Skip to comments.U.S. wildlife managers urge lifting Yellowstone grizzly protections
Posted on 12/12/2013 4:51:01 PM PST by george76
Yellowstone's grizzlies, now classified as a threatened species, were briefly removed from protected status by the federal government in 2007, when the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service declared that the outsized, hump-shouldered bears had made a healthy comeback.
At the time, the number of grizzlies in the region had exceeded the government's recovery goal of 500 bears, the government said.
But conservationists successfully challenged the de-listing in court, arguing that the government discounted climate changes
On Wednesday, members of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee sought to reverse that decision, recommending a new de-listing after reviewing a report suggesting Yellowstone's bears can be sustained by berries and a multitude of other food sources.
The panel estimated the grizzly population in and around Yellowstone, which spans parts of Wyoming, Idaho and Montana, has now climbed to about 600 bears.
(Excerpt) Read more at news.yahoo.com ...
Griz and wolves! Amazing animals, grizzlies! Wolves, on the other hand, should be eradicated....again!
I have mixed thoughts on bringing back the wolves and grizzlies.
Ideally, it seems good to have them in the wild-lands. Realistically, it means for all intents and purposes you’re making an area of the wild non-accessible to humans.
Perhaps my thoughts are tunnel vision here, but I don’t like seeing areas of our nation crafted to keep humans out.
Our forefathers were a hell of a lot smarter than the enviro-nazis who are stuck on stupid.
Heh. In other words, maybe the political regulator folks are frightened about tourist revenues going down because of bears eating tourists. There are probably many more than 600 of those creatures in the area, too.
Why would they need a special protected status? Hunting in a Nat. Park is illegal.
The introduction of the much larger Canadian timber wolves and Grizzlies are decimating much of the native elk , deer, moose, sheep ... populations.
Plus the wolves were to be limited to a small number and to a limited range. Both promises were / are ignored.
and the hydatid disease due to Echinococcosis granulosus tape worms
The special protected .. often leave the park, then kill livestock [ and humans next ? ]
Hilarious... Country folk have a great way of simplifying the issues don’t they.
Doesn’t sound good on a number of levels here.
Thanks for making the points.
Reduce the numbers of grizzlies by delisting them and having limited numbers of hunting permits issued for them.
Pay a bounty on wolves as well as a year round open season.
More climate change lies. The whitebark pine is declining due to introduced disease and mountain pine beetle infestation.
Environazis always lie.
Thanks for the Ping, George!
I agree. I believe that every block of Washington D.C. should have at least one grizzly and two wolves.
Just curious. Are you saying that wild critters have no right to have any habitat all their own, i.e. being able to escape from people?
That doesn’t answer my question.
The White bark pine. How much food does the grizzly get from a White Bark Pine. I’d say about as much as the ocean level has risen over the last 100 years.
OK. What does that have to do with anything?
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.