I see both sides of the fence, I like having wildlife, but at some point there are a lot of added costs to allow them to be in places
bears and crops, tend to be a issue
and even in PA< there are many shot over crop damage
so, if grizzly's would be in a farm belt and a protected species, at that, I can see conflicts happening, all the more so as numbers increase and still no hunting on them
if the state wishes to have them(and I have NO problem with bears period of any kind I like them to be honest)
but the state should also have some plan to help off set costs to farmers, if NOT willing to trap and relocate them, which if trying to expand there range wouldn;t be an option!
I mean I gather a LOT of the modern farmers in this area, have been there BEFORE grizzlies were there and maybe even bought land knowing this!
which to me is a little more different, than someone moving into a place where bears are NOW< and then complaining about them
that I never understand, if you KNOW there there, how can you c ry about them
learning to co exist with bears is very possible, even with grizzlies and brown bears, but it does take effort and education on HOW TO<
which when new area's get bears, the STATE should be involved in helping make the adjustments and COSTS to do so!
most game depts DON"T like to hear about NEW costs, LOL
I get it, but, its about long term planning, as if money is to made down the road, , its an investment on the game dept IMO
not a burden!
teaching residents HOW to get bear smart, also saves them from having lots of calls and complaints and having to go and solve problems in other ways!
again, working together is better than fighting WHAT view is right IMO!