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: In search of joy at Vancouver Mall during Christmas time
  Paul Valencia reflects on his annual Christmas-time visit to Vancouver Mall, finding nostalgia, people-watching, and moments of joy amid last-minute holiday shopping.
• 
  Opinion: Atmospheric River events mean even less clearance for vessels crossing under the proposed Interstate Bridge Plan
  Neighbors for a Better Crossing argues that high river levels from atmospheric river events further reduce vessel clearance under the proposed Interstate Bridge design, creating long-term navigation risks on the Columbia River.
• 
  Opinion: Why I won’t mourn the end of enhanced ACA subsidies
  Elizabeth New (Hovde) argues that allowing enhanced ACA subsidies to expire forces a necessary conversation about rising health care costs rather than continued cost shifting to taxpayers.
• 
  Letter: Worried about a replacement bridge?
  Sharon Nasset raises concerns about congestion, bridge capacity, and unanswered questions surrounding inspections and decisions tied to the I-5 bridge replacement effort.
• 
  Opinion: IBR promotes ‘giving away’ historic interstate bridges while withholding cost estimate for replacement
  Neighbors for a Better Crossing argues the IBR program is promoting demolition of the historic Interstate Bridges without releasing updated cost estimates or current seismic data to justify replacement.