Zinke Fully Supports North Cascades Grizzly Recovery

[Oh Mah]

Thank you sir,i'll bring the wife to (oops) breakfast then.

[wolfbait]

There's been a fair amount of support for Zinke on the forum in the past. Curious to see where those who were supporting him are at on this one.

I'll take the good with the bad and be thankful it isn't worse or just all bad.

 

I haven't seen where Zinke is for locking up huge tracts of land, which is what the USFWS etc. have planned with grizzly bear recovery.

Was it in the early 1990's that the USFWS and WDFW started releasing G. bears in WA? And how many of those bears stayed in WA?

What are the bears that do stay going to eat?

I wonder if they can have a bear plan that excludes locking land for recovery?

[jackelope]

There's been a fair amount of support for Zinke on the forum in the past. Curious to see where those who were supporting him are at on this one.

I'll take the good with the bad and be thankful it isn't worse or just all bad.

 

I haven't seen where Zinke is for locking up huge tracts of land, which is what the USFWS etc. have planned with grizzly bear recovery.

Was it in the early 1990's that the USFWS and WDFW started releasing G. bears in WA? And how many of those bears stayed in WA?

What are the bears that do stay going to eat?

I wonder if they can have a bear plan that excludes locking land for recovery?

Zinke/The DOI is overseeing the sale of large tracts of public lands all over the west.

[Bob33]

There's been a fair amount of support for Zinke on the forum in the past. Curious to see where those who were supporting him are at on this one.

I'll take the good with the bad and be thankful it isn't worse or just all bad.

 

I haven't seen where Zinke is for locking up huge tracts of land, which is what the USFWS etc. have planned with grizzly bear recovery.

Was it in the early 1990's that the USFWS and WDFW started releasing G. bears in WA? And how many of those bears stayed in WA?

What are the bears that do stay going to eat?

I wonder if they can have a bear plan that excludes locking land for recovery?

Zinke/The DOI is overseeing the sale of large tracts of public lands all over the west.

https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-zinke-recommends-keeping-federal-lands-federal-ownership-adding-three-new

[ShedHead20]

Does anyone know if the re-introduction will be within the boundaries of the North Cascades National Park? Or are they planning on release sites being spread throughout the entire northern range of the Cascades (i.e. Mt. Baker Wilderness or Pasayten Wilderness)?

[npaull]

It has NEVER made sense to me why there are active reintroduction efforts to places where natural spread is still possible. Just mystifying. Grizzlies can naturally spread from BC down into the north cascades, and in so far as they can make it into habitat that sustains them, fine. But to spend taxpayer money on a perfectly common species that doesn't need our help to exist... just nuts. We should focus our $ and time on improving, reclaiming and protecting habitat, and just let nature take its damn course.

[Skyvalhunter]

Does anyone know if the re-introduction will be within the boundaries of the North Cascades National Park? Or are they planning on release sites being spread throughout the entire northern range of the Cascades (i.e. Mt. Baker Wilderness or Pasayten Wilderness)?

Just North Cascades National park but they wont remain there

[jackelope]

There's been a fair amount of support for Zinke on the forum in the past. Curious to see where those who were supporting him are at on this one.

I'll take the good with the bad and be thankful it isn't worse or just all bad.

 

I haven't seen where Zinke is for locking up huge tracts of land, which is what the USFWS etc. have planned with grizzly bear recovery.

Was it in the early 1990's that the USFWS and WDFW started releasing G. bears in WA? And how many of those bears stayed in WA?

What are the bears that do stay going to eat?

I wonder if they can have a bear plan that excludes locking land for recovery?

Zinke/The DOI is overseeing the sale of large tracts of public lands all over the west.

https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-zinke-recommends-keeping-federal-lands-federal-ownership-adding-three-new

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/zinke-suddenly-pulls-land-in-home-state-of-montana-from-oil-and-gas-lease-sale/2018/03/05/c5e80664-20c3-11e8-badd-7c9f29a55815_story.html?utm_term=.04f850853dd0

[Special T]

When they had the local Skagit valley meeting lots of localsasked an important question.

Are the Griz going to stay up in the mountains just like they promised the elk would?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[Skyvalhunter]

https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-zinke-supports-grizzly-bear-restoration-north-cascades-ecosystem

[Stein]

Wolves and bears are reintroduced because there is an overwhelming desire by the owners of public land to have them on the landscape.  We look at this from the view of a hunter, but we are a small minority of public landowners.  Hunters represent 6% of the population, thus 94% of the public does not hunt.

80% of Washington citizens support reintroduction of grizzlies into the north cascades. 

Bears and wolves have become and will continue to be an issue for hunters.  In my mind, we share ownership of the land with the other 94% of the population and it is something we learn to live with.

[lokidog]

It has NEVER made sense to me why there are active reintroduction efforts to places where natural spread is still possible. Just mystifying. Grizzlies can naturally spread from BC down into the north cascades, and in so far as they can make it into habitat that sustains them, fine. But to spend taxpayer money on a perfectly common species that doesn't need our help to exist... just nuts. We should focus our $ and time on improving, reclaiming and protecting habitat, and just let nature take its damn course.

Well said!

[Special T]

Wolves and bears are reintroduced because there is an overwhelming desire by the owners of public land to have them on the landscape.  We look at this from the view of a hunter, but we are a small minority of public landowners.  Hunters represent 6% of the population, thus 94% of the public does not hunt.

80% of Washington citizens support reintroduction of grizzlies into the north cascades. 

Bears and wolves have become and will continue to be an issue for hunters.  In my mind, we share ownership of the land with the other 94% of the population and it is something we learn to live with.

And yet sportsmen supply 80% of the conservation $... Anyone wonder why sportsmen feel resented?

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G930A using Tapatalk

[bearpaw]

There's been a fair amount of support for Zinke on the forum in the past. Curious to see where those who were supporting him are at on this one.

I'll take the good with the bad and be thankful it isn't worse or just all bad.

 

I haven't seen where Zinke is for locking up huge tracts of land, which is what the USFWS etc. have planned with grizzly bear recovery.

Was it in the early 1990's that the USFWS and WDFW started releasing G. bears in WA? And how many of those bears stayed in WA?

What are the bears that do stay going to eat?

I wonder if they can have a bear plan that excludes locking land for recovery?

Zinke/The DOI is overseeing the sale of large tracts of public lands all over the west.

https://www.doi.gov/pressreleases/secretary-zinke-recommends-keeping-federal-lands-federal-ownership-adding-three-new

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/zinke-suddenly-pulls-land-in-home-state-of-montana-from-oil-and-gas-lease-sale/2018/03/05/c5e80664-20c3-11e8-badd-7c9f29a55815_story.html?utm_term=.04f850853dd0

Sounds to me like Zinke is trying to avoid environmentalist challenges and tribal concerns? The environmentalists hate Zinke, they will complain no matter what he does. The article is a hit job on Zinke, it complains that he is avoiding environmental concerns then portrays him in a bad light for further reviewing areas of concern. Typical media bias!

From your link:

Last week, Zinke postponed the sale of leases covering 4,434 acres near Chaco Culture National Historical Park, a sacred tribal site in northwestern New Mexico.

“Secretary Zinke is once again treating America’s public lands like contestants on a reality show, handing out roses to the places he chooses to save while casting the rest aside,” said Jesse Prentice-Dunn, advocacy director for the Center for Western Priorities.

A formal protest filed in January by three environmental groups — the Wilderness Society, Montana Wilderness Association and Park County Environmental Council — charged that BLM officials had not done an adequate review of the environmental impact that drilling in Montana would have on the city of Livingston, the Yellowstone River and the Upper Missouri River Breaks National Monument, as well as on sage grouse habitat.

But Interior Secretary Ryan Zinke, who before joining the Trump administration represented Montana in Congress, decided to withdraw 26 parcels from consideration, along with portions of two others. A cadre of local and national environmental groups had filed formal protests against the sale, contending that drilling would adversely impact the Yellowstone River and other areas.

Interior will proceed starting next Monday with the auction of the remaining 83 parcels, which encompass nearly 46,200 acres.

From the link bob33 posted:

Recommendations Secretary Zinke made in the final report included the following:

Keep federal lands federal -  the report does not recommend that a single acre of federal land be removed from the federal estate. If land no longer falls within a monument boundary it will continue to be federal land and will be managed by whichever agency ​managed the land before designation

Add three new national monuments - Secretary Zinke recommended beginning a process to consider three new ​national monuments: The Badger II Medicine Area (Montana), Camp Nelson (Kentucky), and the Medgar Evers Home (Mississippi).

Modify the boundaries and management of four monuments - Bears Ears, Grand Staircase, Cascade-Siskiyou, and Gold Butte National Monuments
Expand access for hunting and fishing - Maintain an ongoing review to ensure ​public ​access​ to encourage more hunting and fishing in monuments

So far the net difference in Zinke's actions are millions of acres in Utah removed from monuments which made Utahans happy. His proposals are for about 17,000 acres of new monuments, (a small fraction of what he has opened back up) one monument which is only a home site.

The only issue I currently have with Zinke is him wanting to waste taxpayer money on grizzlies, we don't need to transplant them. I agree with Npaul, grizzlies will and are migrating to Washington on their own. Zinke should listen to local concerns closer on this issue.

The main reason I have opposed grizzlies is due to the enviros using grizzlies as a reason to lock up land and then when grizzlies multiply they don't want to allow hunting to control numbers (Montana, WY, ID are perfect examples). I really don't care if we have a few grizzlies or wolves as long as we can control their numbers when it's time to manage them and as long as these species aren't used as a reason to take away opportunities to recreate or take away access. 

[bearpaw]

Wolves and bears are reintroduced because there is an overwhelming desire by the owners of public land to have them on the landscape.  We look at this from the view of a hunter, but we are a small minority of public landowners.  Hunters represent 6% of the population, thus 94% of the public does not hunt.

80% of Washington citizens support reintroduction of grizzlies into the north cascades. 

Bears and wolves have become and will continue to be an issue for hunters.  In my mind, we share ownership of the land with the other 94% of the population and it is something we learn to live with.

80% of Washington citizens support reintroduction of grizzlies into the north cascades.

I haven't followed this issue, if true, if 80% of people in western WA actually want grizzlies then maybe Zinke is doing what is desired by local people? We already have grizzlies here in NE WA, we have had them for quite a few years, I can't see that they are a big deal, as long as the feds don't close more land by using them as an excuse to do that, and as long as they don't overpopulate, there's no doubt in my mind that the enviros will prevent us from ever managing grizzlies in WA.