Science, ethical arguments, and management in the preservation of land forgrizzly bear conservation

Environmental groups advocate the preservation of an area with British Colu mbia's coastal temperate rainforest as a sanctuary for grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis). Debate among government, industry, and environmental s pokespersons has provided arguments with no resolution. We have applied to this issue available biological knowledge on grizzly bears and the argument s of a range of ethical theories. The theories of three professionally trai ned ethicists were included: Tom Regan, Holmes Rolston III, and Arne Naess. Aldo Leopold's prominent position in the conservation movement justifies h is "land ethic" as a fourth ethical theory. All four theories agree that th e area should be preserved. Contrary to this fundamental agreement, the the ories diverge when tested against a "hard" conservation scenario, the confl ict between the protection of the last surviving grizzly bears versus the s urvival of a culturally distinct human tribe. Application of the principles developed by Regan and Naess recommend the human interests should override the preservation of grizzly bears, whereas Leopold's and Rolston's argumen ts favor the preservation of the area for the bears. Our work can be used a s a model of how the gap between biological sciences, ethical theories, and ecosystem management can be bridged successfully.