More Federal Judge interference
 

WYOMING

Judge puts hold on

Rockies grizzly hunt

A judge on Thursday temporarily blocked the opening of the first grizzly bear hunts in the Rocky Mountains in more than 40 years, as he considers whether the government was wrong to lift federal protections on the animals.

U.S. District Judge Dana Christensen’s order came two days before Idaho and Wyoming prepared to open the first grizzly bear hunting seasons in the Lower 48 states since 1974. The move marked a victory for wildlife advocates and Native American tribes.

SOURCE: WIRE REPORTS

"The move marked a victory for wildlife advocates and Native American tribes."
Total B.S. The TRUE wildlife advocates are the hunters and the professional wildlife managers that know and actually CARE for the wildlife. The grizzlies have made a strong comeback in Wyoming, Montana, and Idaho, and limited hunting will not in any way be a detriment to their population.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has made the determination that the grizzlies have recovered, and have given their management back to the states The professional biologists in the state wildlife agencies have determined that there can be limited hunting, End of story!! Just like the wolf issue, this has absolutely NO business in the courts, and just like the wolves, it will end up wasting thousands of state wildlife agency dollars defending their decision, and will end up hurting other wildlife and probably domestic animals.

The grizzly may have been a totem to some of the Indian tribes, but throughout their history they hunted the bears, and anything that they say now has absolutely no validity in the states decisions for a very limited grizzly hunting season.

Many people think the purpose of the ESA is to keep species on it forever when it fact it clearly states that when a species has recovered it will be removed from the list. Professional biologists have determined the grizzly has recovered to a point where it can be turned over to the wildlife depts of the various states for management. However some armchair expert that has probably never got out of the city long enough to even see a live grizzly thinks they know better.

We should take 20-30 grizzlies to NYC and turn them loose in Central Park and let them spread out. Do the same thing in downtown LA and Chicago. Won't be long before the idiots begin to understand how managing the population of apex predators is a really sound idea!

The area that should be banned to hunt grizzlies near Yellowstone for the time being, is the Northern corridor outside of the park; so that the Canadian and Yellowstone grizzlies can migrate; in order so that they can eventually spread their genes between the two.

What you do not know lefty would fill volumes! What are you even doing on a sportsman's message board, I doubt you even own a firearm or hunting bow. The professionals, both state and federal who are charged by law to protect and manage wildlife have made an educated decision which benefits both the animals and the human population and that is their job, not the court's job. The federal circus courts should net even be involved, this is just more leftist legislation from the bench usurping those who are legally charged with making the decisions on wildlife. What does a federal circuit judge know about bears or any other species of wildlife? Zip, Nada, Nothing, that is what. They read petitions from bone headed bleeding heart bunny huggers who don't know crap from shineola to make a affecting people who do know something about the subject and generally ignore the information provided by the professionals. Don't bring your liberal leftist crap here, take it somewhere where they might think you know something. And before you start to whine about your 1st amendment rights and have a right to say what you said, that is true. However it is also true that we have the right to tell you you don't know anything about the subject at hand and to stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

You live in MD! What the heck do you know about the entire Yellowstone region? Can you read a map? Do you have any idea how far it is from the northern boundary of Yellowstone to Canada? From Gardiner Montana which is right at the northern border of Yellowstone along a straight line to Sweet Grass Montana which is right at the USA/Canada border is nearly 300 miles! So you think these bears are just going to suddenly "mingle?" How much migrating do you thing grizzlies do? They have a home range and do not migrate at all! Are you really this ignorant?

Flags -

I agree to disagree that bears "do not migrate at all." When a bear cub comes of age...the sow chases them away to avoid interbreeding.

It is very important for the Northern and Yellowstone grizzlies too intermingle, so that they can guarantee their survival --- According to a NYT's Science article.

I would love to have the chance of hunting grizzlies around Yellowstone myself, save for the Northern corridor above Yellowstone; since I'm an avid conservationist and firearms, archery hunting sportsman as well.

That is not migration skippy! It is eliminating competition. Do you really think bears comprehend interbreeding and that is the reason they chase their young away ? Yeah, you are a hunter alright.

I'm speculating that the interbreeding fear from bears is based on instinct.

And I'm speculating that you really may be as ignorant as you appear! You really don't have a clue do you? You're about 3 dumb posts from the list. Even on this you're turning to the NYT? What the heck do they know about grizzlies?

I'm curious about your theory. Do these bears have some internal compass that guides them North instead of just spreading out in all directions? Do the bears stop when they encounter good food, shelter and habitat conditions or do they keep pushing North to avoid interbreeding? The Judge is ignoring what trained and experienced biologists have advocated for some animal activist cause or theory. Are you tying your theory to some NYT columnist? If so, who? and what research did he/she do? Trying to give you the benefit of the doubt even though animals have never been proven to think or behave in such a manner.

Males get pushed out. I guess simple math isn't your strong suit Erno. 50% of the gene pool is female. If only the males are pushed out, that still leaves 50% of the gene pool to interbreed. Not to mention the ratio of male to female births and survival which makes that percentage much heavier towards the females. I have to admit, I do get a small little giggle watching the totally ignorant try to appear intelligent. Call it a guilty pleasure. Sadly, Darwin only seems to account for other animals not us. Our population would be much thinner.

I have a theory that anything requiring thinking, logic and relevance are not Erno's strong suit. At least that is what his posts seem to indicate.

"In a new paper, biologists say that as grizzly populations increase in both Glacier National Park and Yellowstone, more adventurous males from both parks are journeying further to stake out territory, winding up in places where they have not been seen in a century or so.

If they keep roaming and expanding, the two populations are likely to reconnect as soon as 5 or 10 years from now."

" 'Because Yellowstone is a bit lower in genetic diversity, hundreds of years from now they might be less able to adapt to changing conditions --- changing climate, changing food sources and disease resistance, ' Dr. van Manen said."

"While no one knows what what advantageous traits the Glacier grizzlies might have in their genes, increasing diversity is the best way to assure resilience against those types of hazards.

The state of Montana has said it would not allow hunting where the two populations might reconnect."

quotes: "Grizzlies Moving Towards a Reunion" - By Jim Robbins - THE NEW YORK TIMES, TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 7, 2017
"

If I wanted hunting information, it sure as hades would not come from the New York Times. Just stop, you have already proven you know little if anything. Quoting sources means nothing.

So some biologists have a theory that they've published in a paper. Pretty big ifs in the paper and their theory should be closely examined and scrutinized. Consider this:

Let's say (for the sake of discussion), that both Grizzlies eventually expand to each other's sphere on habitation. Maybe they meet in Montana, maybe in another state or even in Canada since Canadian Grizzlies don't seem to push South that much (just a personal anecdotal observation but humor me). So when the 2 Grizzly groups meet, the males in both groups are going to contest the territory. That's what they do. If your Canadian Grizzlies win, they get to pass their genes onto the Yellowstone group. If not, the gene flow goes the other way. So some degree of crossbreeding occurs. Where in those biologists' theory or yours does it show or explain how or why the crossbred Grizzlies would go back to their respective initial home areas (Canada and/or Yellowstone) and cross breed the rest of their respective populations? I mean, those groups left their respective home areas because they were kicked out. How are they going to convince the dominant males in each area to let them back in?

You see the problems with this "theory" right? I mean if biologists truly wanted to accomplish a cross breeding purpose, wouldn't it make more sense for them to trap and release males and females from each respective area into the other area? Kind of like you bring in a different bull to breed your cows when you're trying to avoid too much interbreeding of your herd. It's great to read articles but you still have to think about them and whether they make sense. Critical thinking should occur whether you're reading some article about some biologists' theory or you're examining a used car proposed contract/deal. In each case, the other party is doing what they think is best for them and it might not always be best for you or even correct.

It should no be apparent to all of us that the guy from MD knows so much more than those of us that have actually spent a lot of time or even been born in the Rockies does when it comes to grizzlies. After all, there has never been a grizzly in either MD or NY but that doesn't stop them from being experts right? I wonder if he knows how far it is from Yellowstone to Glacier? Heck you could put 2 or 3 MDs in that distance but he thinks these bears are just going to hop and skip across that much territory so they can get busy breeding. I wonder if he factored in the 7 months a year the bears spend in hibernation into his thought pattern. OOPS!

Maybe he thinks they get subway passes? :D

Frauds are so easy to spot!

BUT! your missing the point here!
bring logic and facts into the discussion and all it does is potentially slow the head long mindless goal of banning hunting...
you don,t really think for two seconds that the stated goal was legit!
(well maybe, it is if the libs think theres a high percentage of GAY GRIZZLIES)

Good points. I mean there would never be any anti-hunter biologists who would publish a bogus study and propose a pie in the sky theory, right? I mean that's like saying that global warming scientists never corrupted their data to achieve a pre-desired outcome, right? Nah, that would never happen. :s4:

Attacking a poster due to political leaning and presumed residential location is wrong. Instead, educated discussion along with personal opinions is the purpose for this site and can be useful.

A simple internet search provided the following from Western Wildlife Outreach. A quoted source from the State of Washington not Montana...GASP! Not trying to come across as an expert as some frequent posters would love others to believe.

Here you go...

6. How large an area does an individual grizzly bear require?

That depends upon how rich the habitat is in bear foods. Grizzly bears are not territorial. They do not stake out and defend a well-defined area but follow food availability. A food source that is rich in early spring often fizzles out by late spring, causing bears to move to other food sources. As a result, home ranges generally change from year to year. Most bears move through an area of several miles during a 24-hour period, but daily movements may vary widely by season, food availability, age and sex of the bear, security cover, and level of disturbance.

The average home range size throughout North America for an adult female grizzly bear is about 70 square miles. Adult males have much larger home ranges, often 300-500 square miles. Male home ranges are generally larger because males travel over a broader area to find females. Female home ranges are usually smaller because the limited mobility of cubs confines them to an area just large enough to supply food, water, and security. Research is needed to learn about grizzly bear home ranges and habitat use in the North Cascades.

"Grizzly Bears Are Waking Up Early This Year, And Climate Change Could Make That A Bad Habit"

http://www.takepart.com/article/2015...ng-they-should

More liberal nonsense!

I'm not sure what your point is. If an adult grizzly bear's home range is 500 square miles -- the maximum value listed -- that corresponds to a 22 mile X 22 mile region. Alternatively, that corresponds to a 44 mile X 11 mile region. Alternatively, that corresponds to an 88 mile X 6 mile region. These calculations aren't suggesting to me that an adult male grizzly bear is going to travel 300 miles as the crow flies to find a mate. Thus, I do not see the nexus of "an adult grizzly bear's maximum home range is 500 square miles" to this discussion.

Sorry Rogers, no one can have an educated discussion with someone who makes up what he throws out as facts because it fits his political agenda and make no mistake about it, that is what his comments are about.

Not sure how many on this thread or following it actually know that the frequency of Bear vs Human interactions is climbing quite a bit in Montana , Idaho and Wyoming....the latest, a guide in NW Wyoming was attacked and killed by a sow grizz and full grown cub, the man being guided survived, this is just the latest in what is increasingly becoming more and more regular bear interactions with humans. But I doubt an activist judge will let facts get into the way of their personal agenda.

Kinda like Erno, facts are a thing he never lets affect his non thinking.

I've lived about 90 miles north of Yellowstone Park for the past 40 years. I have not heard of a single verified sighting of a grizzly bear north of I-90 in Gallatin or Park counties, MT since I've been here.

Any thoughts of mother bears kicking their offspring out to prevent interbreeding is total BS. Male animals will attempt to breed any female of their species that comes into heat. They don't care if the female is their sister, mother, or grandmother.

Montana FWP is continually live trapping problem bears and transplanting them in other area of the state. If the FWP bear biologists were concerned about mixing the genetics of Yellowstone and Glacier Park grizzlies, they could easily move male bears between the parks, and not have to wait several hundred years for bears from each Park to naturally mix.

"Judge Bans Yellowstone Grizzly Bear Hunt!"

http://www.real.video/5839784320001

Sounds like you're celebrating.

What would you expect from a liberal, they love liberal federal judges that give them what they can get no other way. I have no idea what that pop up sniper is doing here other than to try to cause trouble.

IIRC, I believe he previously identified himself as a And has said he hunts squirrels. I'm trying to think back and see if I remember meeting any hardcore leftist radicals that hunt but I can't remember any.

Are you sure he didn't say he was a squirrel?:D

Well, you know what they say about people who hang out with squirrels in the woods, don't ya? :D

I've hunted black bear with a rifle in Western Maryland, and I would love the opportunity to harvest a grizzly.

I'd like to see established populations of black bear in every county of Maryland; though the Maryland DNR is trying to prevent that by live trappings, such as in Baltimore County and releasing them back into Western Maryland. But I believe that that repopulation of black bears in every county of Maryland is inevitable --- We just have to give them a chance...like the grizzlies in the western half of the United States.

Sure you did and would!! Nice attempt at back tracking.

I would have taken him as more of a nature photographer instead of a rifle hunter.

I can't say what I take him as.