Wasn't that the whole idea of all of the money spent on grizzlies....to get them so they could be delisted? They are hanging around just a few miles out of Cody, Wyoming, that is where that last bunch were removed, 5 or 6 if I remember right.

This delisting move is a politically driven, not a scientifically driven, decision.

Whether there are 600 grizzlies or something less is still debatable. However, even if the numbers are correct, 600 is not sufficient to ensure the long term survival of the bear in the GYE. The GYE is spatially isolated from other bear populations--which -even the so called environmental groups like National Wildlife Federation that support delisting are basing their opinion more on tainability of the grizzly bear, npolitics than on defensible biology. changes the parameter for what is a "safe" population for long term survival.

The criteria for delisting was put together more than 20 years ago. Since that time we have learned a lot more about both grizzly habitat needs, conservation biology issues related to small populations and population dynamics. Most population ecologists belief that a species like the grizzly living in isolation from other "rescue" populations need more than a thousand and perhaps as much as 2000 animals to be viable in the long run.

With a continual erosion of habitat and food sources to subdivisions, oil and gas, and things like white pine blister rust and lake trout displacing Yellowstone cutthroat trout in sprawning streams, the future for grizzlies in the region is anything but bright.

A prudent person would acknowledge this new science as well as the unsolved habitat and food issues, but prudence is not driving this issue. Delisting is political and should be acknowledged as such. The goal of the ESA is to get bears where their long term sustainabily is ensure, not to delist just to be able to claim a success.

The listing was probably politically driven as most listings are. How can you say success in doing what was set out to do is politically driven? Or was the idea to keep them listed permanently so greens could dictate to others how to manage their own property?

We still hunt grizzles/brown bear for meat in Alaska. If the environmental/animal activist waco terrorists want more bears, come to Alaska! Spend your money to ship them south! They are killing all the moose and caribou calves and affecting my ability to eat and put food on my table. Yes we still have a subsistence lifestyle here in Alaska, hunting to feed our families the way our forefathers did before us.

Grizzlies are OK to eat, but a little greasy, I prefer black bears.

You poor soul. You sound like a geninue Alaskan tough guy. I met a lot of them when I lived in Alaska--guys living in Anchorage or Fairbanks or even some village thinking they were born again Daniel Boones and how they were going to starve if they couldn't go out and blow away a moose or caribou. Stop playing around. No one in NA even the most remote Eskimo villages needs to kill to eat any longer. That's a bunch of malarky. People may want to hunt because they like the taste of wild meat or they get enjoyment from being outside, but don't give me that BS about Alaska and subsistance. Even when I lived in Alaska 35 years ago, almost no one was utterly dependent on wild meat for survival. And I know there's far less dependence today.The amount spent on rifles, shells, and the time taken for hunting if you put a value on your time can buy a lot of beans, and other food--even at expensive Alaskan prices--I know because I bought a lot of beans and other staples when I was living in the brush of the Brooks Range years ago. Relatively speaking things are far less expensive today because transportation has improved.

GEO,

I will concede that since the "Big Box" stores came to Anchorage and Fairbanks things have gotten cheaper. Heck I send in for bush orders at Wal-Mart at least twice a year. Anchorage and Fairbanks have grocery stores, but not in the bush. You see that is the biggest problem with the lower 48, they just can't believe, you just can not drive to Nome. Heating fuel in the bush can be as high as $6.50 a gallon, if you can get it at all. How much do you pay? I heat my home with wood and strictly wood. I eat wild meat, its all I feed my family, not the store bought, chemical induced meat.

Yes I do spend money on hunting equipment, but it is a necessity, not a luxury, like many in the lower 48. Were I live you can't go to the local grocery store to get that gallon of milk. When I go to Bethel, a few times a year and by the way, the closest town to me, for which there are no roads, milk is over $7 a gallon.

I survive on subsistence and the ability to kill that moose or caribou, grow my own veggies, gather berries are all a real fact of life to feed my family. I don't kill for trophies, I kill for food and I don't claim to be a Daniel Boone, who by the way couldn't survive in the Alaskan bush because he was a puss.

Can I get beef in Bethel, you bet, for a hefty price, but why? A good moose steak beats the best beef steak any day of the week.

We Alaskans are an independent, hearty bunch. We take offense to all those in the lower 48 who want to turn Alaska into their own National Park. Those who believe that we Alaskan need to live like them in the lower 48, can turn around and stay in the lower 48, you are not welcome here. There’s a real, genuine reason why Alaska only has 650,000 folks, no one else has enough balls to live here! I have seen them come and go from the lower 48 and many more return to their comfortable, not too far from the mall type of life.

Now Geo, if you really lived in Alaska 35 years ago you would understand this. Alaska is the ONLY true last wild new or old west. The Rockies aren’t wild anymore, except for British Columbia. There is no place in Montana, Colorado or New Mexico that doesn’t have some sort of road attached to it. The only place I have seen that is anything close to being wild is Wyoming. We Alaskans still have a say in our State government, unlike many in the lower 48. Alaska is an ownership State.

So don’t sit there in your nice suburban surroundings claiming to know what Alaska is all about……Remember you left and couldn’t make it here.

You're not so far in the brush that you don't have email. That's what I mean--no one is that isolated any more. When I first went to the Brooks Range, there was only a plane a week coming to the nearest village--but by the 1980s there might be three flights a day to Fairbanks. No place in the bush is that isolated any more.

I spent 20 years in Alaska--nearly all that time in the bush, so know something about it. I've lived near or in Bettles, Tok, Kiana, and other villages. I left in part because I got tire of all of the new comers who wanted to make it like every place else--always arguing for more roads, more pipelines, more oil development, and so forth. People talk about how wild Alaska is, but do everything they can destroy the wild--including its predators.

I also got sick of the people who want to blame wolves and grizzlies for their own inability to hunt. I am a former hunting guide and I hunted when I lived in Alaska and shot my share of caribou, sheep, etc. and still hunt--and hunt with both grizzlies and wolves--and in my experience the only people who don't get their meat are either incompetent hunters or lazy ones.

The wonderful world of generators and satellite communications.

Alaska is a growing place that is true. I would like to see it grow a little more. I am for resource development so long as it is done in a safe manner. I think the State of Alaska should start building a new road from Fairbanks to Nome and somewhere in between take a left turn and continue it down to Dillingham.

I would also agree with your comment about lazy hunters, they road hunt or sit on top of their RV. Alaska has changed a lot since 1975 when I moved here. I have also seen more environment/animal activist waco terrorists move in from the lower 48 too, like the Sierra club, PETA, friends of animals etc.

However, I am for predator control to increase populations of caribou and moose. In the McGrath area, there was a 100% calf kill last year, mostly because of a huge wolf pack and big population of bears. It is a scientific fact that predator control works. This year the State of Alaska is allocating the control program for 150 wolves. However, if the environmental/Animal activist waco terrorist wants to save the wolves, I am sure that Alaska Dep't of Fish and Game will allow them to relocate these wolves, but AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE.

But then again, they want us to spend our own money for their programs.

Thomas quote:"But then again, they want us to spend our own money for their programs."


Bingo, you just summed up the environmental movement, they want to take over control of our land and property, and they want us to pay for it out of our pockets! Talk about greed.