[removed]

I guarantee that I spend more time in the woods than you do, and I am absolutely in favor of grizzlies on the landscape. Just admit that you're a fuckin wussy who is scared of encountering a bear. 🤣

> Bears aren’t interested in attacking you.

They aren't usually interested in hunting people, but it does happen from time-to-time.

Once they've established a home range, however, they can be very interested in defending their territory, especially during mating season. Having read a variety of stories about bears attacks as part of trying to be an aware hiker, they always make me relieved we only have black bears in our area.

Reading a book on the Lewis and Clark expedition in particular made an impression on me. When the natives were telling them stories about grizzlies, they could couldn't wait to encounter one to show off how much braver and better hunters they were.

Actually encountering grizzlies cured the party of that enthusiasm, and Lewis actually almost died in one of the encounters.

https://lewis-clark.org/sciences/mammals/bears/grizzly-bear-encounters/

That’s smart. Hope to kill the bears before efforts ever start.

I'm from here originally, and I'm going to take the Department of Wildlife's opinion on whether or not they are apex predators over yours. If you're too much of a coward to handle the presence of wildlife in wilderness areas then stay the fuck out of the mountains.

You should stay in the city

[removed]

> Blizzards are part of nature, too, but you don't want to encounter those, either. We don't have control over blizzards, though.

What do you do if you don't want to hike in a blizzard? You don't got hiking when blizzards are likely. Likewise, if you don't want to be attacked by a grizzly, either feel free to not hike in grizzly county, or come prepared to defend yourself.

[removed]

[removed]

If you're unwilling to accept the consequences of the natural environment you live in, you should consider living elsewhere.

[removed]

[removed]

This wouldn't be r/Washington if someone in the comments didn't find a way to complain about state restrictions on magazine capacities.

1. Gray wolves are an apex species that occupy a top niche in the natural food chain. Like bears and cougars, they have few competitors and play a prominent role in any ecosystem they inhabit. So yes, wolves are absolutely apex predators. 2) No one is suggesting dropping a bunch of grizzlies off in the suburbs. Peddle your strawman bullshit elsewhere. 3) I lived in rural western Montana for a while, I DID have grizzlies in my neighborhood, and it was fucking awesome.

Blizzards are part of nature, too, but you don't want to encounter those, either. We don't have control over blizzards, though.

Somewhere in between when you spot the bear and when the bear rips your jaw from your skull, because that's a grizzly's instinctive fighting technique, is where nature probably stops being pleasant. I don't know the exact line, but it's definitely before it switches to tearing open your abdomen to enjoy your liver.

I don't have an absolute opinion on whether grizzlies should be reintroduced to the north Cascades, but I do have a very strong opinion that if we do so, there had better be an overwhelmingly compelling reason to accept the increased risks of having a far more aggressive species of bear in an area where human activity has increased by leaps and bounds over the last century.

[deleted]

Do you live in one of these areas where grizzlies would be introduced?

As a result of the WDFW’s inability to manage the predators that already reside in this state, I am fundamentally opposed to putting any attempts to restore grizzly populations in our state.

Surely this is a joke

Lol did you really just try to make a NIMBY argument about bear that EAT people? That’s a really bad analogy, do you realize you just compared grizzly bears to minorities and poor people?

[removed]

[removed]

[removed]

Did you reach your dog whistle quota