[deleted]

One million percent

That's what anti-wolf people said about reintroducing wolves to Yellowstone. Then they put them back and saw massive improvements to the entire ecology of park. You can't see a 'negative impact' because you're operating from the assumption that no grizzlies represents 'normal.' That is a false baseline.

As someone who lives (with two small boys) in the Methow at the doorstep to NCNP. I’m with u/CnD123 on this one.

Have you ever hiked in Glacier NP u/juiceboxzero? I ask because it’s a very different feel than the cascades, “higher consequences” for lack of attention in the backcountry for one. It’s fun to be in that environment but certainly not something I want to deal with on a daily basis. As someone else stated, black bear are docile, they know their place and rarely cause issues. I ran one off our property (it was eating apples off our tree) just a few weeks ago. Griz are different, they know they’re the top of the food chain. There’s almost certain to be human griz conflict. Guess who’s on the hook when that happens? The federal assassins who’s job it is to hunt and kill any bear that becomes too comfortable around humans (ie. thinks they’re top of the food chain).

I get the sense you are ok with this because you won’t be affected by it. I assume you would feel different if you had experience hiking around griz AND were faced with them reintroduced in your back yard for no functional reason other than “they used to be here many decades ago and it would be nice”. Where does that logic end? There’s no way to change all the ills humans have brought upon this earth by reintroducing griz to NCNP. Unfortunately..

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Ha!

[removed]

There's a difference between reintroducing an animal native to an area who only lost that area due to human interference, and an animal that went extinct due to natural selection.

Also velociraptors weren't native to our region anyway. They were Asian, and Jurassic Park lied to you. If you want to read more about dinosaurs in WA here's a link.

Who gives a shit? The ecology is just fine without them and they have thousands of miles of territory in North America already

Saw a grizz there last year

Edit: who downvoted this? Lol. It was right on the road near Diablo Lake. Loads of cars stopped.

I think they should reintroduce them as far as Northern California. Its their natural habitat.

[removed]

[removed]

You're defending the choices of the past while pretending not to espouse the beliefs that justified them. LOL.

That's kind of like saying "I'm not racist, but the people of this area thought it was in our best interest to restrict the rights of black people. I'm just a fan of the status quo".

>My argument is that we decided years ago that is in our region's best interest to not have grizzlies.

That's the same argument.

[removed]

Humans are thriving in tons of other places in North America. This isn't about human lives - it's about human convenience. I don't dispute that your life is more "valuable" than a bear's. I dispute that the fulfillment of your recreational goals is.

[removed]

I'm curious about the "ecologically important" part. What specifically do you mean by that.

More people go to Yellowstone and Glacier than the north cascades and not many people are getting killed by bears.

That is not my argument. My argument is that we decided years ago that is in our region's best interest to not have grizzlies.

Sorry, your side lost.

Yep, you getting to have recreation wherever you want, with a risk level you're willing to tolerate is more important than other species getting to simply live in their natural habitat.

You: "I love the Washington wilderness, but fuck nature - it should be less wild"

[removed]