Hunters kill charging grizzly, Idaho

[robby denning]

I'm all for a grizzly hunt, and their numbers have obviously been climbing. I'm not one to make assumptions that they are "too high" or on the flip side "too low" as that is just a personal opinion.

What I do know, is that human presence in the woods in and around Yellowstone has been on the rise, and possibly at a greater rate than the bears population increase and I believe that has more to do with encounters than anything else.

The fastest growing areas of land for the last, oh im not sure, 10 years, has been directly related to proximity to a National Park and with the sheer number of people that are now using these landscapes coupled with the ever growing GBear population is rife for human-bear conflict.

Robby- all good. Not pegging this on you, but I'm just sick of all the bravado that comes along on the internet of guys who have spent 5 days in "grizz country" and now are experts behind the subject matter.

Yeah I get it. I just know in 30 years, the population has definitely climbed. Ask any of our biologist around here, that was the whole idea of expanding and tying together the Yellowstone ecosystem. And you are right, There are more people up there for sure, tons of summer homes, but there’s a lot more bears too.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[TheTone]

Even if the bear pop is high sows with Cubs will never be hunted and killing sows does nothing but hurt efforts to de-list

oppurtunity for human conflict is incredibly high around IP due to all the summer cabins. It’s really hard to educate the owners when they have a huge family that shares it all summer and you have different individuals there at all times

 

[robby denning]

Even if the bear pop is high sows with Cubs will never be hunted and killing sows does nothing but hurt efforts to de-list

oppurtunity for human conflict is incredibly high around IP due to all the summer cabins. It’s really hard to educate the owners when they have a huge family that shares it all summer and you have different individuals there at all times

I understand that, Of course we don’t hunt sows and cubs. But if you listen to guys like Jim Shockey and Billy Molls, un-hunted grizz bears become problem bears. They have no fear of humans. Right now those IP bears associate us with food, not trouble.

And there’s just so many compared to previous decades that trouble is almost guaranteed.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk ok

 

[TheTone]

I agree they need managed different and hunted but proposed tag numbers are IMO going to have little effect on perception of people. I used to really like hunting IP, I miss the elk and country I don’t miss worrying about grizzlies

I’m not into shockeys opinion on anything. He’s been bought and sold more times than I’m sure he remembers

 

[Slabcommander]

Glad all involved are okay. Stay strapped y’all

 

[Muledeerfanatic]

I always love the "too many bears" argument
How about way to damn many people!

 

[Page Master]

There’s just too many of them up there. More conflict and death is coming to both bears and people


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

We just shouldn't let people in to hunt where the bears are then.

 

[mtnbiker208]

Bears keep life in the woods, sporty. It should not be all about safety.

 

[MJB]

As was said before they need to be hazed when near humans. No fear is not a good thing

 

[robby denning]

We just shouldn't let people in to hunt where the bears are then.

Are you serious, we should not be able to use our national forest to elk hunt, fish, and recreate so bears can have free reign?

We’re not talking about a small area here, we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of acres of national forest. They already have 1,000,000 acres to the east in Yellowstone national park.

There’s always been a few grizzlies up there, even before they were on the endangered list. I’m good with a few, but with bear attacks and bear encounters on the obvious rise up there, and the feds shutting down our season a couple years ago that was approved, I’m not OK to just sit back and say “ oh well, let the bears be bears.” With that thinking, we should shut down all game management.

The situation is just like the wolves, it’s swung way too far the other way now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[CorbLand]

Have a family cabin less than 2 miles from that area. I have spent my entire life playing in that area and rarely did you ever run into bears. In the last year, this is number 4 that has ran into issues with people in there. There was hiker that got mauled, a biker got chased and now this all in the same general area. They trapped one in a campground at mill creek and I believe they took one out of Centennial shores this year too. 30 years of being up there and we never saw or dealt with grizzly's. Something has definitely changed.

 

[TheTone]

Probably more fatal car and atv accidents each year in IP than there are non fatal grizzly attacks. Maybe we should ban tourists and people that aren’t fremont county residents from being in the area

 

[mtnbiker208]

Probably more fatal car and atv accidents each year in IP than there are non fatal grizzly attacks. Maybe we should ban tourists and people that aren’t fremont county residents from being in the area

I wonder what has killed more in the ip\west yellowstone area, avalanches or bears?

 

[AZ_Hunter_2000]

Everything should be managed. However, we also accept certain risks when we go hunt. Up to us individually to mitigate and/or eliminate any risks we deem too high.

Walking around with a ribeye tied to your neck in grizzly country is still probably safer than walking through some metropolitan areas in the US.

 

[Page Master]

Are you serious, we should not be able to use our national forest to elk hunt, fish, and recreate so bears can have free reign?

We’re not talking about a small area here, we’re talking about hundreds of thousands of acres of national forest. They already have 1,000,000 acres to the east in Yellowstone national park.

There’s always been a few grizzlies up there, even before they were on the endangered list. I’m good with a few, but with bear attacks and bear encounters on the obvious rise up there, and the feds shutting down our season a couple years ago that was approved, I’m not OK to just sit back and say “ oh well, let the bears be bears.” With that thinking, we should shut down all game management.

The situation is just like the wolves, it’s swung way too far the other way now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Just a little sarcasm for your Thursday Tuesday Robby.

 

[robby denning]

Just a little sarcasm for your Thursday Tuesday Robby.

You got me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Gobbler36]

I always love the "too many bears" argument
How about way to damn many people!

This is where I stand. Too many of us, we encroach and develop areas that should be left alone in the first place and then bitch and complain and cry when the wildlife eats our daisys or (Pomeranian) or scratches us up a bit.
don’t like your neighbors then get the **** out

that said I’m absolutely for state management of bears and having seasons should the fish and game agency of these states feel it’s best.

 

[Page Master]

You got me


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I am not sure there is a better feeling than getting an admin to rant 2 paragraphs over some sarcasm.

 

[robby denning]

I am not sure there is a better feeling than getting an admin to rant 2 paragraphs over some sarcasm.

I have to agree.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[slick]

I have to disagree with notion that "hunting will change bears attitudes/behavior/aggression". The almighty Jim Shockey is wrong. I actually find hilarity in that statement. Most bears already avoid human interaction. Think of the number of hunters that encounter bears, or have the potential to (close proximity) that are never attacked and on the flip side the bears actually run the opposite way.

We're talking about changing behavior that at a fundamental level is an evolutionary process that has happened over 100s or 1,000s of years. Bears are all of the sudden not going to defend kills, cubs or potentially charge when startled because we killed a tiny percentage of them? We aren't going to change bear behavior by shooting whatever the proposed number was a year (MT 7? ID 1? WY 22?).

Fear is also a learned response, and as said above we aren't killing sows with cubs (or intentionally). Once you get shot you're dead and therefore no more fear response.

I could see this being a reasonable line of thinking if we were going to try and decrease the population by 75%, but that is not and will not ever be the case going forward.