jon Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 https://www.seattletimes.com/seattle-news/interior-secretary-ryan-zinke-throws-support-behind-grizzly-bear-recovery-in-north-cascades/ Thoughts? Quote
KirkW Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) Zinke is a tool of the highest order but even a broken clock is right twice a day. I'm all for restoring Grizz to any of their native range that is reasonable. The amount of apes taking up space in prime habitat is a bit problematic though. Maybe I'll get the chance to hunt Grizz before my days are up! "Cattlemen were incensed, stating they have already faced too much carnage from the return of the wolf to Washington" Edited March 24, 2018 by KirkW 1 Quote
ivan Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 one apex predator to another, the grizzly bear can kiss my ass Quote
KirkW Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) I wish I still aid climbed Ivan. Despite the fact that I've given up the habit, I'd love to share a camel at a belay station with you again. Long live the Grizz Edited March 24, 2018 by KirkW Quote
olyclimber Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 12 hours ago, KirkW said: Zinke is a tool of the highest order but even a broken clock is right twice a day. I'm all for restoring Grizz to any of their native range that is reasonable. Ditto. Quote
pcg Posted March 24, 2018 Posted March 24, 2018 (edited) I think what's reasonable is to establish policies that protect them and their habitat and then let them self-restore on their own, or not. Who knows better than grizzlies what habitat is suitable for them. Seems more natural than shocking an ecosystem with a man-made abrupt fix. I would love to see grizzlies in the NC, but ones that peaceably wandered in and settled down on their own, not ones that were yanked out of their home and dropped into a new and strange and unfamiliar land. We just need to respect and protect the land and then otherwise leave it alone so it can return to its natural state. It's a bit presumptuous for us to assume we know what that is. Edited March 24, 2018 by pcg Quote
ivan Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 22 hours ago, KirkW said: I wish I still aid climbed Ivan. Despite the fact that I've given up the habit, I'd love to share a camel at a belay station with you again. Long live the Grizz it's tough, but i can still free climb sans smokes, should you be in the state of warshington... 1 Quote
KirkW Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 (edited) 22 hours ago, pcg said: I think what's reasonable is to establish policies that protect them and their habitat and then let them self-restore on their own, or not. Who knows better than grizzlies what habitat is suitable for them. Seems more natural than shocking an ecosystem with a man-made abrupt fix. I would love to see grizzlies in the NC, but ones that peaceably wandered in and settled down on their own, not ones that were yanked out of their home and dropped into a new and strange and unfamiliar land. We just need to respect and protect the land and then otherwise leave it alone so it can return to its natural state. It's a bit presumptuous for us to assume we know what that is. While I completely agree with the sentiment that it would be great to just let these populations rebound or spread "naturally" the reality is that this will never happen without human intervention. The historical travel corridors that connect currently suitable habitat are gone and will not be returning unless we removed humans from the landscape. It's all about the habitat and the ability of animals to move freely within it. I agree that we need to put more focus on respecting and protecting the land but unless we're going to rip out all the dams, tear up our highways, cease land development and stop putting out forest fires and controlling other "natural" but devastating events, there isn't a snowballs chance in hell that Grizz will repopulate on their own. If people want them back in the N Cascades we're going to have to put them there. We can't manage some parts of the system and then expect the others to function "naturally". I don't think this is at all presumptuous. Rather, It's the reality that having nearly 8 billion people on the planet brings us to. Edit to add : Although not directly related to the issue at hand... Radiolab did an excellent series of podcasts focused on the Galapagos islands and the efforts to "save" the tortoises on Pinta island. Anyone interested in wildlife reintroduction issues might find them interesting and thought provoking. "Resurrection" delves into the issue the most. http://www.radiolab.org/story/galapagos/ Edited March 25, 2018 by KirkW Quote
JasonG Posted March 25, 2018 Posted March 25, 2018 How much is reintroduction going to cost? I would rather the money be spent on trail and road maintenance to keep people spread out in the hills, not concentrated where the access is the best. And while you're at it, take the NPS money spent on killing fish in alpine lakes and put that towards road and trail maintenance too. I'm in the minority based on the poll, but that is true on pretty much everything in life. 1 Quote
G-spotter Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Since there's already grizzlies on the BC side of the Cascades how are you gonna stop them from reintroducing themselves? New wall? Armed drones? Rangers demanding park passes? Geez. Quote
Off_White Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 I was trying to find a picture of a grizzly bear with a passport when I came across this, thought, huh, too odd not to share... Quote
JasonG Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 53 minutes ago, G-spotter said: Since there's already grizzlies on the BC side of the Cascades how are you gonna stop them from reintroducing themselves? I've often wondered if the habitat is suitable why the haven't shown up on their own. I know the pat answer is that the migration corridors are fragmented and prevent movement. But I don't buy it. I was driving the trans Canada last spring and "King" was walking the RR tracks right next to the road near Kicking Horse Pass. He's so frequently seen munching on train-kill that he has a name. Grizz also aren't afraid of people, unfortunately. I know this first hand from working around them in AK for years. Quote
G-spotter Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Grizzlies were only reintroduced into the Skagit Range and Hozomeen Range in BC about 10 years ago, so I'd suggest the main reason is time. They are slowly working their way south. Quote
JasonG Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Ah....I thought they had never been totally extirpated in that area up there, or maybe a bit east of there. Makes sense that it would take more time. Quote
Eric T Posted March 26, 2018 Posted March 26, 2018 Have you guys actually read the EIS? There's going to be around 800 helo sorties to get them in and more flights to monitor. So much for a wilderness experience .. Look at what gets shut down in Yellowstone every summer to prevent human grizzly interactions. So much for access... 28 million bucks to not even expand the range of grizzlybears in North America by half of one percent. This is environmentalism run amuck. Quote
JasonG Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 I haven't read it, but I will try and track it down now. $28 million could clear a lot of trail miles for a very long time. I have a retired NOCA NPS botanist in my neighborhood and it's crazy the places they flew in and the frequency of flights over the years. To them it was fun work..... to me, a giant waste of money. And don't even get me started on flying barrels of Rotenone up to lakes to kill off the trout. Sorry for the drift....back to grizz! Quote
Off_White Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 I guess it's related thread drift, but I'd be interested in reading more about this trout killing deal, is it because they're planted non-natives? Is there some ecosystem disruption? Not enough mosquitoes? Quote
KirkW Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 4 hours ago, Eric T said: Have you guys actually read the EIS? There's going to be around 800 helo sorties to get them in and more flights to monitor. So much for a wilderness experience .. Look at what gets shut down in Yellowstone every summer to prevent human grizzly interactions. So much for access... 28 million bucks to not even expand the range of grizzlybears in North America by half of one percent. This is environmentalism run amuck. Do you have a link to the EIS? All Google is finding for me is dead links. Quote
Eric T Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 I have a copy of the EIS at home but won't be back for a week. They may be tweeking it, idk. Quote
Rad Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 16 minutes ago, Off_White said: I guess it's related thread drift, but I'd be interested in reading more about this trout killing deal, is it because they're planted non-natives? Is there some ecosystem disruption? Not enough mosquitoes? Trout are voracious predators that disrupted the ecosystem of mountain lakes. It'd be like adding polar bears to pre-schools, but more gory. Hey, do you suppose we could arm those polar bears with AR-15s? Seriously, though, here's an article on trout in mountain lakes. NYTimes on trout in lakes 1 Quote
ivan Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 i hate mozzies more than grizzlies, if this helps the conversation Quote
JasonG Posted March 27, 2018 Posted March 27, 2018 I'm well aware of the amphibian cost of planting trout in alpine lakes. But, I'm a stinking fish biologist, that loves to fish! Bring on the gore! Oh, and the EIS: https://parkplanning.nps.gov/documentsList.cfm?projectID=44144 Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.