act. The United
States Government Accountability Office recently reported
that the agencies responsible for implementing this plan need
to develop a transparent decision-making process whose success
or failure can be immediately measured by the public.
The National Park Service wants this plan to work. I was pleased
to recently announce that, working with the state of Montana,
we will provide the majority of funding for the State to acquire
a 30-year lease of grazing rights on the Royal Teton Ranch
property just north of the park. We will continue to foster
research on wildlife brucellosis vaccines. We are finalizing
a draft Environmental Impact Statement that addresses long-term
comprehensive bison vaccination. We will continue to be as
attentive as ever in preventing the transmission of brucellosis
from bison to livestock, and acting on the equally important
part of the plan – ensuring the long term preservation
of bison.
But we have much more work to do. The Interagency Bison Management
Plan requires that we conserve the bison population and address
the risk of disease transmission, and the plan will need our
constant attention to remain effective. However, to get to
the root of the problem, we need to seize the opportunity
before us now to form a deep, respectful partnership, harness
our respective missions and energy, utilize non-invasive tools
and techniques, and eventually eliminate this disease, not
the wildlife nor the livestock, from the entire greater Yellowstone
area.
More than once in the last several weeks, I have heard or
read that the time is now to “unite against” one
interest or another in finding a solution to the brucellosis
issue. Today, I ask you to seriously consider the power, pertinence
and progress we would make if we “unite for”,
rather than against, those elements of brucellosis management
that will demonstrate our commitment to our common heritage
and achieve a future where neither wildlife or livestock are
threatened or pitted against one another on a battlefield
laden with politics, rhetoric and an unwillingness to stand
and lead during times of challenge and uncertainty. So, I
will ask once again that we consider “uniting for”:
- Finding new resources to develop effective and sustainable
vaccinations for both wildlife and livestock.
- That we “unite for”; implementing strong adaptive
management changes on the ground that reflect the current
landscape, science and knowledge of our talented field staffs.
- That we “unite for” finding places where bison
are welcome and present no threat to livestock to live outside
the park.
- That we “unite for” a careful and considerate
review, revision and strengthening of the regulatory framework
surrounding livestock and wildlife disease management that
ensure the long term sustainability of both.
- And, that we “unite for”; inviting, including
and involving all those voices we have heard on this issue
and all those voices we will need to listen to if we are to
be successful; scientists, regulators, ranchers, rangers,
tribes, sportsman, conservationists and the public at large.
- To this end, I invite the members of the Board of Livestock
to join me on the park’s northern range later this summer
to further understand our shared migratory wildlife, affirm
our shared values, invigorate our shared commitments to brucellosis
management, and start this long ride together. Thank you.
return to top of page
|
