Surprising Montana Bear DNA Findings Make McCain Eat His Words

April 29, 2010 RSS Feed Print
  • Comment (4)

By John Aloysius Farrell, Thomas Jefferson Street blog

My old college classmate, Kate Kendall, has finished her experiment, counting Montana's grizzly bears for the U.S. Geological Survey via DNA from their hair. And, maybe, Sen. John McCain has apologized for shooting from the lip.

Kate became a topic of debate in the last presidential campaign when the McCain TV commercials made fun of her study, which was financed by a congressional earmark. Bear DNA, you know, sounds like a dumb animal cop show. Well, it turns out that Kate was on to something pretty cool, if you care about American wildlife.

A very long time ago, as a journalist out West, I tagged along with a government wildlife biology team that was working up near Glacier National Park, trying to count wild wolves and bears. Finding those critters (without getting mauled), and putting a radio collar on them is no picnic.

But times change, and in these days of advanced genetic science, Kate asked a simple question: If you gather enough hair from the places where the grizzlies rub against tree trunks and branches, might you not use the DNA to construct a cheaper and safer, but still accurate profile of the bear population in the area? Turns out, you can. She and her team reported their findings in the Journal of Wildlife Management this week.

To the delight of the ranchers and lumber operators in the area (who don't much like to have the big bears protected as endangered species, and probably voted for McCain), Kate's team discovered that the bear population in Montana is doing better than expected. Using 13,000 samples collected over four years, and other data, they determined that there are about 765 grizzly bears in the ecosystem, more than twice as many as expected.

Ace reporter Juliet Eilperin, who works for the Washington Post, cornered McCain in the Capitol this week and asked him if he still thought that Kate's study was a stupid waste of money.

"It's probably right up there with the mapping of the human genome. It justifies every penny of the taxpayer dollars ever spent on it," McCain said. "The bears in Arizona will be very interested in it."

Juliet says that McCain seemed sincere. You can be the judge of that.

As a postscript, here is the necessary disclosure: Kate and I may have been in the same class in college, but we never knew each other, and only met, via email, during the 2008 campaign. And she confirmed, in our electronic exchange two years ago, something I have suspected these many years. The women in our class--the first, if you can believe it, to break the all-male barrier of a major public university--were outnumbered, 10-to-1, by men, and only dated upperclassmen, who had money and cars.

I could have looked like Warren Beatty, and never had a shot with Kate and the other gals in our class. I feel better now.

Tags:
Montana,
U.S. Geological Survey,
John McCain

Reader Comments Read all comments (4)

Add Your Thoughts
Your comment will be posted immediately, unless it is spam or contains profanity. For more information, please see our Comments FAQ.

With such a small breeding pool, does the DNA study try to mate some males with females so there will be more variety? If that pool of genes is too small, do they intend to use sperm from other grizzly populations? As I understand it, the danger of extinction comes not only from loss of habitat but from having too small a gene pool.

aua dawn veirs of CA 4:09PM May 01, 2010

The Montana Grizzly Artificial Insemination Team is a legendary outfit. They are obviously dedicated to preserving a vanishing ecosystem where grizzlies reign supreme, but either really courageous or incredibly stupid. These dedicated guys recognize there's something unique in the survival of America's majestic bear, kinda like the survival of an egalitarian American middle class that also facing extinction. Go Griz!

Richard of MT 9:39PM April 30, 2010

What a terrible article. For starters, you mixed the results of two studies. Maybe try a little harder next time to pay attention to what you’re talking about. It’s sad that you missed an opportunity to report the significance of these works, choosing instead to attempt to sound cute about not getting to date someone? I’ll know next time to not bother reading your column because you obviously don’t worry about reporting anything useful or accurate.

Cecille of MT 11:23AM April 30, 2010

John A. Farrell

John A. Farrell

John Aloysius Farrell is a contributing editor at U.S. News & World Report. An award-winning Washington reporter, he has written for The Boston Globe and The Denver Post and is the author of Tip O’Neill and the Democratic Century and an upcoming biography of the great American defense attorney, Clarence Darrow.

advertisement

Robert Schlesinger

Political Enemies: Good vs. Perfect

In politics the perfect is often the enemy of the good.

Latest Videos

advertisement