Despite opposition from ranchers, orchardists and local officials, the Biden administration last week finalized a yearslong process to reintroduce grizzlies into the North Cascade Range.

The National Park Service and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service have issued a record of decision, confirming a previously released proposal to build up a population of 200 bears in a region roughly the size of New Jersey over 60 to 100 years.

Under the plan, young grizzly bears from Rocky Mountain states and British Columbia will be trapped, trucked and delivered by helicopter to national park lands in north-central Washington.

Government experts admit that the bears will be stressed by the relocation, and some might not survive. But, that number is expected to be low. (Losses are always acceptable to those without skin, or fur, in the game.)

We have opposed this idea from the beginning. We don’t think the area needs another apex predator.

Ranchers don’t want bears preying on their cattle. Fruit growers in the area fear that the grizzlies will be attracted by a ready food supply, ravaging their orchards and threatening their workers.

But a colleague suggested that we look at this from the perspective of the bears that will be moved, against their will, to the North Cascades. She makes a compelling argument.

Imagine you are a bear wandering a familiar range in the Montana Rockies. You know where to find water and food. Since you left your mother everything about this land has been imprinted upon your memory.

Everything that a bear could want is available within your knowing grasp.

Then you are drugged, taken from your home and wake up in the terra incognita of Northern Washington wearing a tracking collar. Where is the water? Where are the berries? Where are the bears looking for mates? Where is your home?

Is this good for the relocated bears? Is this what they would want? Doesn’t that matter?

It’s a bit like going to Portland to tranquilize hipsters so that they can be reintroduced to Des Moines. Sure, some won’t survive, but it’s important that a population be reestablished in their historic home range.

But, we’re talking about bears, not people. Montana grizzly bears are just animals, after all, subject to our whims and best intentions.

They may have been born free, but that doesn’t mean they should be left where they aren’t bothering anyone.

We concede that it was shortsighted to completely wipe out the original grizzly population in the North Cascades. But, there’s equal hubris in believing the forceful relocation of bears from other areas is best for the grizzlies.