Open comment period for grizzly bear introduction

[Wacenturion]

There is a series of public meetings coming up for this. I would want to hear the case for why NPS and FWS think this is a good idea. The burden on them should be to make the case FOR it rather than just force the rest of us to voice objection. Of course there will be many showing up, especially on the west side, who would think this is a grand idea.

The public open houses will be held from 6-8 p.m. at the following locations:

Cle Elum – February 13 at the Putnam Centennial Center
Cashmere – February 14 at the Riverside Center
Winthrop – February 15 at the Red Barn
Omak – February 16 at the Annex Facility at Okanogan County Fairgrounds
Bellingham – February 21 at the Bellingham Technical College
Darrington – February 22 at the Darrington Community Center
Sultan – February 23 at the Sultan High School
Renton – February 24 at the Renton Community Center

This is so they can say they held public meetings, then they do what they want anyway.

Exactly....the way it pretty much has always been for the most part.  Stupid idea if you ask me.

[fireweed]

After checking out the EIS here's what I see:

--They ARE dead set on  transplanting grizzlies.

--The EIS looks mostly at the impacts of the act of moving grizzlies from point A to Point B (helicopter noise, danger to employees, chance that bear won't survive move, short term closure of trail used for transporting) NOT long term impacts of an established population.

--They claim recreation impacts will be temporary and short term (because they are only looking at the actual act of translocation more bears)

--Closure of areas AFTER bears are established is left for another day, another agency, and another plan, so they can claim there will be no long-term closures under this "bear establishment" plan.

--the chance of a bear attack is very low, because the numbers they are bringing is low and they compare it to other areas with super low populations of bears NOT the areas with many bears that may eventually show up.  Data on attacks in greater Yellowstone, for example, is not used for comparison--only attacks in the Selkirks.

In conclusion ::The EIS only looks at the impacts of a handful of bears they are bringing in (5-1o per year or so) not the impact of a strong, established population pushing 300 bears that may result.

[trophyhunt]

I honestly don't believe it will make a difference, but I commented on their site. Unfortunately like has already been stated on here, they've probably already made up their minds, too many anti hunters work in the wildlife field!  This idea is almost as bad as introducing a wolf breed that wasn't here to begin with.  Post your comments either way, bitching on this thread alone will do absolutely nothing.

Only giving up will do nothing. If the other side is more passionate and vocal about their choice, then they probably deserve to get their way. The point of bringing this up was to get more people informed about it, talking about it and voicing their opinion in a more useful way than just b*tching about it. We all have to take it to the next level to make our voices heard.

Remember, we will have different people in charge at the Federal level during, at least, the next four years. What may have been considered futile during the last eight years may fall on more sympathetic ears for the next few years.

I agree! 

[huntnphool]

Here is a link to the plan. I have been reading it for a couple hours.

https://parkplanning.nps.gov/document.cfm?parkID=327&projectID=44144&documentID=77025

[WAcoyotehunter]

They will do it anyway. It's all about the fed $$$ and land. This will close more roads and land to access. After a while no one will care about the land cause no one will be able to use it anyway and it will get sold.  We already know they care about our opinions on this. The meetings are just for show, just like wolves we have no choices

For anybody that does not no this already,they have had grizzly recovery zones for a long time here in northeast wa,which is all the same areas as lynx recovery zones,that's good , but the bad is that they use theses zones for a reason to do no management to the land,then when fires come through its a timber box waiting to burn.

That's not accurate.  They are still logging and using the grizzly recovery area, and putting out fires.  I elk hunt in the recovery area and they have been logging if for the last several years on the Hanlon MTN Project. 

[hunter399]

They will always try to put out fires and log any areas that have burned ,that's kinda of a no brainer.They will selective log some units in grizzly recovery zones at certain times of year when they think it's going to be less impact on the animals.(winter)non breeding seasons,ect.But if you were to look at a map of the zone and what they have logged,you will find tracks of untouched land that not being managed for anything,where not talking 100 acres but in the thousands of acres .Out of these thousands of acres how much do u think they log in one winter on one contract,every winter,maybe 2 percent of the recovery zone.one hot summer is all it takes for the other percent to burn.

[hunter399]

They will do it anyway. It's all about the fed $$$ and land. This will close more roads and land to access. After a while no one will care about the land cause no one will be able to use it anyway and it will get sold.  We already know they care about our opinions on this. The meetings are just for show, just like wolves we have no choices

For anybody that does not no this already,they have had grizzly recovery zones for a long time here in northeast wa,which is all the same areas as lynx recovery zones,that's good , but the bad is that they use theses zones for a reason to do no management to the land,then when fires come through its a timber box waiting to burn.

That's not accurate.  They are still logging and using the grizzly recovery area, and putting out fires.  I elk hunt in the recovery area and they have been logging if for the last several years on the Hanlon MTN Project. 

Thanks for telling us your elk spot ,i might have to check this place out thanks

[Humptulips]

http://apps.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=77.12.035



RCW 77.12.035



Protection of grizzly bears—Limitation on transplantation or introduction—Negotiations with federal and state agencies.


The commission shall protect grizzly bears and develop management programs on publicly owned lands that will encourage the natural regeneration of grizzly bears in areas with suitable habitat. Grizzly bears shall not be transplanted or introduced into the state. Only grizzly bears that are native to Washington state may be utilized by the department for management programs. The department is directed to fully participate in all discussions and negotiations with federal and state agencies relating to grizzly bear management and shall fully communicate, support, and implement the policies of this section.

[JimmyHoffa]

It's the feds doing the relocating.

[hunter399]

It's the feds doing the relocating.

Which means they will do what they want.

[Humptulips]

It's the feds doing the relocating.

Forgive me I thought it was in the State of Washington.  It is however a pretty good argument as to the wishes of WA.

[RB]

It's the feds doing the relocating.

Which means they will do what they want.

 

So we have this problem Bear in (pick a region) that we have moved several times and keeps coming back, so we will just release it in the Washington wilderness yeah that's the ticket. 

[JimmyHoffa]

It's the feds doing the relocating.

Forgive me I thought it was in the State of Washington.  It is however a pretty good argument as to the wishes of WA.

Yeah, on federal land.  Mostly North Cascades National Park, so I don't know of RCWs having any sway over what feds do in there.

[Bean Counter]

I'd like to hear from all the anti-states rights folks who are glad that the feds manage and own much of the Western states forests  so they (currently) have a free place to hunt. Is it really worth annual $80-300 in access fee savings to have to put up with this kind of bull *censored*? 

[Ironhead]

I realize this is a little late, but is there another region in the US or world for that matter that has Grizzlies, but doesn't have either Elk or Caribou? Brown  Bears don't count. I don't see Grizzlies living off grass and berries. We don't have many deer left, what are they supposed to eat in the North Cascades?