Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire Buffalo, Grizzlys, and wolves why not in other Nat'l parks?

I fully understand why the majority of members on these forums would not wish these species to be introduced into other national parks, but why isn't there more of a clamor by the greenies and bunny-huggers for re-introduction?

Is it a case of not in our backyard?

Thinking of Rocky Mountain Nat'l Park, I'd especially like to hear the opnions of those who live in Colorado.

I'd think those folks who supported the re-introduction of the wolves, are against the de-listing of grizzlys, and the hunting and hazing of buffalo around Y-stone would want these species re-introduced to their parks too so they could go to sleep listening to the howl of the wolves and the sounds of grizzlys sniffing around their tents. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" />

I'd sure like to see some of these varmints in Minnesota. We have wolves but free roaming Bison, and grizzly bears would be great. I'm sure a few folks would get mangled along and along but it would still be a hoot.

I sure donate a heap of money to that. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/laugh.gif" alt="" />

The Colorado Wildlife Commission currently has a wolf management plan in the works. The smart money is on wolves wandering in from nearby states and starting independant populations, and Colorado wants to be ready.

The Grizzly is listed as "endangered" in Colorado, but is more likely extirpated. The Commission is on record as "against" any re-introduction unless they are swept up in a federal program or the Colorado citizenry desire more Griz. Neither is likely to happen.

Would be fine, if they taught the wolves where the park boundaries were, and the wolves obeyed them. They already have more breeding pairs in Yellowstone than they said they would permit, and no one is talikng about reducing them. I'm all for regulations of grazing permits on public land, but the ranchers in the surrounding areas are tied up, if the wolves decied they want prime rib on the ranchers own property. As for grizzlies, I don't think you will ever see them reintroduced in Coloardo. Outdoor recreation is too big a money and too many groups would successfully stop it.

I'm surprised the DNR in WI hasn't actually done this here. They'd be fully protected, of course, against any human danger. I recently found out that rattlesnakes are actually PROTECTED here...

Geez...... Like there's a shortage...... What a bunch of idiots..

I'm all for grizz and wolves in Central Park ... (Nu-York Cidy)

S.B.

I'd be all for it in the state capitol(building). Lock the doors and see how many "20 mph at all times especially 12:00AM-7:00AM because thats when a patrol car is sitting at each end school zone law" gets passed. <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/wink.gif" alt="" />

I heard a while back that theres a draft plan in the works to re-introduce wolves to Oregon,was to be completed this month but I haven't read it yet.

I think it is more than just a little hypocritical for environmentalists (read bunny-huggers) to file lawsuits, protest, and generally raise hell because they want one or all of these species in one place (and protected) but not anywhere near where they live.

Yes, yes, I know, there are some in Jackson and Bozeman etc., etc. that support the protection of these species but most of them are living elsewhere.

There are few forms of life more self-centered than Greenies, one of which is the Liberal. Since the vast majority of Greenies are liberal, we can hope they all become gay and de-breed themselves out of existence.

The reason there isn't more of a clamor is because of several things.
One, the Greens are already fighting tooth and nail against the affected locals in Montana, Wyoming, Wisconsin, Minnesota, whatever.
Two, politics is incremental. You can bet that once the issue is "settled" permanently and in favor of the enviro position (I'd like to say IF, but the Green Machine is a 1.5 billion dollar a year single-issue political juggernaut) then those resources freed up will be applied elsewhere. Like in Oregon. Maine. Rural California.
Further along the line of incrementalism is how enviros never really say what they want in a "compromise" -- just like the Brady Bunch -- but once the compromise is made, THEN the goalposts get moved.

I've long advocated we utilize Alaska Air National Guard for a few night missions over Kalifornia. Hell, we'd even put parachutes on them wolf crates! <img src="/ubbthreads/images/graemlins/smile.gif" alt="" />

call me stupid but if the wolf or other critter is "introduced" what is to stop the locals, when normally out working their land from shooting said "new critters"? and suddenly there are no more new critters....


I'd think nothing, they just follow the three S's, shoot, shovel, shut up....

Great job of sterotyping California. I think there are ass holes in every state, including your beloved Alaska.

In Calif. the looney ass hls run the state.

Conrad