Letter: ‘I think this is a horrible idea and hope you do not reintroduce grizzly bears’

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

Jim McConnell
Jim McConnell

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

Also read:


  1. Carol

    This is the Hunger Games in real life.
    If any politician supports this; ‘ Those bears belong in their back yards and take their guns away.’
    Jane Fonda’s X hubby, Ted Turner, wanted huge predator wolves back on his property. He got them.
    The NWO only has a few stack em pack em cities to live in most states. The rest of the nation will be wildlife preserve., with more killer animals.
    With this NWO crap, all loggers would be in danger. Will loggers get to shoot the bears for their safety, to do their jobs logging trees for building?
    There isn’t enough food for the deer and elk, for the bears to consume. The bears may become people eaters.

    When there is a wildfire the bears would run into towns or cities to escape.
    Government don’t want homeless living in tents. Homeless will not leave into the bear habitats to live.
    Start making some legislative phone calling! This needs to be stopped.

  2. Margaret

    In Alaska, violent encounters with Grizzly bears are all too common. near cities especially. It’s time to contact legislators to object to this dangerous plan!

  3. Robert

    Recently an experienced outdoor couple were attacked,killed and partially eaten by a grizzly while in their tent. This happened in Banff national park. It is more common than you think. Why is it that complete idiots that probably have never spent a day in the woods are able to make these decisions?

  4. Don Jacobson

    Risks can be managed sensibly.
    Hikers in bear-prone areas need to be reasonably athletic – and armed.
    Most people using common sense can avoid grizzly bear problems.
    When they cannot, a single gun shot to the air usually scares away the bear.

    If we were equally afraid of cars due to the number of persons who die annually in car crashes there would be a ban on cars.

    Risks can be managed sensibly. It’s time to start sharing with nature, rather than conquering and paving over.


Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *