Previous :: Next Topic |
Author |
Message |
Pahoehoe Member
Joined: 12 Oct 2017 Posts: 563 | TRs | Pics
|
|
Pahoehoe
Member
|
Tue Oct 15, 2019 7:23 am
|
|
|
Michael Lewis wrote: | The average profit of a heifer in 2015 was $2400 (~$9000 - cost of food, shelter etc.) |
The average heifer (a female bovine never having given birth) weighs about 500lbs and sells for about 600 dollars if exposed to a bull.
Calf/cow pair expenses for the year are about 600 dollars a year.
I'm not sure where you are getting your info but it's very wrong.
https://www.drovers.com/article/cattle-prices-and-profitability-2019
|
Back to top |
|
|
some name Member
Joined: 22 Jan 2012 Posts: 4 | TRs | Pics
|
I am having some trouble with something about the discussion on this thread. Some of the comments seem to indicate that the proposed Grizzly recovery area is primarily within the North Cascades National Park (NCNP), and that as hikers/climbers/backpackers we would be very unlikely to ever encounter a Grizzly Bear unless we traveled deep into the heart of the NCNP, or perhaps we would experience an occasional trail closure, but again only if we are using a trail deep within the NCNP ( I suppose that very few NW Hikers posters would do this . . . )
However, when I look at Fig. 1 (Area Of Analysis) on pg. 2 of the EIS, and read the text of the EIS document, it seems that the actual planned recovery area is much more and much larger than the NCNP itself, and includes all of the area identified as the North Cascades Ecosystem (NCE). This is the area outlined in black on Fig. 1, and appears to include pretty much all federal land north of I-90, and extending some into BC. Am I reading this correctly? Is the plan to add bears to the NCNP area only? Or is it to restore a significant Grizzly population to the entire NCE? Could someone please clarify this?
Grizzly-Bear-Restoration-Plan-EIS-Fig-1
|
Back to top |
|
|
Michael Lewis Taking a nap
Joined: 27 Apr 2009 Posts: 629 | TRs | Pics Location: Lynnwood, WA (for now) |
As pointed out by Zephyr in chapter 2 of EIS you'll see a map of release locations:
|
Back to top |
|
|
Brushwork Food truck
Joined: 18 Aug 2018 Posts: 508 | TRs | Pics Location: Washington |
|
Brushwork
Food truck
|
Tue Oct 15, 2019 9:53 pm
|
|
|
Some names, you are correct in looking at the map. The area in consideration is the area north of I-90. Ie much more than what some consider North Cascades.
When I grow up I wanna play.
When I grow up I wanna play.
|
Back to top |
|
|
BigBrunyon Member
Joined: 19 Mar 2015 Posts: 1450 | TRs | Pics Location: the fitness gyms!! |
Looks like they're holding off on any plans to release in the upper drainages off the west side of mainstem thunder up south cross valley from the gain past the gizzly drainage coming down off Fisher easy vicinities
|
Back to top |
|
|
Ski ><((((°>
Joined: 28 May 2005 Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics Location: tacoma |
|
Ski
><((((°>
|
Wed Oct 16, 2019 6:36 pm
|
|
|
Wednesday October 16, 2019 17:03 PDT
WDFW NEWS RELEASE
WDFW officials offer five tips for living with bears this fall
Fall is here, and Washington's black bears are stocking up fat reserves for winter hibernation. Black bears are opportunistic when it comes to finding food and tend to select foods with the highest number of calories, which can bring them into proximity with people.
Officials concede that watching a bear can be an awe-inspiring experience, but warn residents to avoid attracting them to their homes.
"Do everything you can to avoid an encounter with any bear, which help to keep them, and you, out of harm's way," said Rich Beausoleil, WDFW statewide bear and cougar specialist. "Following these simple steps can prevent virtually all black bear and other wildlife issues."
Follow these five tips to avoid negative bear interactions this fall:
1. Always store garbage cans in a garage or sturdy building until collection day. Bears are smart and opportunistic. If a garbage can is left out, they'll find it. So, put garbage out the morning of collection, not the night before.
2. Remove bird feeders (seed and liquid) from porches, trees, and other accessible areas, and feed pets inside. These feeders can inadvertently become easy, high-calorie attractants for bears. If they find it, they may come back, which will begin to pose a problem.
3. Pick and remove fruit from trees, even the highest branches. Bears love fruit and may climb trees to get it, possibly damaging valuable branches. Also remove fallen fruit, which can also pose an accidental lure for bears.
4. Don't intentionally feed bears, deer, elk other wild animals. Bears have great memories, so once they find food, they'll likely return having begun to associate food with people. Anything a deer or elk will eat, a bear will eat too, even near homes. Once bears learn to connect people with food, it starts to puts the bear, and the public, at risk.
5. Don't wait until you have a bear problem. If people wait until a bear is seen, it may be too late to prevent a negative outcome. Taking these steps before a situation occurs is the best way to prevent negative interactions with wildlife.
A bear's natural diet consists of items such as blueberries (256 calories) or huckleberries (166 calories). Access to excessively high calorie foods, such as garbage, birdseed (1,750 calories), and hummingbird feeder fluids (3,200 calories), may delay a bear's natural hibernation patterns. This is another important reason to remove such items.
If you have tried the recommendations listed above and are still experiencing a bear problem please call (360) 903-2936 to report to WDFW enforcement officers. In an emergency, call 911.
People can find more information about how to avoid conflict with bears at wdfw.wa.gov/species-habitats/species/ursus-americanus. Please contact your regional office at wdfw.wa.gov/about/regional-offices if you have questions regarding living with bears.
-WDFW-
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach.
I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
|
Back to top |
|
|
Kim Brown Member
Joined: 13 Jul 2009 Posts: 6900 | TRs | Pics
|
some name wrote: | when I look at Fig. 1 (Area Of Analysis) on pg. 2 of the EIS, and read the text of the EIS document, it seems that the actual planned recovery area is much more and much larger than the NCNP itself, and includes all of the area identified as the North Cascades Ecosystem (NCE). This is the area outlined in black on Fig. 1, and appears to include pretty much all federal land north of I-90, and extending some into BC. Am I reading this correctly? Is the plan to add bears to the NCNP area only? Or is it to restore a significant Grizzly population to the entire NCE? Could someone please clarify this? |
The current project is a resurrection of an older project that was analyzed in the 1980s, and wasn't funded. It is part of an interagency collaboration, from which the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee was formed. The areas targeted are in MT, WA, ID, and WY.
So while the area in WA is indeed more than NCNP, the NCNP was targeted because the suitable habitat is already there, and I suspect, but not sure, that the particular bears that would have the best success can be obtained from like ecosystems (for food, shelter, other habits) and have like biological patterns (breeding, hibernation). When the fisher was reintroduced recently, the same considerations were made for obtaining those animals.
Reintroducing in the entire area targeted is too much to bite off; too expensive, and they're not even sure it's going to work. Chip away at it.
The grizzly recovery plan public Open Houses held about 5 years ago drew large audiences; I think up to 500 people attended the one in Seattle. (I might be wrong about how many hundreds, but I do know that it was in the hundreds).
It's cool that people are still interested; but it is disheartening when there's a lot of interest, and the projects die due to lack of funding. It's sorta turns the public off of participation.
There's another thread on this subject, which might give more information not discussed on this thread.
"..living on the east side of the Sierra world be ideal - except for harsher winters and the chance of apocalyptic fires burning the whole area."
Bosterson, NWHiker's marketing expert
"..living on the east side of the Sierra world be ideal - except for harsher winters and the chance of apocalyptic fires burning the whole area."
Bosterson, NWHiker's marketing expert
|
Back to top |
|
|
bk Member
Joined: 01 Jun 2012 Posts: 266 | TRs | Pics
|
|
bk
Member
|
Wed Oct 23, 2019 8:23 pm
|
|
|
|
Back to top |
|
|
zephyr aka friendly hiker
Joined: 21 Jun 2009 Posts: 3361 | TRs | Pics Location: West Seattle |
|
zephyr
aka friendly hiker
|
Thu Oct 24, 2019 8:41 pm
|
|
|
Bear comments are closing in 3 hours or so. Now's your chance. ~z
|
Back to top |
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Disclosure: As an Amazon Associate NWHikers.net earns from qualifying purchases when you use our link(s).
|