As their population expands, some states feel grizzlies should no longer be protected under the Endangered Species Act.
Please LIKE and SUBSCRIBE if you enjoyed it! bit.ly/1Adl6ht
*More info & videos below*
“Grizzly 399: Queen of the Tetons“ premieres May 8, 2024, at 8|7c on PBS and KZhead.
---------------
For full NATURE episodes, check out www.pbs.org/wnet/nature/episod...
Facebook: / pbsnature
Twitter: / pbsnature
TikTok: / pbsnature
Instagram: / pbsnature
-----------------
Nature is a production of The WNET Group for PBS. Throughout its history, Nature has brought the natural world to millions of viewers. The PBS series has been consistently among the most-watched primetime series on public television.
-----------------
As their territory expands into cattle country, local ranchers reassert that grizzlies should be delisted under the Endangered Species Act, which would pave the way for legal hunting of the bears.
-----------------
More videos:
Bee Mating Ritual Caught on Camera - • Bee Mating Ritual Caug...
Bullfrog Dad Protects His Tadpoles - • Bullfrog Dad Protects ...
Leopard Hunts Baboon in Broad Daylight - • Leopard Hunts Baboon i...
Meet the Deadliest Cat on the Planet - • Meet the Deadliest Cat...
Octopus Dreaming - • Octopus Dreaming
FOLLOW PBS:
Facebook: /
Twitter: / pbs
Instagram: / pbs
Shop: www.shop.pbs.org/
Grizzlies used to be all over the Western US. They've barely begun to recover.
Grizzly hunting was banned several years ago in British Columbia, Canada. Don't know if they were endangered or not. The thing is the general public, like 90% don't approve of trophy hunting. While meat hunting is like 80% OK with the public.
If they're not vegetarian themselves, they can't really complain about meat hunting. What's the use of trophy hunting though?
Limit the amount of hunting permits, and make it a raffle. Pay a hefty price, to possibly get selected. I guess it wud be a source of money flow, like how some safaris allow this for their big game. There wud have to be a lot of enforcement of control to make sure these bears continue to recover in numbers. But do they really have enough numbers to be hunted again? Seems risky.
I agree with you. Unfortunately the sad truth is that saving animals often has to be profitable to be impactful. It seems the best route would be going with the model of tag raffles, high cost of tags, and careful selection of what grizzlies are hunted. I personally prefer there would be none, but that's not realistic. As mentioned in the video, parks would lose visitors (and thus money) if more charismatic bears were picked off.
That is exactly what officials are going to do if grizzlies are de-listed. State wildlife agencies would assess the population, then allocate a number of tags that would be sustainable for the population, then they would be drawn in a lottery/raffle system with a probable high price tag. The money from the lottery for tags and associated licenses/equipment/ammunition would go back to the agencies to be be used for research, enforcement, etc.
It's not about conservation, but profit.
Yea, that sucks @@soltcolt4506
@@jonathanhoang6253if the money is used to support the bears more, and went towards making the corridor happen, that'd be nice
Wolves were taken off the list in 2021. And the very next hunting season, 2/3rds of the population in some states were killed. Delisting a predator is way too risky.
Big man using a gun to take down a bear, hunters must feel proud to be able to pull a little trigger
Absolutely gorgeous protection for all animals and their habitats
I side with the wildlife, never the livestock. Conservationists need to create a wildlife corridor between the two parks and populations before they are delisted. If the fauna is unstable, the environment is not healthy for the people.
Regardless of if they are endangered or not, I just don't understand why some people want to hunt those animals, unless they are overpopulated running over our existing habitat. Even in that case, should be controlled managed culling. In the very distant past, our ancestors hunted animals for meat to survive. We don't need the thrill to kill.
The trouble with any and all issues surrounding the removal of the Rocky Mountain Grizzly from the protections of the Endangered Species Act is going to come with the mentality of the people in the region. Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho are all fierce conservative states with their primary economic activity is in farming and ranching. These ware "jobs" that are ultimately land rich and cash poor. The land a guy's ranch is on may be worth a lot, but he cannot trade the value of that land and still reside on that land... not unless the new landowner okays that, and even there, that sort of deal could only be made ONCE. The only way they can make money is selling cattle or sheep to market... and with cattle, that often relies on letting the cattle grow up to maturity so that they weigh more and thus can make more money when sold. And this has been a long and tough process to do. Which was why as these states were settled the settlers launched predator extermination programs. Putting bounties on things like wolves, mountain lions, coyotes, and bears of all species. Any animal that could pose a conceivable threat to livestock was charged to be a threat to human activity and thus worthy of extermination. And many of these settlers also made cases that they could do a better job of managing the deer and elk populations than wildlife could and thus excused the extermination of the predators that way. Other farmers then justified exterminating the herbivores to preserve their grain fields. It's only by the rise of TR at the end of the 1800s and early 1900s that many of these trends were reversed... BUT by that time, it was too late. The wolf was functionally extinct south of the Canadian border in many states, the mountain lion had saw much of its range curtailed, and the grizzly having its range reduced to small and scattered areas, like Yellowstone and Glacier. And the protections were often limited should bears leave the sanctuaries of the parks, because of the recognition of the power and potential danger that a large predator poses. And the fact that the primary economic activity around these parks remained farming and ranching. They weren't going to want a large and active population of grizzlies coming off the parks... Though, for a great deal of time, that wasn't too much of an issue. Mostly because of the fact that since the wolf had been successfully exterminated, the elk and deer population exploded within the parks and the boarding areas, and created a trickledown effect where they were essentially eating themselves out of house and home and got to a point where farmers and ranchers were having to donate hay and alfalfa to tourist organizations that set up spots to take photos of the elk. This essentially gave the grizzlies in Yellowstone a steady supply of winter killed deer and elk that they didn't have to work for... along with the presence of human garbage from campers. All of which shows the ecological damage done by the predator extermination programs... But the beliefs that created those programs NEVER died. People protested when the wolves were brought back to Yellowstone with one rancher saying, "you will have dead children within weeks of this" despite the fact that practically every recorded case of wolf attacks on humans in the US has come with the context that the person had stumbled into an area where the pack had its pups stored, and were thus being defensive... the wolf was starved and desperate... or the wolf was rabid and thus not exhibiting normal behavior due to disease. And the few cases where those situations hadn't been there in North America, the wolves appear to be "wolfdogs," hybrids that lack a fear of man or cases where the wolves were feeding on human garbage and lost the fear of man due to exposure. So, when the Yellowstone wolves began to cut down the coyote population in the park and also beginning to put a dent in the elk population, allowing the park's ecology to return to where it was BEFORE wolves were exterminated, people then protested that the wolves were decimating the tourist industry because people came to the region to see the elk, not the wolves. Which was then used to further the argument that the wolves will deliberately kill all the cattle because they don't know how to manage wild game properly... And with the farmers and ranchers holding that opinion with an animal that maxes out at 175 pounds for largest historic weights (and these coming out of Siberia, thus not the Yellowstone wolves)... they're not going to be more tolerant of an animal that in the Rocky Mountain region can reach around 800 pounds. Thus, to the farmers and ranchers... their belief remains as it was in the 1800s when the predator extermination programs were running. That the appropriate number of large predators that could conceivably pose a threat to livestock is exactly 0. The only predator they'll tolerate in large numbers is the Red Fox, which is too small to even take on a calf, let alone an adult cow.
I'm just here to pick the bear.
Grizzlies must be kept on the endangered list.
Nooooooooooo leave them alone!!!!!! Thats barely a population to withstand the endless amount of male ego hunters in this country!!!!!
Exactly.
Grizzlies are plentiful in Alaska but they are still endangered in Canada and USA.
👏🏽👏🏽👏🏽
Please NO
Some call "controlled" "endangered".
No matter what you write about the bears and the hunters someone will get offended. Seriously though hunters in 2024 we know exactly why they hunt big game to begin with. I'm not talking about people who hunt as their main income but the hunters who do it as entertainment.
🇨🇦 here...are there efforts in place to stop this from happening. I sure hope so...killers for sport will have those beautiful thriving bears back on the endangered list with in a year.
Yea I don't understand it, like just do hunting photography. Requires the same amount of skill, and patience to get that perfect shot except u don't actually kill anything.
@@tracesmith4966 lmao... so they'll start poaching them? Why aren't they just poaching them now then? The reality is (just like wolves) even if they do open a hunting season it won't even put a dent in their population.
Most responsible hunters actually make a significant impact on the PRESERVATION of wildlife. It's the poachers that need to stop all that nasty business
@lostpockets2227 yes...I get that...poaching here in N.W. Ontario Canada has the same problem...but really the only thing endangered up here are some of our fish species. Breaks my heart that people aren't grateful for their league limits...and always have to have more.
When they recover, they have to be de-listed.
No leave all animals alone
As much as I love animals, that simply isn’t realistic right now. Banning trophy and sport hunting would be one thing, but sometimes people need to defend themselves or their livestock
Bear hunting should be banned in North America
I think limited hunting is necessary at this point. Grizzly bears need to be afraid of humans. Limited hunting instills that fear.
Would hunting instill that fear though? Correct me if I’m wrong, but isn’t most hunting of large, potentially dangerous game, done at a distance? The bears might become more cautious of being out in the open, but I don’t think they’d necessarily fear people more. I think allowing people to defend themselves and their livestock/property is fair, but that’s not the same as hunting.
@@Jon-rr7iq Elk migrate into the national parks when hunting season starts. These animals are much smarter than we give them credit. Bears need to know that any encounter with a human could be fatal. So avoid humans.
In alberta they're causing to much trouble already
No