Monday, August 14, 2017

A Volatile Brew of Plausible Deniability

It's 2017. Are we seriously anxiously awaiting for the so-called president of the United States to denounce white supremacy, and act relieved when or if he actually does?

"They're thugs," he says.

They're not thugs. They're not hoodlums. They're not hooligans. They're fucking racists. Terrorists! They think they're better than others because of the color of their skin, and they use bullying, threats, intimidation, fear and violence in an attempt to subdue and control others.

They think they're better than others because, in large part, the GOP leadership, for years, has told them they're better than others. They tell them that minorities hate them. They tell them that non-whites are all on welfare and living off their hard-earned tax dollars. They tell them that non-whites rape, rob and kill. They tell them that non-whites are sneaking across our borders and taking their jobs. They tell them that non-whites are turning their religious beliefs into law and supplanting U.S. law. They tell them that those who don't believe them hate America and are part of the problem. They tell them they need guns, lots and lots of guns, to defend themselves and America. They tell them all this and more, lots more, to feed, instill and incite fear, anger, hate and win votes.

In the meantime it is they, the GOP leadership, taking their money and health care and jobs and brain matter and souls to increase wealth and power for a relatively small percentage of elitists.

And people believe them. People fucking believe them! People who think they are superior to others do not have the brain power of critical thinking to see the obvious; to see what's right in front of their noses. They could be drowning in the hot floods of climate change and if the GOP leadership tells them it's the fault of non-whites and gays and liberals and refugees and only they, only the GOP leadership, the only real Americans, can throw them a lifeline  . . . they actually fucking believe it!

And so they flood to the polls and vote Republican. They wave American flags and evoke the name of Jesus while ranting against refugees, the poor, the sick, the libtards, the snowflakes, the non-whites . . . the 'others'.  They want to make America great again.

This volatile mix of frustration, confusion, ignorance, half-truths, lies and, yes, stupidity boils over to anger, rage, hate and violence. Some now wave Confederate flags, and Gadsten "Don't Tread on Me" flags and Nazi flags. Nazi flags! In the United States of America.

Some drive their cars into hordes of peaceful protesters.

Thugs?

These people think they're true Americans. The only Americans. Patriots! And they're dangerously dumb enough to think they're superior.

It's a recipe for insanity, and GOP leaders are the master brewers, adding a potent dose of plausible deniability, while continually feeding the monsters of their creation growing out of control.

They call these monsters "Thugs." 

Saturday, July 29, 2017

Extremely Extreme Huntress: Get Out of Bed and Get Some!

Extreme Huntress Kristi Puts the Hammer on a Coyote 
Backcountry Hunters and Anglers has organized a "get in shape for hunting with fellow hunters hike" up to the "M" on Mount Sentinel in Missoula, Montana, early Monday and Tuesday mornings ("Hunting season's just around the corner . . . so get out of bed and get some!"). You don't want to miss it, I am told, because Kristy Titus will be on the hike!

Not wanting to miss anything big, and not knowing who Kristy is, I looked her up.

Kristy is an "Extreme Huntress" who apparently wears a lot of make-up while traveling the world and sometimes paying guides to help her kill a variety of animals for profit, entertainment and amusement. She represents the wolf-hating Rocky Mountain Elk Foundation as part of "Team Elk," and hosts "NRA Women" while appearing on a variety of hunting shows (including "Pursue the Wild") to promote and defend our "hunting heritage," which nowadays seems to mean supporting an industry of high-tech gadgets as well as policies that diminish our wildlife and wild places while waving a "conservation" flag, quoting Aldo Leopold and pretending to be Theodore Roosevelt.

"Stand and fight with NRA!" she says. . . you know, the gun-industry's public relations firm and branch of the GOP that helps fund the American Legislative Exchange Council (ALEC) -- which is leading the push to sell our public lands -- as well as backing politicians who deny climate change and other science, and want to gut the Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, the Endangered Species Act, the Environmental Protection Agency and other laws, regulations and agencies that protect the wildlife and wild places we claim to cherish -- all so we can focus on the more important, bogus, fear-mongering claims of fictitious boogeymen (and boogeywomen) who are surely going to take all of our guns away . . . one of these days . . . you'll see! 

But hey, she extremely pursues extremely dangerous game in extremely rugged, extremely dangerous, extreme places while looking extremely good, just like all the famous macho-men hunting heroes who kill for profit, amusement and entertainment. That's pretty extremely cool, dude . . . right? 

In one of her "Out West with Kristy Titus" live-blog videos -- sponsored by RealTree, Swarovski Optik, RMEF Team Elk, Trophy-Taker, Cabela's and "Always Lethal" Under Armour -- she shares tips from the Titus family ("excellent sources of information for coyote and bobcat hunting") on killing predators. As a bonus, she puts "the hammer" on a coyote so we can all watch the animal die as many times as we want in regular and slow motion.

In another of her shows she shoots and wounds a bear from 450 yards. Then she shoots and wounds it some more from 300 yards. The bear retreats to its den where she eventually kills it. You can watch this extremely exciting, extremely daring, extreme "hunt" right from the comfort of your recliner while eating chips and drinking beer. (I recommend a RealTree camouflage chair and Busch special hunting-season beer in camouflage cans.)

Perhaps we can soon watch Kristy, Randy Newburg, Steven Rinella and other extremely rugged, extremely fearless and extremely amazing backcountry hunting entertainers share their extreme grizzly-killing tips while putting the extreme hammer, and the big extreme kibosh, on an extremely rugged, extremely deadly, extremely dangerous extreme Montana griz hunt! Stay tuned (and be sure to have extra chips and cammo beer on hand).

Commercial Message: In the meantime, be sure to head to Cabela's and get Kristy's "Pursue The Wild" elk call line by Rocky Mountain Hunting Calls -- The "Wild Frenzy Bugle," "Wild Fury Diaphragm" and "Ignite-Her-Wild" external reed cow calls, available now! (I hear rumors there's a new one coming out: "The Whining Crying Baby Calf Calling For Mommy Which Infuriates the Huge Bully Bull Who Will Come Running In Fast -- Whether He wants to or Not -- Diaphragm Elk Call Extreme!")

Hunting season's just around the corner: Get out of bed and get some!  

Monday, May 29, 2017

Freedom is Freedom: Practice it. Enjoy It. Respect it.

Late one dark August night in 1983, at Camp Lejeune,  North Carolina, I sat in an old concrete bunker on Onslow Beach with my friend and fellow Marine Michael Sauls, sharing a bottle of Jack Daniels and listening to the rhythm of crashing waves from the Atlantic.

We’d gone through boot camp together at Parris Island and Infantry Training School at Camp Geiger. We both excelled and were invited to compete, along with dozens of others, for three available slots in Force Recon. I came in third place and went to Force; Michael came in a close fourth and went to Recon Battalion -- but only because he sprained his ankle on an obstacle course. He held a grudge against me for awhile. I was where he should have been, and he was where I would have been.

It was a strange twist of fate that occasionally haunts me to this day.

On that particular summer night I was jealous; he and his unit were readying to ship out, somewhere far across the vast, dark ocean in front of us. Training was over, and it was time to put it all to the test.

We talked a lot that night, about anticipation, fear, excitement, war and what separates good warriors from bad. We also talked about fishing. I told him about a photo I had of my dad fishing off this very beach, in the 1940s, when the base was known simply as “Tent City,” before he shipped off to fight on Saipan, Tinian, Okinawa and Iwo Jima.
 Now it was our turn. Well . . . at least his turn. At some point, when the bottle of Jack went from half-full to half-empty and beyond, we talked about patriotism.

“Everyone should have to recite the Pledge of Allegiance every morning,” I said.
“I don’t think so,” Michael replied.

It surprised me, and irritated me a bit.

“Freedom is freedom,” he said. “People should do whatever they want if it doesn’t hurt anyone else. Nobody should be forced to do what they don’t want to do, just because others think they should. I believe in freedom. That’s why I’m a Marine.”

Two months later Michael Sauls was killed when two separate suicide bombers – part of a group calling themselves “Islamic Jihad” – drove trucks full of explosives into the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon.
 He was among 220 Marines (241 American servicemen)  who died that day.

I thought of Michael a few days ago when I saw a meme on a USMC Force Recon Association Facebook Page depicting a photo of actor R. Lee Ermey looking angry and threatening, playing the role of fictitious Marine Drill Instructor Gunnery Sergeant Hartman in the movie “Full Metal Jacket.” The fictitious caption, attributed to the fictitious Gunny Hartman, reads: “THE NATIONAL ANTHEM: When it plays you get off your ass, put your hand over your heart, remove your headgear, and render the proper respect!”

“HELL YEAH!!! OOORAH!!” wrote the person who posted it.
“Damn straight!” responded another.
“Bullshit!” I responded.


“I served in Force Recon to help protect the American ideals of freedom and liberty for all, including freedom of choice,” I wrote. “If someone doesn't want to stand for the national anthem, that's their choice. In a free country, they should not be compelled to do so -- not even by an actor who pretended to be a DI in a movie. I support and will defend with my life such freedom.

A fellow Marine dared me to say such a thing at the next Force Recon Reunion, “and see how fast you get your ass kicked!”
  He called me a “traitor,” and questioned if I were truly a Force Recon Marine. He said my friends who died – including Michael Sauls – “are rolling over in their graves.”

It’s an attitude growing dangerously prevalent in our society. People love “freedom” as long as you think and act just like they do. If you don’t, you can’t truly be a real Marine, or a real American, or a real patriot.
 It seems those who most adamantly defend the Constitution, the principles of our Founders, and the American way know and understand the least about it.  Some people seem to think they have a monopoly on patriotism. Those who don't agree with them "hate America,” they say. “Love it or leave it!”

How about this one?
I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

The fellow Force Recon Marine who called me a “traitor” asked me: “
What would make you post this unpatriotic crap on this weekend especially?

Personally, I don’t think freedom is unpatriotic. Neither did my friend Michael Sauls.

Wave the flag, visit veteran cemeteries, decorate the graves of heroes, hit the Memorial Day sales, cook up some hot dogs, stand for the National Anthem and recite the Pledge of Allegiance. If you want. Or not. That’s up to you. But remember this – those who died for this nation died because they believed in freedom. Practice it. Enjoy it. Respect it.


“Freedom is freedom,” Michael said. “People should do whatever they want if it doesn’t hurt anyone else. Nobody should be forced to do what they don’t want to do, just because others think they should. I believe in freedom. That’s why I’m a Marine.”

Tuesday, April 11, 2017

Stop Persecuting our Fellow Predators


Everything we hunters love about elk – their speed, wariness, agility, intelligence – was shaped and honed through thousands of years of coevolution with wolves, bears, mountain lions and coyotes. Predators helped make elk what they are, and predators help keep elk what they are.  In the wilds, everything is intimately connected; the health of the whole depends on every part. When I merge into the wilds to hunt, I feel part of the whole -- not merely a visitor to the wilds, but a participant; a predator.

I love wild elk meat, but also see myself as a vegetarian of sorts -- living off the wild grasses, sedges and forbs that grow near my home in western Montana. Most of these plants are not palatable to humans, so I let elk convert them to protein for me. Perhaps someday I will travel through the digestive system of a grizzly and fertilize the vegetation that elk eat: Seems only fair considering all the elk I've killed and eaten. We’re all connected.

Unfortunately, many hunters don’t see it this way. They show disdain and disrespect for our fellow predators. They see them as “competitors” killing and eating what they arrogantly and selfishly think is “theirs” instead of trying to understand the vital, ecological role they play in shaping and maintaining what they claim to love. Nowhere is this more apparent than in the ongoing war on wolves.
 

Idaho Fish and Game recently hired a paid bounty hunter to eliminate two wolf packs in a wilderness. Idaho hunters have organized wolf-killing competitions and co-ops to pay trappers to kill wolves. The state legislature and governor declared wolves a "disaster emergency" and allocated $2 million to killing wolves. More recently Idaho Fish and Game conducted secretive aerial shootings of wolves from helicopters without public knowledge or input; they spent $30,000 to kill 23 wolves. Idaho Fish and Game is doing this and more in an ongoing effort to appease hunters to protect livestock and maintain artificially high and unhealthy numbers of elk for hunters to shoot.


Elk populations are increasing in most of the West. State wildlife departments are expanding elk hunting to reduce elk populations while simultaneously killing wolves under the guise of protecting and boosting elk numbers. Where elk populations do appear on the decline there are plenty of factors to consider in addition to wolves: Changes in habitat; a natural reduction in numbers where, prior to the return of wolves,  populations were artificially high; lack of mature bulls and low bull-to-cow ratios in herds (often resulting from early season hunting and too much hunting pressure on bull elk) which influences the timing of the rut and breeding behavior, the timing of spring calving influencing increased vulnerability of elk calves to predation; influence of other predators including mountain lions, black bears and grizzlies; unanticipated impacts of various hunting regulations and hunting pressure, and changes in behavior and habitat use by elk in the presence of wolves.

Where I hunt, the growing presence of wolves has changed the behavior and habits of elk. Elk bunch up more for safety, and move around more to evade and avoid wolves. They are a lot more wary. I have adapted and adjusted to these changes and have no problem finding elk. This is part of the beauty and value of hunting within wilderness -- to adjust, adapt and be part of the landscape; to be, as my friend David Petersen put it, part of the "bedrock workings of nature." We render the wilds a diminished abstract when we alter it to suit our own needs and desires and, in the process, make it less healthy and whole. There are those who espouse the virtues of backcountry hunting and yet seem apathetic or supportive towards the destruction of backcountry integrity. Those who understand the wilds know how critically important predators are to the health of the land. To remain silent about the nonscientific, politically-based killing of wolves in the wildest of places is to be complacent towards the degradation of what we claim to cherish.

One of the cornerstones of our North American Model of Wildlife Conservation is that wildlife be managed based on good science.  That good science shows the return of wolves to much of the western United States has resulted in significant, long-term benefits to wildlife and the habitat that sustains them -- including the species we love to hunt.


Predators are rarely managed based on science or for the benefit of predators and healthy ecosystems. They’re rarely managed in accordance of what most Americans accept. Hunters and anglers pay the bills through licenses and excise taxes on hunting and fishing gear and (along with governor-appointed commissioners) have lopsided power and influence over how wildlife is managed. Thus, wildlife management often leans more towards animal husbandry – producing more to catch and shoot sometimes to the detriment of other wildlife. Predators get a bad deal.

A recent report about the flaws of the North American Model summed it up this way:
"The scientists also express concern that the interests of recreational hunters sometimes conflict with conservation principles. For example, they say, wildlife management conducted in the interest of hunters can lead to an overabundance of animals that people like to hunt, such as deer, and the extermination of predators that also provide a vital balance to the ecosystem."


More than half a century ago Leopold wrote: "I personally believed, at least in 1914 when predator control began, that there could not be too much horned game, and that the extirpation of predators was a reasonable price to pay for better big game hunting. Some of us have learned since the tragic error of such a view, and acknowledged our mistake."

We still haven't caught up to Leopold.

Monday, April 3, 2017

Fired (Farewell MWF)

The Montana Wildlife Federation (MWF) has had a huge influence on my life. I strongly believed in their values, mission and goals. It has shaped my thoughts, beliefs and actions ever since I left the Marine Corps and moved to Montana in 1985. I used to volunteer for the organization. I helped lead the organization. I served two terms as the organization's president. I helped lead the organization's efforts to ban game farms in Montana. I received the organization's Les Pengelly Professional Conservationist Award. Many of the good folks involved in the organization are like family to me. (See Preserving a Tradition.) More recently, I worked for the organization as their western Montana field representative.

I was fired.

I did the best I could. I strengthened relations with affiliate clubs; I revived an affiliate club; I was in the process of getting a new affiliate up and running; I helped advance protection of the Badger-Two Medicine area; I helped create awareness and support for the Blackfoot Clearwater Stewardship Act; I rallied hunters and anglers to comment on the draft revisions of the Helena-Lewis and Clark Forest Plan; I generated OpEds and letters-to-the editors advancing our mission and goals; I developed and strengthened relationships with partners and members; I wrote numerous articles and essays for MWF's newsletter and blog; I represented MWF at fairs, brewery events, film festivals and sportsmen shows, and I helped advance the mission, goals and objectives of an organization I have long been part of, and been passionate about, in an honest, credible, professional manner. I put in long hours and I worked hard. Affiliate leaders, partners and members seemed happy with my work. 

When I received my 6-month evaluation and workplan review, my boss, the executive director, made valuable suggestions on how I could improve, but said I was doing a good job. I followed through on his suggestions. By all indications, he was pleased with me and my work.

I first sensed a change when I posted an article regarding ballot initiatives on my own time and on my own personal blog. This was while the Montana “trapping” initiative I-177 was up for a vote, which would have banned recreational trapping on public lands. I was careful not to take a stance on the issue in that personal essay, but rather discussed how – through poor behavior, denial of science, and ignoring and even often ridiculing other citizens who should have a say in how public lands and wildlife are managed – we can sometimes bring these initiatives upon ourselves. It resonated with a lot of people, including fellow hunters. It did not contradict MWF policy, but I could understand how it could be perceived that way. We almost lost an affiliate because one of their leaders was upset. Understandably, my boss was not happy. He told me to immediately remove the blog and sign a note stating I would not write or post such things again. I understood, admitted to a lack of judgement, signed the note and thought all was good.  I even patched things up with the disgruntled affiliate and its leaders.

A month or so later, the boss became upset about a photograph I posted on my own, personal Facebook Page of me with a blackeye. He claimed that a “funder” had complained about the photo and said it portrayed a “negative” image of MWF and could hurt MWF’s ability to accomplish its mission and goals. I told him I would be more careful in what I post on my personal page and blog, and I was.

At this point, I believe it became personal for the boss; he simply did not like me. It no longer had anything to do with my performance. His entire attitude towards, and treatment of me became akward and uncomfortable.

Then I missed some conference calls for legitimate reasons (on the road and out of cell range; in the hospital with my son) with our partner organizations in regards to the Blackfoot Clearwater Stewardship Act and the Upper Blackfoot Campaign. One of the partners was upset with me, so I met with him and worked things out. I agreed to a list of tasks he wanted me to accomplish. It was a good, honest, airing of grievances of which I was not previously fully aware of, and served to clarify my role and what I needed to do.  Our partners seemed fine with our resolution; the boss was not. He had me sign another note outlining specific goals and expectations. One of those was to not miss any more conference calls.  I took it very seriously. I posted it over my desk and read it every morning. I did my best to meet all goals and expectations – although I felt like the boss was setting the stage to fire me and waiting for me to fail.

A few weeks ago, I asked the boss if I could take some time off to go on a spring-break road trip with my son. I assured him I would be on all scheduled conference calls. He gave me the go-ahead. We were in East Glacier on the day of one of the conference calls. Cell coverage in East Glacier is iffy, so my plan was to drive atop a hill between East Glacier and Browning where coverage is usually strong and where I have parked and participated in conference calls before, while working on the Badger-Two.  Cory and I drove to the spot. Unfortunately, a storm had blown in and I kept getting cut off the call, and missed the conference call. I drove to Browning and sent an apology to our partners and explained what happened. They seemed fine. In fact, one partner wrote back: “No worries, enjoy your break.”

I explained the situation to my boss. His response: “If you really wanted to be on the call you would have been on the call.” (Apparently, he’s never been between East Glacier and Browning during a storm.)

He fired me.

That’s my story. I have talked to a lawyer about a possible “wrongful discharge” suit. We’ll see. I have mixed emotions; it’s a tough thing to prove, and I still strongly support the mission, goals and objective of MWF.  However, I doubt I will be actively involved anymore unless the current executive director leaves.  He's an arrogant, bureaucratic number-cruncher who cares more about perception, image and money than wildlife and wild places. His every move is dictated by the foundations he's good at soliciting money from.

It may be a good thing. I’m a stubborn, passionate, opinionated guy and my views on a few things – such as wolves, grizzlies and trapping – are not always in-line with MWF (and therein lies the likely roots of it all). I am already enjoying my freedom to once-again write about those issues. I’m going to make a go of writing and photography and see what happens; it’s more suited to me and my wild ways.  

Friday, March 31, 2017

Grizzlies: A Renewable Resource?

I just read an article in Petersen's Hunting called "Should We Hunt Grizzly Bears?" by David Hart. He quotes Mac Minard, Executive Director of the Montana Outfitter and Guide Association: "They should be hunted because they are a renewable resource."

A "renewable resource"?

Grizzly bears? Rugs? Claws?

A commodity?

"We abuse land because we regard it as a commodity belonging to us. When we see land as a community to which we belong, we may begin to use it with love and respect." -- Aldo Leopold

Grizzly bears . . . a "renewable resource"?

There's no love and respect in that.


Thursday, March 30, 2017

We Don't Need to Hunt Grizzlies (Nor Should We)

Photo from a hunting-guide service called the "Grizzinator."
"Nothing good will ever come from killing a grizzly bear. Much good can come from respecting its right to continue to roam the land.” – Phil Timpany

Many hunters and wildlife professionals say we need to hunt grizzlies to “manage” them, and that grizzly hunting-tag revenue is needed to pay for the management. I don’t buy it. 

We should manage bears like bears, not deer and elk. Deer and elk evolved as prey; they produce high numbers of fawns and calves because they feed a lot of animals above them on the food chain, including many of us humans who hunt. Grizzlies evolved as predators; they don’t produce a lot of cubs. Their populations are tenuously self-regulating (something we should learn from them). We should manage them accordingly.

We should manage grizzlies in a manner best for the bears; we should manage them based on science, ethics and social desires; we should manage them to allow for the space they need and deserve; we should manage them by improving people's knowledge of grizzlies and how to best prevent conflicts; we should manage them by allowing them the benefit of the doubt and erring on the side of caution; we should manage them by giving "troubled" bears every chance we can, and we should manage them by occasionally (as a last resort), killing certain individual bears if they become a socially unacceptable danger.

Who will pay for this? The American people should, all of us, because a huge majority of Americans want, support and appreciate that we still have wild grizzlies and the wild places to sustain them. Most Americans are fascinated with grizzlies, a fascination that has existed since humans drew pictures of them on rocks. Grizzlies are different. Myth, fear, awe, reality, science . . . all of it and more always has and always will influence the powerful mystique and perception of grizzlies.

For a long time we killed them. We killed them to near extinction. (Some subspecies are extinct, existing now only in our imaginations or places like the California flag.) I assume most Americans agreed with such a policy, until leaders like Theodore Roosevelt came along. We’ve winnowed them down to a tiny fraction of the once-immense territory they historically roamed. I suspect all people with empathy and compassion in their hearts are saddened by this. They should be. I am.

Most Americans respect grizzlies. Most Americans will not accept or tolerate the killing of grizzlies for trophies, amusement and ego. Most Americans feel disgusted to see hunters proudly standing over dead bodies of a once-powerful living presence they killed for no legitimate, no acceptable justification. I’m one of those Americans, and I’m a hunter. 

When I kill an elk or deer, I feel grateful, humbled and saddened but happy to be part of the wilds -- to kill my own meat in a respectful, ethical, sustainable way. Nonhunters I know understand and support that. They accept hunters killing deer and elk to fill freezers; they don’t accept hunters killing grizzlies to fill egos.

We should not manage grizzlies to boost numbers of prey species so we have more to kill. (I’ve heard fellow hunters say that we need to kill elk and deer to keep populations in check, but we need to kill predators to boost the number of animals we need to kill to keep their numbers down.) We should not kill grizzlies to raise money to protect them.

That is not wildlife management based on good, sound science or social acceptability.

Predators are rarely managed based on sound science or for the benefit of predators and healthy, functioning ecosystems. They’re rarely managed in accordance of what a majority of Americans accept. Hunters and anglers pay the bills through licenses and excise taxes on hunting and fishing gear and (along with governor-appointed commissioners) have lopsided power and influence over how wildlife is managed. As a result, wildlife management often leans more towards animal husbandry – producing more to catch and shoot sometimes to the detriment of other wildlife. Predators usually get a bad deal.

We’re stuck in a wildlife-management paradigm that attempts to justify indefensible death; it’s time for change.

All Americans should help pay for and influence how wildlife is managed. We don’t need to sell grizzly-tags to fund the management of grizzlies. Let’s get an excise tax on all outdoor gear – not just hunting and fishing equipment. Let’s create a license for nonhunters who want to buy one. Let’s create a grizzly stamp to sell and raise money much like we do with duck stamps. Let’s try something different. Let’s take some power and influence from those who wrongly insist we need to hunt grizzlies. 

Grizzlies face enough uncertainty with impacts from human encroachment, habitat loss and degradation, and climate change. Warmer temperatures, less snow, earlier snowmelt and more drought has already caused a decline in white-bark pine nuts, berries and other bear food. To err on the side of caution we should not even be considering delisting grizzlies from federal endangered species status and turning management over states eager to kill them. Not yet. But if we do, we don’t need to hunt them.

There is no biologically or social justification to hunt grizzlies. We should manage them with the respect and reverence they deserve.