Vancouver resident Jim McConnell offers a response to the National Park Service planning to reintroduce grizzly bears in the North Cascades

Editor’s note: Opinions expressed in this letter to the editor are those of the author alone and do not reflect the editorial position of ClarkCountyToday.com

Thank you for allowing comments from the public. What is the purpose of the National Park System? If it is to provide enjoyment, education, and inspiration for American citizens and future generations, why would we want to introduce predatory animals who would endanger citizens and future generations? Grizzlies are dangerous. Is the National Park System trying to go against its purpose and force people to stay away from our national park lands?

This has some similarities to the idea of bringing in more mosquitoes to areas so they can bite humans and other animals to infect them with deadly viruses. Mosquitoes kill more people each year than any other animal. Just because we have been able to remove them from an area to make it safer for people and other animals, does not mean we should now reintroduce them to an area where they are no longer a threat. This seems like a crazy, warped political and/or environmental idea.

Wolves used to be a dominant predator in what is now the Portland metro area. Should we reintroduce wild wolves in neighborhoods throughout Portland because they once lived there?

Reintroducing grizzly bears has far more downside than up. That is unless the purpose of reintroducing this dominant predator is to reduce the population of other wild animals and keep humans off the public lands that we pay for and which were set aside for us to enjoy.

I think this is a horrible idea and hope you do not reintroduce grizzly bears.

Jim McConnell
Vancouver

---

Also read:

• 
  Opinion: The unpreferred and unaffordable Interstate Bridge replacement proposal
  Rep. John Ley argues that the Interstate Bridge Replacement proposal is unpreferred, unaffordable, and failing to address congestion, cost transparency, and community concerns.
• 
  POLL: If project costs continue to rise, what should lawmakers do with the I-5 Bridge replacement plan?
  This poll asks readers what lawmakers should do with the I-5 Bridge replacement plan as costs rise and key decisions remain unresolved.
• 
  Opinion: IBR still holding and lying about coming billions in cost overruns
  Joe Cortright argues that Interstate Bridge Replacement officials are deliberately delaying the release of an updated cost estimate that he says could push the project toward $10 billion.
• 
  Opinion: Another problem with strike pay from the UI fund – Potential double-dipping, overpayments
  Elizabeth New (Hovde) argues that Washington’s new strike pay law risks overpayments and double-dipping unless workers are clearly warned at the point of applying for unemployment benefits.
• 
  Letter: A call for competent Interstate Bridge project management
  Rick Vermeers argues that unchecked scope, rising costs, and missed timelines threaten the survival of the Interstate Bridge Replacement project unless light rail is removed.