What's wrong with more grizzlies in Idaho?

[Rotnguns]

I know from a previous thread that I've got a (very) minority opinion on this topic, but why are so many against grizzly bears expanding into some of the areas in Idaho that they used to inhabit, and establishing a stable population so we can have a season on them? I think we're seeing a rather disproportional number of attacks here in Idaho because this apex predator has lost their fear of us. We've got plenty of other predators more than capable of handing us our lunch, but they don't. In over fifty years living and hunting here, I cannot recall a single lion attack (other than a pet that was let loose to get pregnant near Idaho City - a story in itself). Yet California, where as I understand, lions are protected, attacks are more and more frequent. Because we run lions and black bear with dogs and have a long season on them, they have developed a legacy fear and respect for us. In other states, not so much. More grizzlies in our state would keep the wilderness wild and add to the adventure of an outdoor experience. We need more risk opportunities in our lives in general - we're becoming soft as a society. Just my two cents on this topic.

 

[Wyo_hntr]

Nothing if Idaho could actively manage them and people could protect themselves without fear of jail or astronomical fines.

But many people believe a bear's life is more important than a human's. I don't. But then again I also don't believe a landscape should be inundated with apex predators to "add to the wilderness experience"

 

[Soj51hopeful]

This theory of yours might hold water if you could actually hunt them a lot. Not just a few tags handed out every year but a couple hundred so they actually develop a fear all over the state. Problem is their reproduction rate is very slow. The liberal judges would never let it happen.

 

[Marble]

I'm not quite sure how to take this thread. Either the OP is screwing with us or is very naive.

The problem with grizzly bears is they are different than any other predator. They know they are the apex. They do not fear anything. They are a totally different bear than a black bear.

The politics of hunting grizzly bears in the lower 48 will prevent a season with any impact on the population. Just look at how the current wolf and grizzly populations have been managed since their creation. Agreements are made when the populations are established, and then when it comes to hunt them because of a population trigger, the Anti groups sue and get everything tied up in the court system, thus preventing scientific management.

Very predictable outcome.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

 

[Rotnguns]

I'm not quite sure how to take this thread. Either the OP is screwing with us or is very naive.

The problem with grizzly bears is they are different than any other predator. They know they are the apex. They do not fear anything. They are a totally different bear than a black bear.

The politics of hunting grizzly bears in the lower 48 will prevent a season with any impact on the population. Just look at how the current wolf and grizzly populations have been managed since their creation. Agreements are made when the populations are established, and then when it comes to hunt them because of a population trigger, the Anti groups sue and get everything tied up in the court system, thus preventing scientific management.

Very predictable outcome.

Sent from my SM-S918U using Tapatalk

No, I'm not "screwing with you" and I'm not naive. Grizzlies are a formidable beast, but they are not an alien super creature. If they didn't have a legacy fear of humans, wolves would be much more dangerous - not sure if you've ever seen one, but you'd have zero chance of surviving a determined attack by a wolf pack. Same goes for a lion or even a black bear. Yes, the politics would have to change for my idea to work. But that's been done before. Would you agree that extending your line of reasoning to Alaska would result in Grizzlies being hunted to near extinction there?

 

[Rotnguns]

This theory of yours might hold water if you could actually hunt them a lot. Not just a few tags handed out every year but a couple hundred so they actually develop a fear all over the state. Problem is their reproduction rate is very slow. The liberal judges would never let it happen.

Agree, the politics would have to change so that we could hunt grizzlies and instill proper respect in them. But in Idaho, that could easily happen. Just need to keep fighting at the federal level and hope for conservative federal leadership.

 

[Grundy53]

The problem is they won't be hunted down here. They are way past the point of delisting yet they are still listed. So your argument is moot.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Rotnguns]

The problem is they won't be hunted down here. They are way past the point of delisting yet they are still listed. So your argument is moot.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

I think there are lots more grizzlies in Idaho than reported. What's needed is a REAL census of grizzly bears in our state, conducted by unbiased investigators and published for all to see. If the feds won't do it (and I wouldn't trust them if they did), let Idaho Fish and Game expand their budget and do a proper census.

 

[Customweld]

The politics won't ever change. It took almost a decade to wander through the wolf bs to get a season. All we will see is more forest locked down for habitat. Grizzlies would present nothing more than an extremely useful tool in green group litigation.

 

[P Carter]

Wolves are a different animal. Grizzlies, even where they are hunted, consistently maul hunters, hikers, etc. It’ll fundamentally change the backcountry experience in idaho. Wolves don’t worry me one bit. Carefree hiking with kids in grizz country would not happen for me - we’d get out but its a fundamentally different experience.

Heck, read Undaunted Courage or the Lewis and Clark diaries - grizzlies were all over those guys and scared the pants off them. Wolves aren’t mentioned at all as a matter of concern. And it’s not because one was hunted and the other wasn’t.

If you’re counting on hunting enough grizz to make them stop mauling people, I do think you’re being naive. It would be 20 or 30 years until there’s a meaningful hunt. Again, look at wolves, and grizzlies (for whatever reason) provoke even more litigation and politics. And even if there’s a hunt I don’t think it will have the same results.

 

[Rotnguns]

The politics won't ever change. It took almost a decade to wander through the wolf bs to get a season. All we will see is more forest locked down for habitat. Grizzlies would present nothing more than an extremely useful tool in green group litigation.

You make good points, but we fought hard and eventually, we DID get a wolf season - even managed to expand it. We can now even trap them. The problem is our unique terrain in Idaho - new wolves should not have been added to the ones we had here; the only way to effectively reduce their numbers would be by airborne hunting, and that's not gonna happen. Grizzlies, on the other hand, could be run with dogs and successfully hunted in significant numbers to manage their population.

 

[Grundy53]

I think there are lots more grizzlies in Idaho than reported. What's needed is a REAL census of grizzly bears in our state, conducted by unbiased investigators and published for all to see. If the feds won't do it (and I wouldn't trust them if they did), let Idaho Fish and Game expand their budget and do a proper census.

The feds aren't the problem. They want them delisted.... and can't get them delisted. That should tell you something.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Grundy53]

You make good points, but we fought hard and eventually, we DID get a wolf season - even managed to expand it. We can now even trap them. The problem is our unique terrain in Idaho - new wolves should not have been added to the ones we had here; the only way to effectively reduce their numbers would be by airborne hunting, and that's not gonna happen. Grizzlies, on the other hand, could be run with dogs and successfully hunted in significant numbers to manage their population.

Grizzlies would never be hunted in any significant number period. They, at best, would be an oil tag. With a few given out every year.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Rotnguns]

The feds aren't the problem. They want them delisted.... and can't get them delisted. That should tell you something.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

I don't agree. Idaho tried to have a season on them last year but the federal courts stopped us.

 

[Customweld]

You make good points, but we fought hard and eventually, we DID get a wolf season - even managed to expand it. We can now even trap them. The problem is our unique terrain in Idaho - new wolves should not have been added to the ones we had here; the only way to effectively reduce their numbers would be by airborne hunting, and that's not gonna happen. Grizzlies, on the other hand, could be run with dogs and successfully hunted in significant numbers to manage their population.

This is going to sound snarky and I have no intention of being snarky.

There is no way on God's green earth that the animal rights groups would allow grizz to be hunted with dogs. Hell, they are trying to get bear baiting shut down right now. Idaho tried to have a grizz hunt and that lasted all of about a month before it got axed.
They will make all the promises in the world to get them here. Once they are here, they will fight everything in court.

 

[Rotnguns]

This is going to sound snarky and I have no intention of being snarky.

There is no way on God's green earth that the animal rights groups would allow grizz to be hunted with dogs. Hell, they are trying to get bear baiting shut down right now. Idaho tried to have a grizz hunt and that lasted all of about a month before it got axed.
They will make all the promises in the world to get them here. Once they are here, they will fight everything in court.

I don't think it's snarky at all - a sound opinion in my view. But we can beat the animal-rights extremists just like we did with wolves, using sound scientific evidence backed up by experiences in predator management in other states. If the extremists had their way, we'd have no more hunting at all. We need to push on them a little bit more, rather than fight back against them all the time.

 

[Wyo_hntr]

Grizzlies would never be hunted in any significant number period. They, at best, would be an oil tag. With a few given out every year.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

Correct but people should be able to DLP them before being mauled. But as of now prosecution is always a possibility

 

[Grundy53]

I don't agree. Idaho tried to have a season on them last year but the federal courts stopped us.

The courts aren't "the feds". The agency that manages Grizzly bears wants them delisted. The federal courts are a tool used by tree/bunny hugger groups to stop any hunting of them. The federal judges are appointed for life. Good luck with that.

Sent from my SM-S901U using Tapatalk

 

[Wrench]

Have you lived in Idaho to see the death of outfitters in the former top elk zones? Do you remember when there were 50 lumber mills within an hour of cda? Did you see what the grey ghost did to priest lake?

Sure griz are not an alien and I am not afraid of them, but to risk my property or stiff jail time for protecting myself or property just so we can have more unmanageable apex shit is laughable.

Make it an $18 fine for shooting one and I'm fine with it. Btw, what are they going to eat? Berry season is only a couple months and we don't have salmon filled streams. If you look at the harvest reports......we're not exactly killing many elk and that assumes that those elk come from grizzly habitat.

This is reckless at best. Novel idea, 100 years too late.

 

[Customweld]

I don't think it's snarky at all - a sound opinion in my view. But we can beat the animal-rights extremists just like we did with wolves, using sound scientific evidence backed up by experiences in predator management in other states. If the extremists had their way, we'd have no more hunting at all. We need to push on them a little bit more, rather than fight back against them all the time.

There is sound science to delist the current population now. It will bankrupt IFG fighting them.