Yellowstone, sustainability, and the future?

Field: Environmental Science (Physical Sciences)

Yellowstone National Park (YNP) is world famous and sets precedents across the globe. The broader region, the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), also embodies an “idea” and an “ideal”: a formula of the wild, and of the human–wildlife nexus, where people might live sustainably within the ecosystem. The truth is far from this ideal, however. Yellowstone is endangered, something I have come to understand well over 50 years of living and working there. People harass grizzly bears with drones. Others leave campfires burning on their departure. Overcrowding on trails, as well as at restroom facilities and observation sites, is common, as are impromptu wildlife-viewing opportunities that cause dangerous traffic jams on roads. Take one personal example: in 2014, at dusk on a summer day in nearby Grand Teton National Park (just south of YNP) and from the safety of my car, I spotted a grizzly bear foraging 50 feet from the road and about 150 feet from a bike path. Fortunately, no bikers were on the path. The next morning when I passed the same spot, the bear was gone, but mountain bikers came speeding by, heads down, only a short distance from where the bear had been just hours earlier. Such proximity and lack of awareness can be a fatal combination; bikers have been killed by grizzlies elsewhere. Given the potential danger in such a situation, why place a recreational bike path in grizzly bear habitat at all? In the GYE, where incidents like these occur daily, unprecedented human population growth has led to rapid increases in residential and commercial development, visitation and recreation, and much more. With scores of geographic and political boundaries bisecting the GYE, integrated management commensurate with such widespread problems is lacking, as is farsighted coordination, leadership, and policy. Are we inadvertently drifting toward systems failure despite all the good intentions and hard work of a great many people over generations? Though these mushrooming, interconnected issues are diverse in nature and impact, they all derive from the same underlying source: us. The question is, what shall we do? Currently, our society is struggling to create a new story and set of actions to realize a flourishing future for all. Our evolving language labels it as “coexistence” or “living sustainably on the land”, among other tropes. While ecological science – along with its associated management and policy implications – can provide grounding and direction, the challenges ahead clearly require much more than science. The overall situation is a fundamental opportunity to rethink, refit, and redeploy our understanding, work, and relationships, should we decide to do so. What are the most helpful ways forward, given the rapid change evident in the GYE? First, we must establish clear goals for the whole GYE. This means recognizing the GYE’s status as an irreplaceable public good. What are our obligations to future generations and to non-human life? We must foster public dialogue; improve existing and develop new environmental laws and policies; and revitalize a focused corps of professional scientists with appropriate leadership and resources. Second, we must bolster the conservation of large carnivores and protect the long-distance migrations of native ungulates. Ecological science is essential to this, as is the integration of our problem-solving approach regionwide, contextually and practically. The park’s science center, the Yellowstone Center for Resources (YCR), could serve as a leader and organizer of diverse interests, to produce the science needed for effective management. The YCR could also lead a GYE “futuring” exercise about change that is coming, such as that with respect to climate, endangered species, invasive taxa, tourism, and development. This will necessitate cooperation between the YNP, government agencies, conservation organizations, universities, and many others, pooling talents and resources. Third, we need to integrate knowledge of and action for conservation on the ground. This requires not only a special kind of leadership, organization, and resources at scale but also the melding of human values, science, and pragmatism. Doing so would allow the ecological and social sciences, traditional ecological knowledge, and the general public to inform and support management and policy associated with “coexistence” and “sustainability”. This formula has been field-tested, at least in part, and could be used to guide the GYE’s future. The GYE needs a rapid, co-learning network reminiscent of the Marshall Plan. Arguably, these recommendations are rational and ethical, and can maximize a future ecosystem that is both biologically rich and high-functioning, hugely iconic, and supported by an enduring democratic society over generations. Achieving all this can bring out the best in us. Now is the opportunity to act. SUSAN G CLARK Yale School of the Environment, Yale University, New Haven, CT