Latest Hot Topics from our Yellowstone Net “News and Politics” Discussion Forum
Join the Yellowstone Community Discussions
How 700 to 750 of "anything" much less once near eradicated grizzly, could be declared as "Recovered." Then introduce state self described "Trophy Grizzly Hunting" .....twice yearly for a rug......makes zero sense however spun.
State management of grizzlies already proved disastrous results by 1970's with estimate survival of 150 max in entire eco system! Now the States want management control all over again? If real state control/management intentions were sincere, then relucatantly state experiment again.....but without any trophy hunting as a proposed state management component.
*Consider....WY F&G 2018 reported over 7,000 Trophy Grizzly Hunting Applications, from far and away, for state grizzly "quata trophy harvest" Take the benefit spin out of pro grizzly trophy propenents, then evaluate the likely direct and collateral bear elimination biannual hunting would present under state control. A "win-win?"
My opinion is post Court ruling reinstating ESA protection. It's a given challenges will arise and likely expand for quatas and geographic trophy hunting. The 7,000 initial trophy hunt applications may look like a very small number........
Statistics: Posted by BobTN — Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:30 pm
https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/u ... -FINAL.pdf
Statistics: Posted by Mike — Sat Dec 15, 2018 9:01 am
Statistics: Posted by Dorothy — Wed Dec 05, 2018 8:31 pm
Statistics: Posted by rzrpirate — Fri Nov 30, 2018 4:58 pm
Statistics: Posted by RikWriter — Thu Nov 29, 2018 4:54 am
Statistics: Posted by billandkaren — Sat Oct 13, 2018 9:40 pm
Hunting has never been allowed inside the Yellowstone NP boundaries. And, as far as I know, that's not going to change. Since you have a home close to Yellowstone, remember, that you'll always be able to bring your grand kids to Yellowstone to see the grizzly bears and wolves. The hunts are only going to be conducted outside the Park boundaries.
I lived in the extended protective zone of Yellowstone when the wolves were first re-introduced to Yellowstone in 1995. But the wolves wouldn't stay in the Park. They were wandering all over the Beartooth Mountains and were often seen in our local area. We even saw them in our back yard. In the late 90's the wolves began killing our neighbor's livestock as were grizzly bears. The ranchers were used to dealing with grizzly bears but the wolves had them really angry and frustrated since the federal govt was protecting them. Many of our long-time ranching neighbors suffered numerous livestock losses which equated to a significant loss of their annual income. So I've always been torn on who to support and where to put my allegiances...my ranching neighbors who kept our house from burning to the ground in the 2006 Derby wildfire or to the wildlife activists. The ranchers tried so hard to live with the wolves in our area and had gone to great personal expense to keep their livestock protected. They hired and paid sheepherders to stay with their sheep 24/7 and also tried to fence their cattle in at night, putting them in pens that that were built next to their homes. No matter what they did, nothing worked. The wolves always seemed to find a way to find and kill their lambs and calves. The state and federal agency officials finally stepped in and began reimbursing ranchers for their livestock losses. But the rancher also had to show proof that the killer of their livestock was a wolf. And that wasn't always EZ. Although the reimbursement helped ranchers financially, in the short term, the amount barely covered the rancher's total expenses and their annual losses which were significant. So many ranchers either left our area or sold out to land developers. So, as you can see, wolves and ranchers near the Park have never gotten along very well...and for good reason. But I've been very encouraged to see how well the states adjacent to the Park (MT, WY and ID) have managed wildlife in recent years in an effort to see that the population of various animal species are monitored closely so the number of the animal species remain robust, strong and healthy. And, IMO, that can only be achieved if sick/injured animals are culled from the herd and/or the state conducts a hunt each year that has specific hunting dates, harvesting limits and hunting restrictions. The WY hunt, for example, limits the grizzly hunt to one male grizzly...no females are to be harvested. If I'm not mistaken, hunters will also be required to take an educational hunting course. Sounds good but I'm concerned about the "know-it-all" gun-crazed hunters who won't be able to tell the difference between a male grizzly and a female grizzly when they see a bear. That may be why MT is not having a grizzly hunt this year. They may want to see how well the WY hunt goes before having a grizzly bear hunt in MT. A state-sponsored hunt can be a win win for everyone, not only for avid hunters, outfitters and wildlife enthusiasts, but also for the state which will get lots of revenue from the trophy hunt fees, that can be used for hiring more personnel and enhanced wildlife management.
No one wants to show their grand kids the iconic Yellowstone bears and wolves, more than I do. But it probably won't happen if wildlife numbers and wildlife health are continually being compromised by sickness,illness, high mortality rates and bad wildlife management. To manage a wildlife species successfully takes a lot of time and money and a lot of dedicated personnel like field technicians, qualified bear specialists, botanists and wildlife biologists. MT, WY and ID are pretty stretched, financially. And to better manage wildlife on a year round basis, the states will need more money and more qualified people. So I'm going to take MT's lead and see how well the WY hunts goes before I find fault with any state-sponsored hunt. Hopefully, the hunts will be successful and the big winners in the long term will be the grizzly bears, wolves, the local residents...and all the wildlife advocates and little critters, like me.
Statistics: Posted by yellvet — Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:43 pm
A couple years ago we were stuck in a bear jam around Tower where Rosie (I believe) and her cubs were on the hillside making their way down to the road. Some guy drives up the opposite direction, gets only half way off the road and parks his pickup. As he is starting to get out, I rolled down my window and told him that he needed to stay in his truck and get it off the road. He hesitated but decided to go ahead and get out anyway. By then Rosie is right around the back end of his pickup. I could see her but he couldn't. I said in a more stern voice, "Sir, you had better get back in your truck. There is a mother bear with cubs right behind your truck." He totally ignored me and proceded to walk to the back of his truck. Rosie comes around the truck and they face each other not more than five feet away. He then gets scared and runs to the door of the truck, but he apparently locked the door and couldn't get in. He then runs dodging between cars to get away. It would have been funny if it hadn't been so dangerous. Fortunately, Rosie did not react and just continued to cross the road with her cubs behind.
We were out by Sedge Bay on Saturday afternoon the 22nd and drove up the overlook. We did not see any wildlife and nothing out of the ordinary with the tourists. I wonder what time this incident took place? Anyway, we missed the action.
Statistics: Posted by billandkaren — Fri Sep 28, 2018 7:40 pm
I hate to see this turn into a political issue. But that is what this administration is doing. As an independent with Republican leanings, I am now being forced to vote exclusively Democrat because I feel very strongly about the issue of protecting wolves and grizzlies for my grandchildren to be able to see and enjoy like my kids and I have done. This will drive my voting in the upcoming elections.
Statistics: Posted by billandkaren — Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:06 pm
A couple of years ago, I was fishing at Trout Lake. There were half a dozen or so people enjoying the warm fall day, when this older man and his small white terrier show up. No leash, not supposed to be there at all. Adding insult to injury was the guy's attitude. He was quite belligerent, swearing at people who were telling him to remove the animal. The dog was pretty annoying, coming up to everyone and sniffing and barking. I might have accidentally stepped on him when he came up to me, oops. There were a couple of photographers on the lake who were trying to get shots of wildlife, and they began following the man and dog and snapping a LOT of photos, to the man's increasing irritation. They also had a radio and managed to hail a park ranger, who apparently met the jerk at the trail head.
Not the same level of dangerousness and stupidity as the recent scofflaw, but in the same vein.
Statistics: Posted by JennyA — Fri Sep 28, 2018 2:07 pm
If you were near Sedge Bay on Saturday the 22nd and saw anything that can help the Park Service please report it
https://billingsgazette.com/lifestyles/ ... 4b905.html
Statistics: Posted by Mike — Wed Sep 26, 2018 8:31 pm
https://www.jhnewsandguide.com/this_jus ... faad0.html
https://missoulian.com/lifestyles/recre ... 4aec0.html
https://missoulian.com/lifestyles/recre ... 64f55.html
Statistics: Posted by pugman170 — Mon Sep 24, 2018 7:49 pm
Read that this morning. This guy obviously wants to get arrested.Mike wrote: ↑Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:30 pmWell just like the wildlife harasser who could not not make it back to his home state without breaking more laws,the geyser walker has led law enforcement on a wild chase that had him driving on park grounds and then a golf course before catching his car on fire and only bailing out after being driven out by less than lethal gunfire in Cheyenne Wyoming
https://www.kgwn.tv/content/news/Crash- ... 68991.html
Statistics: Posted by bsinc1962 — Fri Sep 21, 2018 10:44 am
Statistics: Posted by lah — Thu Sep 20, 2018 5:58 pm
https://www.kgwn.tv/content/news/Crash- ... 68991.html
Statistics: Posted by Mike — Thu Sep 20, 2018 1:30 pm