Page 1 of 1

Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Mon Sep 24, 2018 7:49 pm
by pugman170

Re: Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Fri Sep 28, 2018 6:06 pm
by billandkaren
It seems our victory in stopping the the grizzly hunt may be short-lived. Apparently congress has acted quickly to allow more indiscretionary hunting of wolves (in an immature tit-for-tat response) and seeks to make changes to weaken the endangered species act itself. Like congress has nothing better to do than try and retaliate against this ruling. It takes them years to try and do things like help with the immigration problem or numerous other issues facing our nation. But try to protect our nation's natural iconic creatures and they act in a matter of days.

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.


Re: Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Mon Oct 08, 2018 4:43 pm
by yellvet
Bill, you may want to read this article at: ... ration.htm

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 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 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. ;)

Re: Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Sat Oct 13, 2018 9:40 pm
by billandkaren
Yellvet, thanks for your reply and I respect your opinion. However, not sure I agree with certain aspects. I realize it is a very complex issue and there are no simple answers. I don't think that the economic issues should drive policy, but the argument can be made that having a healthy population of bears and wolves has greatly contributed to the huge economic benefit in tourism dollars being spent in the three states you refer to. I do recognize that there is no hunting allowed in the parks, but that doesn't guarantee the survival of the species. There was no hunting in the parks when the grizzlies were moving dangerously close to extinction in the yellowstone ecosystem back in the 1970's. I also realize you can't have bears and wolves roaming the countryside and neighborhoods unchecked. But I don't think we are anywhere close to that now. I think the plan to compensate ranchers for their losses is a wise one and should be given more time. Yes, I'm sure it is a bit of a pain for them. But there are places in Europe where wolves have lived with sheep herds and losses have been minmal. I believe this is due to well-trained sheepdogs watching over the flocks. We need a healthy and diverse population of these apex predators to ensure their long term survival. (The Florida Panthers are a prime example of what can happen when a population becomes isolated).

Re: Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Wed Feb 27, 2019 11:30 pm
by BobTN
I'll just be straight up with my strong viewpoint , without political influence or bias either side.

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........

Re: Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Wed Mar 20, 2019 10:26 am
by yellvet
Here's the latest on some of the recent wildlife protection bills that have been introduced in the MT state legislature: ... islature-0

Re: Breaking News.... NO GRIZZLY HUNT! Grizzly Bears Protected again....

Posted: Fri Mar 29, 2019 11:39 pm
by billandkaren
Thanks, Yellvet, for the update on the proposed legislation. That would be great if this passes. There should be a buffer zone for the apex predators around the parks. I give Montana credit for taking a look at this as. Hopefully, Wyoming and Idaho will do the same.