Posted on 12/07/2007 10:06:37 AM PST by george76
Bears that barge in on people in the forest have become enough of a nuisance that more of them should be hunted, state wildlife managers have decided.
The Utah Division of Wildlife Resources, responding to a spike in human-bear contacts and an 11-year-old boy's death in June, want to issue 296 black bear hunting permits for Utah's 2008 spring and fall hunts, a 20 percent increase from the 248 permits offered this year.
DWR officials say the state's black bear population is high enough to warrant the permit increase. Wildlife managers also say bears and humans clashed too many times in 2007 not to take some kind of action in areas where the worst damage occurred.
The Division of Wildlife Resources this year recorded 202 bear incidents - that is, bear encounters that pose a potential threat to public safety. That's nearly double the total from the previous three years combined.
But wildlife advocates and bear biology experts ...
(Excerpt) Read more at sltrib.com ...
Liberals are never happy. “Miserable” is their defining trait.
colbert wont be happy
“Las Vegas? Are you kidding?”
Hey, what happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.
LOL
City liberals always blame humans for any problem...Global Warming must be caused by humans ( not the sun ).
The explosion of the predator populations is never related to the wolves, bears...reproducing or being introduced by federal beaurocrazies.
Remember the rural myth or fact about the Eskimos putting their elderly on ice floes for the polar bears to eat? Maybe we can put Jimmy Carter, Billy Bob Clinton, Mad Albright and some others out to sea. Would make the polar bears sick, but at least they’d do a quick job of it.
From the article: “But this year, the proposal is getting extra scrutiny from wildlife defenders . . .”
“But wildlife advocates . . .”
I love the way an AR sympathetic reporter uses these key words . . . wildlife defenders, wildlife advocates.
Wouldn’t want to refer to their real agenda, animal rights above human interests.
From the article: “But this year, the proposal is getting extra scrutiny from wildlife defenders . . .”
“But wildlife advocates . . .”
I love the way an AR sympathetic reporter uses these key words . . . wildlife defenders, wildlife advocates.
Wouldn’t want to refer to their real agenda, animal rights above human interests.
Sorry about the double post.
And what happens in the deep, dark woods stays in the deep dark woods..........
I believe that would be considered animal cruelty. Might as well feed them antifreeze or rat poison.
“Like people who swim in waters patroled by sharks then whine when they get bit.”
More people die from falling coconuts than shark bites.
“I never understood camping and hiking deep in the woods.”
Have you tried it?
“Let’s see Las Vegas or a forest , hmmmm...”
A forest easy.
“Let’s see, beautiful beaches of barbados or a forest, hmm...”
Or both but beware the coconuts on the beach.
>>>>Eskimos putting their elderly on ice floes for the polar bears to eat?<<<<
http://www.straightdope.com/mailbag/meskimoicefloe.html
The AR sympathetic reporter is way too obvious.
And the editor must be using the Dixie Chick Business plan ?
I’ll take the forest any day, FRiend.
I can say the same thing about your listed choices for recreation.
Let’s see, a concrete jungle jammed with thousands of people, automobiles and neon lights; with mobsters, whores and hustlers trying to pull everything they can out of your wallet with no regard to how hard you worked to fill that wallet, or (scenario 2)
a sandy beach at 95 degrees, blazing sun, dozens of folks splashing and shouting at each other, broken glass in the sand and hepatitus in the drinks and some cabana boy trying to seduce your 15 year old daughter:
OR: a lakeshore with a tent pitched in a shady cool glade, or with a river burbling calmly 30 feet away, with nobody around but my friends and family.
Surrounded by strangers, or with a select group of known folks. Looks like a simple choice to me. Then again, I’ve always preferred being outdoors to being cooped up in some concrete cave.
Regarding bears, at least I can legally kill a bear if it’s threatening humans, I’d get in trouble dealing with human predators the same way.
You add Helen Thomas to the list and I'll help you row 'em out to the flow...
You are joking I assume.
Las Vegas would be almost the last place in the US that I would want to have to spend time in.
It would be tied with a 2 day flight delay sleeping on the floor of O’Hare airport.
Yes I could spend a lot of time in a forest, assuming I had a good food supply.
There is nothing better than being outside and away from most people.
Except that men should not hunt “them” in any way shape or form...
There is no such place! Black bears are scavengers and will travel anywhere. Oh and by the way, don’t play dead for a black bear, as a scavenger they will eat “trail” kill. Play dead and you get invited to dinner as the main course. A better idea would be to arm oneself and face the legal ramifications.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.