I almost took a job in big timber Mt trapping grizzlies. I know they kill alot of cattle and have lots of human health and safety issues. We definitely don't want them in the cascades.....Oregon and Washington can't even manage the predators we have nowI've seen a lot of talk about how this would benefit the ecosystem but none say HOW. This is a red flag to me. Would be interested to know how well grizzlies are controlled and dealt with in parts of the country where they do still thrive (Montana, Wyoming, Idaho, etc.) and see whether their role in those areas improves the ecosystem. Otherwise, introducing an apex predator for sentimental reasons seems a little…silly.
There are already plenty of wolves in N Washington. Apparently there was a small herd of forest caribou that had started to establish in N. Washington, but got wiped out by predators including wolves.I didn't read all of the reply's to this post, but if someone hasn't mentioned it then I will:
Aren't we introducing wolves again to these areas too? I'm sure the plan is not to bring in high numbers of grizz and wolf to high population centers, but what keeps this from happening over time?
If proper safety measures via firearms have to be taken when hiking Alaska where these predators are higher in number, will the same safety measures be taken when walking trails in Washington? Will protected status keep people from controlling numbers of these predators once they overpopulate?
Seems like a bad idea to me. But I'm no expert
You are exactly right, my thoughts exactly spot on.The plan is to eliminate hunting via predators. Griz, wolves, cougars. Then push gun control because you don't need any guns if you can't hunt. The only solution is kill every wolf an bear they drop off. Prove a point enough is enough. No other possible outcome available as voting is corrupted and the game dept owned by liberal nut jobs.