U.S. drafts plan to bring grizzly bears back to Washington’s North Cascades (WAPO)

Stonedfish

Known Grizzler-hater of triploids, humpies & ND
Forum Supporter
For well over 99.44 % of the population, unless the Grizzly reintroduction plans include your couch, phone, or Starbucks Drive Up, this is not a threat.

Don’t forget the picnic table off that list.
Just substitute black bear for a grizzly and you are set.
SF

 

Mossback

Fear My Powerful Emojis 😆
Forum Supporter
We had a black bear get into our garbage last week. Made a big mess, and ate 35 pounds of apples off the neighbors porch.
They thought leaving apples on the porch was a good idea...
Damn bear broke the bungy on our trash can, granted it was old and sort of rotted, but he drug the can into the driveway and proceeded to sort through the bags one by one.
He was partial to rotten peppers from the container garden too, saw him on the game cam.
Then he pooped in the driveway...
🤣🤣🤣
 

Jake Watrous

Legend
Forum Supporter
I say go for it. More dangerous? Maybe. But we’ve sanded too many corners and padded too many edges. They’ve got signs up that tell people not to fall off of cliffs or hold their children over edges.

Part of the appeal of nature—true nature—is that it’s an edge. Hard to truly respect something that's been lobotomized and pacified.

Deer aren't Bambi, wolves aren't lapdogs, and a grizzly isn't Yogi. It's past time the indoorsy crowd re-learned that.
 

Brian Miller

Be vewy vewy quiet, I'm hunting Cutthwoat Twout
Forum Supporter
I say go for it. More dangerous?
Yup. According to Montana FW&P throughout the 201Xs, for every reported human - bear encounter, there was an average of 23% of the humans injured or killed, and 23% of the bears killed. One year it was no humans injured, but 50% of the bears killed. (thankfully the actuals were small)

...we’ve sanded too many corners and padded too many edges. They’ve got signs up that tell people not to fall off of cliffs or hold their children over edges.

Paraphrasing... according to the NPS most of the Grizzly bears in WA had been killed by 1860. Were there too many signs back then? Or was it because apex predators and humans (and their livestock) don't coexist very well, even at WA 1860s human population levels?

...a grizzly isn't Yogi.
And bullets and buckshot aren't marshmallows
 
Last edited:

Jake Watrous

Legend
Forum Supporter
Yup. According to Montana FW&P throughout the 201Xs, for every reported human - bear encounter, there was an average of 23% of the humans injured or killed, and 23% of the bears killed. One year it was no humans injured, but 50% of the bears killed. (thankfully the actuals were small)



Paraphrasing... according to the NPS most of the Grizzly bears in WA had been killed by 1860. Were there too many signs back then? Or was it because apex predators and humans (and their livestock) don't coexist very well?


And bullets and buckshot aren't marshmallows. But no problem, right?
I celebrate your right to a dissenting(?) opinion. I'd like nature to be more wild, and though I haven't bought meat from a store or a butcher in years I'd have happily paid more for ranchers to insure their livestock and/or increase the price per head in exchange for a more restored ecosystem.

When recreating in bear country, I've always carried a .30-06 and kept my wits about me. I like the immersion and the clarity that being out there brings. People who aren't prepared shouldn't be out there until they are. You don't drain or fill in lakes because you aren’t good at swimming, you either learn to swim or you stay out of the water. There are lots of places I don’t go and things I don’t do because I lack the abilities and knowledge to do them—I’d like to but haven’t yet. In the meantime, I don’t expect those places to be sanitized, tamed, and made more accessible to me.
 
Last edited:
Top