A judge for the US District Court for the District of Montana, ruled [order, PDF] Monday that a US Fish & Wildlife Service decision to remove protections on the grizzly bear in the greater Yellowstone area was arbitrary and capricious and could impact the lower states’ grizzly populations.

Conservation groups and local tribes brought the suit after the announcement [press release] by the US Fish & Wildlife Service last year that grizzly bears in the greater Yellowstone area would be delisted [rule text] as an endangered species, removing protections for that population.

Chief Judge Dana Christensen first found that the Service did not consider all the pertinent scientific evidence when it delisted the grizzly bear, as reduced populations in the greater Yellowstone area could impact populations of the bears in other states. The scientific issue argued was whether the grizzlies would have enough genetic diversity independent of human intervention if hunting of a certain number of bears would be allowed. The conclusion was “that all evidence suggests that the long-term viability of the Greater Yellowstone grizzly is far less certain absent new genetic material.”

The chief judge also found the Service’s decision to be arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act [text], in its analysis of the factors determining an endangered species designation in the Endangered Species Act [text]. The chief judge found that the Service relied illogically on studies that actually gave a result contrary to the actions of the Service.

As a result of the ruling, proposed grizzly hunts scheduled in Wyoming and Idaho were canceled. Earthjustice lawyer Tim Preso, an attorney on the case commented [Earthjustice report], “This is a victory for the bears and for people from all walks of life who come to this region to see the grizzly in its natural place in the world.”