You don't have to outrun the bear...

Help Support CattleToday:

Yes, no place else is there a better example of climate change than Yellowstone. It gets so hot there that the groundwater boils over and spews in the air. I've seen it myself.
 
"Every reasonable scientist, every reasonable arborist, agrees that there is a very tightly knit connection between the availability of food supply and the behavior of these bears," he says.

This is what jumped off the page at me and it drives me nuts. Could be a debate on just about anything and inevitably someone, after stating their case, says "reasonable people agree" or "right-thinking people agree". Of course, this implies that anyone that dares to disagree with them couldn't possibly be a reasonable person. Whether I agree with them or not, I always come to the conclusion that the person that says that is a complete moron.
 
Noticed nothing was said about the large population that is now living there.

wonder what they are going to do about the need for carbon credits for Yellowstone.
 
VanC":2mfz9ovz said:
"Every reasonable scientist, every reasonable arborist, agrees that there is a very tightly knit connection between the availability of food supply and the behavior of these bears," he says.

This is what jumped off the page at me and it drives me nuts. Could be a debate on just about anything and inevitably someone, after stating their case, says "reasonable people agree" or "right-thinking people agree". Of course, this implies that anyone that dares to disagree with them couldn't possibly be a reasonable person. Whether I agree with them or not, I always come to the conclusion that the person that says that is a complete moron.

Van, that hit me too. This sentence has its truth but it in no way validates their claims. These folks are smart with words and twisted logic and the public is well.... dumbed down.

Like ILH points out the numbers of bears is much more as are the numbers of people. Trees dying? Don't think it could be anything to do with the "no touch" rules the Park Service has had in place for so many years and the age of the timber. Things do seem more prone to die with older age. Hey, maybe we need to get a grant and study if there is some correclation between age and death.
 
Jogeephus":n9bcv72g said:
VanC":n9bcv72g said:
"Every reasonable scientist, every reasonable arborist, agrees that there is a very tightly knit connection between the availability of food supply and the behavior of these bears," he says.

This is what jumped off the page at me and it drives me nuts. Could be a debate on just about anything and inevitably someone, after stating their case, says "reasonable people agree" or "right-thinking people agree". Of course, this implies that anyone that dares to disagree with them couldn't possibly be a reasonable person. Whether I agree with them or not, I always come to the conclusion that the person that says that is a complete moron.

Van, that hit me too. This sentence has its truth but it in no way validates their claims. These folks are smart with words and twisted logic and the public is well.... dumbed down.

Like ILH points out the numbers of bears is much more as are the numbers of people. Trees dying? Don't think it could be anything to do with the "no touch" rules the Park Service has had in place for so many years and the age of the timber. Things do seem more prone to die with older age. Hey, maybe we need to get a grant and study if there is some correclation between age and death.

Good points about the numbers being up. Heck, any fool should be able to figure out if you have more bears competing for food, some of them are going to be hungry and are going to start looking elsewhere. Same with the trees dying. I'm no logger, but it seems to me if you don't thin out the timber once in awhile the competition will kill the older trees and stunt the younger ones. Also remember reading that it creates a heckuva fire hazard.
 
Also remember reading that it creates a heckuva fire hazard.

Off the original subject but that's how it worked out here for millions of years. Mother nature just burns it down once in a while.

Incase anyone would like to read something without the freakin NPR slant this is a bit more scientific and less sensational approach to the subject. The key thing to remember is that bears are and always will be omnivorous. The real problem is that they have eaten almost EVERYTHING in the park including the Elk, Moose, and Fish.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/20 ... 083202.htm

One good bear season in Yellowstone would solve a lot of these problems.
 
Gotta remember we have the pine beetle going through and it is killing off HUGE tracts of trees. Drive anywhere in MT and you will see it, including out here on the plains. Guys are losing their wind breaks. We've lost a few trees ourselves.

talked about them recently at a fire council meeting and because the beetle causes the trees to loose their sap they are just punks. Will be hard to burn and will just smolder. they already tried to do a burn on some in the Lewis and Clark Nat. Forest and that is what they found out.
Now all we got is "Widow Makers" because they won't log them.
when a logging plan is set up the enviros go to court to stop it and by the time it gets out of court the trees are not worth the time or effort to harvest them
They have done this with fire killed timber.
biggest argument they use is the soil will erode. Does any way. No vegatation to hold it down after a fire.

On the subject of the bears they are already moving out here onto the plains. Know a guy that lost a sheep to a griz. A lot of ranchers and farmers are unhappy. A boy that is friends with my daughter had one of the griz break into his chicken house and get a couple of his chickens last year. I gotta remember to deliver the 2 I promised him to replace them. FWP didn't even offer to do that.
Talked to his Dad and he was furious. FWP knew that bear was near them and didn't tell them. The boy would go out to feed his chickens by himself. He no longer does.
 
I luv herfrds":2whtib1r said:
Gotta remember we have the pine beetle going through and it is killing off HUGE tracts of trees. Drive anywhere in MT and you will see it, including out here on the plains. Guys are losing their wind breaks. We've lost a few trees ourselves.

talked about them recently at a fire council meeting and because the beetle causes the trees to loose their sap they are just punks. Will be hard to burn and will just smolder. they already tried to do a burn on some in the Lewis and Clark Nat. Forest and that is what they found out.
Now all we got is "Widow Makers" because they won't log them.
when a logging plan is set up the enviros go to court to stop it and by the time it gets out of court the trees are not worth the time or effort to harvest them
They have done this with fire killed timber.
biggest argument they use is the soil will erode. Does any way. No vegatation to hold it down after a fire.

On the subject of the bears they are already moving out here onto the plains. Know a guy that lost a sheep to a griz. A lot of ranchers and farmers are unhappy. A boy that is friends with my daughter had one of the griz break into his chicken house and get a couple of his chickens last year. I gotta remember to deliver the 2 I promised him to replace them. FWP didn't even offer to do that.
Talked to his Dad and he was furious. FWP knew that bear was near them and didn't tell them. The boy would go out to feed his chickens by himself. He no longer does.

Once again it's time to SSS
 
Pines are also shade intolerant species. They do not like the diversity the eco's seem to think they do. Man's intervention with fire protection has altered this very ecosystem they want to protect. Conservationists work with natural laws and mimic and work alongside nature and in so doing benefits are reaped by mankind. Nature hates a vacuum and it will bust the bubble in time. This is the consequences the environmentalists just can't seem to grasp. Their fanatical love of nature is the very thing that will destroy it.

To tell on myself, I wrote an article to this effect years ago that was published by the Sierra Club. It actually changed a few people's mindset yet I'm afraid many people's memories are short lived and too there is little money to be had with this kind of practical thinking unless you actually work to make a real difference instead of spewing rhetoric and collecting donations.
 
Jogeephus":17cgdn4y said:
Pines are also shade intolerant species. They do not like the diversity the eco's seem to think they do. Man's intervention with fire protection has altered this very ecosystem they want to protect. Conservationists work with natural laws and mimic and work alongside nature and in so doing benefits are reaped by mankind. Nature hates a vacuum and it will bust the bubble in time. This is the consequences the environmentalists just can't seem to grasp. Their fanatical love of nature is the very thing that will destroy it.

To tell on myself, I wrote an article to this effect years ago that was published by the Sierra Club. It actually changed a few people's mindset yet I'm afraid many people's memories are short lived and too there is little money to be had with this kind of practical thinking unless you actually work to make a real difference instead of spewing rhetoric and collecting donations.


Well there ya have it in a nutshell!!!!!!!!!!
 
I used to work at a pack station that was located in Sequoia National Park. You could almost tell where the political boudaries were by how healthy the forests and animals were. The bears (and deer) in particular... The park was crawling with them but they never got over about two hundred pounds and looking at them would tempt you to try to get close enough to dump some ivomec down their back. Almost all of them had a tag in their ear indicating that they had caused a problem somewhere(and this was before "global warming") My parents own a cabin within the park and the bears will literally walk onto the porch and move you out of the way to eat your dinner... In the forest, on the other hand, the bears are sleek and fat and you rarely see one. When you do see one they keep a healthy distance.

Another thing that always amazed me was the timber management. The beetles have hit here as well and the park service FINALLY recognized that maybe, just maybe, fire could possibly be a part of natures plan and so now they control burn almost a whole five acres a year and pat themselves on the back while at the same time they put out every natural litning fire that starts in the entire park. :bang:

My personal favorite NPS story came from when I was at the pack station. The head ranger was giving me a citation for not cleaning up some mule poop that had gotten left on the trail(that may or may not have been from one of my animals). As she wrote out the ticket she kindly explained that her job was to make the Mineral King basin exactly the way it was a hundred years ago and as a guest here I needed to leave it as pristene as I found it. I kindly pointed out that a hundred years ago Mineral King was a mining camp with lots of people, lots of horses, lots of hunting, and NO PARK RANGERS. :D
 
cow pollinater":rko8fgvo said:
I used to work at a pack station that was located in Sequoia National Park. You could almost tell where the political boudaries were by how healthy the forests and animals were. The bears (and deer) in particular... The park was crawling with them but they never got over about two hundred pounds and looking at them would tempt you to try to get close enough to dump some ivomec down their back. Almost all of them had a tag in their ear indicating that they had caused a problem somewhere(and this was before "global warming") My parents own a cabin within the park and the bears will literally walk onto the porch and move you out of the way to eat your dinner... In the forest, on the other hand, the bears are sleek and fat and you rarely see one. When you do see one they keep a healthy distance.

Another thing that always amazed me was the timber management. The beetles have hit here as well and the park service FINALLY recognized that maybe, just maybe, fire could possibly be a part of natures plan and so now they control burn almost a whole five acres a year and pat themselves on the back while at the same time they put out every natural litning fire that starts in the entire park. :bang:

My personal favorite NPS story came from when I was at the pack station. The head ranger was giving me a citation for not cleaning up some mule poop that had gotten left on the trail(that may or may not have been from one of my animals). As she wrote out the ticket she kindly explained that her job was to make the Mineral King basin exactly the way it was a hundred years ago and as a guest here I needed to leave it as pristene as I found it. I kindly pointed out that a hundred years ago Mineral King was a mining camp with lots of people, lots of horses, lots of hunting, and NO PARK RANGERS. :D
How big are Mineral King and Silver City now? Last time I was around there each had a population that you could count on one hand.
 
cow pollinater":3irixktc said:
The head ranger was giving me a citation for not cleaning up some mule poop that had gotten left on the trail

:lol: I've never been to Yellowstone, and would like to go there someday. As with any place I get to go on vacation, I like to be treated like the city folk. I have to step in manure everyday, wouldn't want to have to do it for recreation. :lol: :lol:
 
upfrombottom go after the last big holiday of the year. There are enough crazies in that park to drive you insane.
Or go after they plowed the roads, but nothing is "open".
Very few people and you pretty much have the place to youself. I did that one year. This one lady and myself scared each other. Didn't know the other person was there. Best time to hike around Norris.

Yeah Jo. They claim to want to have everything back the way it was over 200 years ago, but in real life that's not going to happen.
Heard about a ranch south of us just outside of a national park. They had selective logging done that cleared out a lot of trees on the boundary line.
Had a huge fire get started and was a running crown fire. It hit that line of thinned out trees on this ranched and dropped from the tops to the ground. They were able to catch it and put it out.
Another scarey deal that came up in the meeting was if there is a fire in the national forest it will take them 2-3 DAYS to log it in and get fire supression going to the scene.
 
cow pollinater":2702grc2 said:
I kindly pointed out that a hundred years ago Mineral King was a mining camp with lots of people, lots of horses, lots of hunting, and NO PARK RANGERS.

:clap: :clap: :clap: :clap: Good job! Some have definitely been promoted to their highest level of incompetence. Long story short. Was on some federal land doing some work. Was a stretch of woods that no one wanted to go into because it was rough as a cob with bushes and brambles over head high but we had to because of contract. Feds told us to watch out for any artifacts and if any were found we'd have to stop work. Fella on crew took a handful of flint he had in his ash tran and tossed it into the area we didn't want to enter. Keep in mind that anyone with half a brain would know that any artifacts would be laying under the six foot of brush and brambles and buried under at least six inches of pine straw and another three inches of root mat and NOT laying on top of this. Anyhow, the area was quarantined and we did not have to go into the area because they were going to excavate it for archaeological data. I can't help but wonder how much money was spent chasing butterflies. :lol2:
 

Latest posts

Top