View Full Version : Should Grizzly Bears be reintroduced to California?
Interesting conversation
http://ww2.kqed.org/forum/2016/07/25/environmental-group-seeks-to-reintroduce-grizzly-bears-to-california/
Heck yes. They might eliminate the permit problem.
Wayne
Old. Slow. "Smarter than the average bear."
MuddyWaters
07-28-2016, 22:21
Been going on for a few years.
Id like to see it, because it would result in a few less people in the backcountry, and more careful ones for sure.
Wilderness without the wild...really isnt.
But, the subspecies of CA grizzly is extinct I believe, and it would be a different grizzly, is an opponents arguement
Since its on the state flag, and is the state animal, they should change that or reintroduce it with significant protections.
.
Sarcasm the elf
07-28-2016, 22:26
Can we start with Hollywood?
Can we start with Hollywood?
That would be extremely cruel to the bears.
Wayne
Old. Slow. "Smarter than the average bear."
Sarcasm the elf
07-28-2016, 22:33
That would be extremely cruel to the bears.
Wayne
Old. Slow. "Smarter than the average bear."
Good point.
Do the grizzlies get a vote?
...But, the subspecies of CA grizzly is extinct I believe, and it would be a different grizzly, is an opponents arguement..
We went through aq similar argument here in Florida years ago when the population of Florida Panthers had reached such a dismal state that the genetic pool was too shallow to support long term survival. The only solution was to introduce cougars from western states in order to boost the popluation while also adding genetic diversity. What we now have in much of the state is a genetic variant of the original panther, but they are doing much better than 30 years ago, numbers are probably 3-4 times as high. One of the few things the Florida Game Commission has managed to get right I guess.
My vote, if I had one, would be to reintroduce the Grizzly.
I'm OK with apex predators expanding naturally. I'm not OK with forcing a species to expand its range to habitat where man has removed it. A few fatal bear encounters and people will be screaming to control the bears again. Of course sinces its Commiefornia, no one is going to be able to remove the bears again and poor little children will be slaughtered by ravaging grizzlies by the thousands.
think of the children and prevent the bears being re-introduced.
Just Bill
07-29-2016, 09:14
I'm OK with apex predators expanding naturally. I'm not OK with forcing a species to expand its range to habitat where man has removed it. A few fatal bear encounters and people will be screaming to control the bears again. Of course sinces its Commiefornia, no one is going to be able to remove the bears again and poor little children will be slaughtered by ravaging grizzlies by the thousands.
think of the children and prevent the bears being re-introduced.
:D My first thought was along those lines;
Ceptin the Apex predators being peoples and that California herd of em could use a bit of natural competition and thinning. :D
MuddyWaters
07-29-2016, 09:59
We went through aq similar argument here in Florida years ago when the population of Florida Panthers had reached such a dismal state that the genetic pool was too shallow to support long term survival. The only solution was to introduce cougars from western states in order to boost the popluation while also adding genetic diversity. What we now have in much of the state is a genetic variant of the original panther, but they are doing much better than 30 years ago, numbers are probably 3-4 times as high. One of the few things the Florida Game Commission has managed to get right I guess.
My vote, if I had one, would be to reintroduce the Grizzly.
Mid 1980s I recall
Fl panther population 39, mostly in big cypress swamp.
Lawmakers vote to build highway thru it
In a few years many have been killed by cars
Way too many people in world.
Need to reclaim private land, and others, and return it to wilderness
Restock extirpated species wiped out due to ignorance
Save something for our childten and grandchildren
Do the grizzlies get a vote? Obviously, they would have to be a citizen of California, before they can vote.
We eventually decide everything in CA by ballot measure. When Hetch Hetchy is drained and returned to wilderness... the bears can be reintroduced there. This can all be done via propositions put on the ballot. :)
The pro "Vote YES on Prop GB and bring the grizzly back to California!" side would run ads showing cute, cuddly, mommy Grizzlies and adorable baby grizzly cubs from a Disney movie. The "Vote NO on Prop GB. Keep these killers in Idaho and Montana where they belong!" side would show ads with clips taken from The Revenant.
Whoever spends the most money on ads and/or can get an endorsement from Leonardo Di Caprio wins.
GoldenBear
07-29-2016, 12:37
> poor little children will be slaughtered by ravaging grizzlies by the thousands
How many poor little children have been killed by ravaging grizzlies in the Lower 48 in the last century? Thousands?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America
Since the truth is "less than a dozen," on what basis do you conclude that grizzlies in California would kill thousands of these poor little children?
How many minor children have been killed due to hunting accidents in the U.S. over the last year? Is it less than the number of children killed by grizzlies over the last century, or greater?
http://www.all-creatures.org/cash/taah-sh-20060302.html
Since the number of minors killed due to hunting is FAR greater than the number of children killed due to grizzlies, shouldn't we "think of the children" and ban hunting before we ban grizzlies?
Tipi Walter
07-29-2016, 13:04
We went through aq similar argument here in Florida years ago when the population of Florida Panthers had reached such a dismal state that the genetic pool was too shallow to support long term survival. The only solution was to introduce cougars from western states in order to boost the popluation while also adding genetic diversity. What we now have in much of the state is a genetic variant of the original panther, but they are doing much better than 30 years ago, numbers are probably 3-4 times as high. One of the few things the Florida Game Commission has managed to get right I guess.
My vote, if I had one, would be to reintroduce the Grizzly.
With 27 million humans in Florida, I'd say they have a much bigger problem---too many dang people.
The main question is not whether Calif should bring bears back into the state, but why the heck did California settlers wipe out the golden bears to begin with?? If you can figure this one out, you can really understand settlers, their attitudes, and why they let this happen. Or why Floridians allowed the panthers to disappear.
Mid 1980s I recall
Fl panther population 39, mostly in big cypress swamp.
Lawmakers vote to build highway thru it
In a few years many have been killed by cars
Way too many people in world.
Need to reclaim private land, and others, and return it to wilderness
Restock extirpated species wiped out due to ignorance
Save something for our childten and grandchildren
Exactly. But humans are highly self-loving and put themselves up as Gods. City on the Hill, etc. In my opinion one grizzly bear is worth 10,000 humans. How much is one panther worth?
There are 39 million humans in California. Their state flag has the golden bear on it. How many golden bears are left? None. What effort is California doing to manage their ecosystem? With 39 million, apparently nothing. Sure, bring every bear into Calif you can find, AND cull the humans as the humans culled the bears and the California Indians.
(History factoid: 100,000 Calif Indians murdered by California settlers between the years 1846-1848).
AfterParty
07-29-2016, 13:19
> poor little children will be slaughtered by ravaging grizzlies by the thousands
How many poor little children have been killed by ravaging grizzlies in the Lower 48 in the last century? Thousands?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_fatal_bear_attacks_in_North_America
Since the truth is "less than a dozen," on what basis do you conclude that grizzlies in California would kill thousands of these poor little children?
How many minor children have been killed due to hunting accidents in the U.S. over the last year? Is it less than the number of children killed by grizzlies over the last century, or greater?
http://www.all-creatures.org/cash/taah-sh-20060302.html
Since the number of minors killed due to hunting is FAR greater than the number of children killed due to grizzlies, shouldn't we "think of the children" and ban hunting before we ban grizzlies?
Shouldn't you not include dozens of states without grizzlies and just do one state with them. Give a much more accurate representation of allowing reintroduction into one state.
My first thought is NO. But I'm open to seeing yes side and what benifet this would be to the bears.
Regarding "too many humans": Maybe, but what do we do about it? Seems to me that we only have a few choices. We could kill a bunch of humans. That would work, but might be unpopular (particularly with the ones selected for extermination). Hitler, Pol Pot, Stalin, et al were fond of this method of population control. Those guys are probably wildly popular in the bear community, but not so much in the human community. Some other solutions (from a policy perspective) are forced sterilization, forced abortion, and forced birth control. We could consult China on how to accomplish this. They have firsthand experience. Of course, they have their own wildlife issues and endangered species.
Maybe it makes more sense for humans to just have a smaller footprint here on this beautiful planet. I think the younguns are starting to figure this out already. We can turn the tide without hating on humans, even the settler types that murdered and were murdered by Native Americans.
Secondmouse
07-29-2016, 14:14
since bears don't pay attention to state boundaries and have a range of 200-500 sq mi, why have they not moved back by themselves? is anything stopping them?..
gpburdelljr
07-29-2016, 14:43
since bears don't pay attention to state boundaries and have a range of 200-500 sq mi, why have they not moved back by themselves? is anything stopping them?..
There are only about 1500 left in the lower 48 of the 50,000 to 100,000 that once existed. The remaining ones are in Wyoming, Montana, Idaho, and Washington. The majority are in Montana (800) and Wyoming (600). In other words, there are no grizzly bears in states abutting California.
Just a point of order. There are Grizzlies in California, perhaps free roaming, but Grizzlies nevertheless.
http://www.monarchbear.org/bears/cubs.html
Should read, "perhaps not free roaming".
Does California need grizzlies? Do grizzlies need California? Maybe they like the other states. Does California have an ecosystem where grizzlies can flourish? Forced relocation of grizzlies just because "there used to be a bunch there" seems less than smart. Haven't we disrupted them enough?
Does California need grizzlies? Do grizzlies need California? Maybe they like the other states. Does California have an ecosystem where grizzlies can flourish? Forced relocation of grizzlies just because "there used to be a bunch there" seems less than smart. Haven't we disrupted them enough?
Did Yellowstone need wolves? Did the reintroduced wolves need Yellowstone? If California does have the required wilderness area meeting the needs of a healthy population of bears, why not reintroduce their magnificence to a former range?
Two of the greatest backpacking memories I have occurred on the same day in Yellowstone. Waking up to the Druid Pack howling at 5:30 in the morning less than 1/2 mile from our tent, and seeing a grizzly amble by less than 30 feet behind that same tent later in the afternoon. Experiences of that nature put the "wild" in wilderness. The responsible parties in California would do well to study the logistics involved in reintroducing the wolf to Yellowstone.
Certainly the committment required to move a breeding population of apex predators back into their former range is immense. Public education, dealing with disgruntled ranchers, poaching, and many other problems will have to be dealt with. But, based on my experiences on that one day, I would have to say the effort was worth it...
With 27 million humans in Florida, I'd say they have a much bigger problem---too many dang people.
The main question is not whether Calif should bring bears back into the state, but why the heck did California settlers wipe out the golden bears to begin with?? If you can figure this one out, you can really understand settlers, their attitudes, and why they let this happen. Or why Floridians allowed the panthers to disappear.
Exactly. But humans are highly self-loving and put themselves up as Gods. City on the Hill, etc. In my opinion one grizzly bear is worth 10,000 humans. How much is one panther worth?
There are 39 million humans in California. Their state flag has the golden bear on it. How many golden bears are left? None. What effort is California doing to manage their ecosystem? With 39 million, apparently nothing. Sure, bring every bear into Calif you can find, AND cull the humans as the humans culled the bears and the California Indians.
(History factoid: 100,000 Calif Indians murdered by California settlers between the years 1846-1848).
I read somewhere, that too much weight on the spinal column causes irrational and delusional thoughts and confusion.
Sarcasm the elf
07-29-2016, 21:59
http://bearmageddon.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/Bearsplain.jpg
I think the California Golden Bear was quite different than a grizzly bear, not only color.
I remember when mountain lions were introduced, one every 4 square miles. One female nearby me, screamed pitiably for a mate. I think it is stupid to bring animals out into open country to leave them there: captive animals need to be reintroduced. Is that environment sustainable for that animal: can they thrive there?
Traveler
07-31-2016, 09:42
Does California need grizzlies? Do grizzlies need California? Maybe they like the other states. Does California have an ecosystem where grizzlies can flourish? Forced relocation of grizzlies just because "there used to be a bunch there" seems less than smart. Haven't we disrupted them enough?
Years ago most all the apex predators were hunted out of places like Yellowstone National Park. There was a reintroduction of these species and some curious things happened, the most interesting was the existing population of deer, elk, and other animals became more robust and healthy. When apex predators were re-introduced there were claims the end of the world would arrive quickly thereafter, but never did and the entire ecosystem benefitted.
While there are occasional deaths due to Bear attacks (approximately 128 since 1900 in the US) and approximately 9 fatal brown bear attacks by hikers in the lower 48 States from 2,000 to current data. Moose kill approximate 1 person a year hiking in forests in the lower 48, which exceed the number of deaths from brown bears. Add to that the number of people moose kill annually and they quickly become the larger threat on a National level. Statistically, the numbers of brown bear incidents really do not support any conclusions that prevent the experiment from being performed.
*- Not all Brown Bears are Grizzly Bears, but all Grizzly Bears are Brown Bears.
The problem, as I see it, is relocation efforts have to start in relatively small areas so bears can find each other. This is the most likely reason (not including deliberate human destruction of them) they have not ventured into CA from areas several States away.
Years ago most all the apex predators were hunted out of places like Yellowstone National Park. There was a reintroduction of these species and some curious things happened, the most interesting was the existing population of deer, elk, and other animals became more robust and healthy. When apex predators were re-introduced there were claims the end of the world would arrive quickly thereafter, but never did and the entire ecosystem benefitted.
While there are occasional deaths due to Bear attacks (approximately 128 since 1900 in the US) and approximately 9 fatal brown bear attacks by hikers in the lower 48 States from 2,000 to current data. Moose kill approximate 1 person a year hiking in forests in the lower 48, which exceed the number of deaths from brown bears. Add to that the number of people moose kill annually and they quickly become the larger threat on a National level. Statistically, the numbers of brown bear incidents really do not support any conclusions that prevent the experiment from being performed.
*- Not all Brown Bears are Grizzly Bears, but all Grizzly Bears are Brown Bears.
The problem, as I see it, is relocation efforts have to start in relatively small areas so bears can find each other. This is the most likely reason (not including deliberate human destruction of them) they have not ventured into CA from areas several States away.
I read something, once, that noted that predators were good for prey animals since they killed the young and weak. It kept the populations in check and sick animals didnt live long enough to spread any disease to the rest of the herd. The young that were killed off prevented the herd from starving to death. Only the strongest were allowed to reproduce.
Its only when man, and hunting for trophies, that the herds got smaller and individual animals weaker.
Its only when man, and hunting for trophies, that the herds got smaller and individual animals weaker.
This is a false statement at least as it relates to western states in particular Colorado. Wildlife and large mammals in particular are very carefully monitored by State agencies. Harvesting permits are controlled by type of weapon, time frame, animal sex and population census within a given game management area. A high percentage of animals harvested are inspected by State officials for compliance to the originating permit. Penalties for non-compliance are expensive and strictly enforced.
If you've ever hunted, finding, stalking and getting a clean shot on a trophy animal is very, very, very difficult. Many hunters who draw a bull elk tag can go seasons with filling it.
In terms of trophy elk, many hunters who have the economic means go to private ranches. There rules and regulations are even more strict. Guides only allow clients to take very mature bulls who are older and near the end of their life natural lifespan. Although the natural death is typically brought on by a fractured jaw, crushed skull or punctured lung due to rigors of the rut. Younger, more viral males remain to further the gene pool.