Forum Index > Trail Talk > North Cascade National Park Grizzley Bear Reintroduction
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Joseph
Joseph



Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Posts: 197 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Joseph
Joseph
PostWed Nov 23, 2022 8:44 pm 
texasbb wrote:
Joseph wrote:
I submit that anyone rational would take their chances with a human, rather than a Grizzly.
I submit that I go to the wilderness to see...wilderness. I'd much rather see bears than people. Yes, there's a risk. It's tiny.
so you'd rather come face to face with a grizzly rather than a human?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Worthington
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jun 2021
Posts: 41 | TRs | Pics
Worthington
Member
PostWed Nov 23, 2022 9:31 pm 
Snowshovel wrote:
http://bearinfo.blogspot.com/?m=1
The GBOP (Grizzly Bear Outreach Project) appears to have last been updated 13 years ago.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Snowshovel
Member
Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2021
Posts: 156 | TRs | Pics
Snowshovel
Member
PostWed Nov 23, 2022 10:01 pm 
Oh no, gb isnít up to date on the gbop

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
RumiDude
Marmota olympus



Joined: 26 Jul 2009
Posts: 3283 | TRs | Pics
Location: Port Angeles
RumiDude
Marmota olympus
PostWed Nov 23, 2022 10:20 pm 
Zloi wrote:
I am curious how many people who advocate for the re-introduction of grizzlies in NCNP would be likely to hike there if they knew it now had a population comparable to certain areas of BC and Alaska?
Well in the first place, they aren't proposing to have a population of grizzly bears comparable to Alaska or BC. And secondly, you are aware that people in Alaska and BC do hike in those areas, and mostly without incident. And thirdly to answer the question, I would be willing to hike in NCNP after grizzly reintroduction. Rumi

"This is my Indian summer ... I'm far more dangerous now, because I don't care at all."

Logbear, graywolf, snowmonkey, Secret Agent Man
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6006 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 7:08 am 
Worthington wrote:
Does this:
gb wrote:
And yet just a few posts above i cited evidence of a large Grizzly about ten years ago that I documented to the worthwhile GBOP. At the same time I e-mailed and PM'ed a couple that likely saw the same bear with 2 cubs (and photographed them) within 5 miles of where I saw the evidence. The fellow from Montana was well aware of the ID of Grizzlies. So:
Quote:
ut then also claim at times, or admit, that there are no Grizzlies
is political hogwash.
Refer to this:
gb wrote:
That is what I was going to say, also. That the Coquialla and Highway 3 act as obvious barriers. Despite that, I saw evidence of a Grizzly Bear in the North Cascades twice about 10 years ago. Wildlife biologists thought that this bear's activity was perhaps a seasonal move from the Manning Park group of bears (personal communication).
If so, what do you mean exactly by "I saw evidence"? What is the GBOP and what exactly was the documentation?
And yet just a few posts above i cited evidence of a large Grizzly about ten years ago that I documented to the worthwhile GBOP. At the same time I e-mailed and PM'ed a couple that likely saw the same bear with 2 cubs (and photographed them) within 5 miles of where I saw the evidence. The fellow from Montana was well aware of the ID of Grizzlies.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6006 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 7:19 am 
Snowshovel wrote:
Ski wrote:
Why is it that WDFW, USFWS, and other wildlife agencies seem to have a propensity for not acknowledging documented sightings of grizzly bears?
Try as they might, camera traps and hair snares have provided nothing. Nobody has gotten a claw print cast or photographed. No grizzly poop either.
One of the two pieces of evidence I saw 4 months after I and 3 others saw the evidence I cited; I found a 14" pile of bearshtick just 5 miles from the initial evidence in an untrailed valley. This is also just 2-4 miles from where the Montana couple photographed the bear Mama and Cubs near their camp. I suggested they submit images in a PM. They apparently did not. Both the evidence we initially saw according to the GPOB wildlife biologist I spoke with, and the guestimate of the Montana fellow indicated a bear of about 650 pounds. This was in 2009. Edit: 2011
Quote:
Thu Jul 07, 2011 12:50 pm Hi Gary, Yah it sounds like there has definitely been some grizzly activity in that area. 650 lbs seems about right for the sow we saw. We also saw a bear print that could have possibly came from the grizz but it didn't register that well. We took a picture but it is really difficult to decipher much from the pic. We reported our siting to the rangers who had me fill out a form for the grizzly researchers. They said we'd most likely receive a phone call from them, but we never did. Exciting stuff.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
gb
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Jul 2010
Posts: 6006 | TRs | Pics
gb
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 7:21 am 
Snowshovel wrote:
Oh no, gb isnít up to date on the gbop
Oh no, Snowshovel isn't up to date on much of anything. Chris Morgan is now with Western Wildlife Outreach. If Snowshove checked his calendar he would understand that 2011 was 11 years ago. Morgan is the individual I spoke with. I think Snowshovel is pretty confused.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Joseph
Joseph



Joined: 13 Jun 2018
Posts: 197 | TRs | Pics
Location: Seattle
Joseph
Joseph
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 9:08 am 
gb wrote:
texasbb wrote:
Joseph wrote:
I submit that anyone rational would take their chances with a human, rather than a Grizzly.
I submit that I go to the wilderness to see...wilderness. I'd much rather see bears than people. Yes, there's a risk. It's tiny.
There is a great deal of evidence of human attacks or abductions in wilderness; not so much of Bears in Washington or BC.
So, not knowing anything else, you'd rather come face to face with a grizzly than a human? That was the question.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Worthington
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jun 2021
Posts: 41 | TRs | Pics
Worthington
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 9:34 am 
gb wrote:
Snowshovel wrote:
Oh no, gb isnít up to date on the gbop
Oh no, Snowshovel isn't up to date on much of anything. Chris Morgan is now with Western Wildlife Outreach. If Snowshove checked his calendar he would understand that 2011 was 11 years ago. Morgan is the individual I spoke with. I think Snowshovel is pretty confused.
Their last GBOP page update was Jan 2010. It's now 1.25 months from being Jan 2023. Technically it was updated 12.9 years ago. Was the Grizzly that you claim to have documented ~11 years ago, the same one that was declared a grizzly and debunked subsequrently? (photographed by ChuckM and FJES6)? It was living in the upper Stehekin watershed, seen along Sahale arm and likely along Rainbow Ridge - further reading. ) If not, where did you see and document it?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Snowshovel
Member
Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2021
Posts: 156 | TRs | Pics
Snowshovel
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 10:15 am 
The link to the Sahale bear is instructive why physical DNA evidence is needed. Anecdotal statements and photos from a distance are too subjective.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
texasbb
Misplaced Texan



Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 1108 | TRs | Pics
Location: Tri-Cities, WA
texasbb
Misplaced Texan
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 11:49 am 
Joseph wrote:
texasbb wrote:
Joseph wrote:
I submit that anyone rational would take their chances with a human, rather than a Grizzly.
I submit that I go to the wilderness to see...wilderness. I'd much rather see bears than people. Yes, there's a risk. It's tiny.
so you'd rather come face to face with a grizzly rather than a human?
False dichotomy. Could be an angry bull moose, a rabid dog, or a 500-lb jet engine falling off an airplane. smile.gif But then, it's a rational decision not to live in fear of unlikely occurrences.

RumiDude
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((į>



Joined: 27 May 2005
Posts: 12254 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((į>
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 8:52 pm 
^ valid point, sir. actually I worry more about getting caught up in a mass shooting than being attacked by a bear. clearly my odds are much better with the bears. up.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."

zimmertr, Waterman
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Worthington
Member
Member


Joined: 23 Jun 2021
Posts: 41 | TRs | Pics
Worthington
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 9:01 pm 
gb wrote:
One of the two pieces of evidence I saw 4 months after I and 3 others saw the evidence I cited; I found a 14" pile of bearshtick just 5 miles from the initial evidence in an untrailed valley. This is also just 2-4 miles from where the Montana couple photographed the bear Mama and Cubs near their camp. I suggested they submit images in a PM. They apparently did not. Both the evidence we initially saw according to the GPOB wildlife biologist I spoke with, and the guestimate of the Montana fellow indicated a bear of about 650 pounds. This was in 2009. Edit: 2011
Is the photo that you claim shows a Grizzly in WA (11 yrs ago) available at any link or could you post it? Are the photographers members of this forum? Any idea why they didn't provide such amazing photos to anyone in the biology or land management worlds?

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Snowshovel
Member
Member


Joined: 05 Apr 2021
Posts: 156 | TRs | Pics
Snowshovel
Member
PostThu Nov 24, 2022 9:43 pm 
From what I can tell, gbís evidence is a pile of poop and an unseen photo. Do I have that right? And the wildlife agencies seem to be less than enthusiastic. Hard to fathom why.

Worthington
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Bruce Albert
Member
Member


Joined: 01 Sep 2007
Posts: 75 | TRs | Pics
Bruce Albert
Member
PostFri Nov 25, 2022 12:41 pm 
Beyond my belief that there is already a Grizzly Bear population, albeit small, in the N. Cascades, maybe someone here can shed some light on my question: Given that nobody hunts grizzlies in WA any more, and given that there is suitable habitat, why don't they (the bears) just naturally reintroduce themselves? It's not like they're lined up waiting for...permission... is it? I'm not seeing where there is a need or benefit for humans to direct and mess up the process, and I point to the experience of the Olympic Mountain Goat as an example of the pitfalls of well-intentioned meddling.

Joseph, Anne Elk, runup
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Trail Talk > North Cascade National Park Grizzley Bear Reintroduction
  Happy Birthday Otter, CampChamp, Wolfman!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

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