Posted on 06/04/2022 7:26:13 AM PDT by marktwain
When incidents of defense against bears occur in the United States, a common position of bear apologists is to claim “bears were here first”, as if, somehow, a bear has moral authority over humans.
A group that promotes the expansion of grizzly bear populations makes this claim, in a more sophisticated way. From conservationnw.org:
Grizzly bears have coexisted with people in the North Cascades Ecosystem from when the first people arrived in North America.
The grizzly bear is a relative newcomer to most of North America. The bears came from Asia to Alaska about 60,000 years ago. Because of the glaciers over most of Canada, they did not make it to the lower 48 states until about 10 – 15 thousand years ago. From nih.gov:
In North America, the brown bear has had a limited history, appearing in eastern Beringia only 50–70,000 years ago and spreading into the contiguous United States about 13,000 years ago (7, 8).
Humans, we have learned, have been in North America for at least 23,000 years, and likely up to 32,000 years. A convincing article was published on October 1, 2021. From nps.gov:
How long have humans been living in the Tularosa Basin? The latest research from White Sands confirms for the first time that humans have been living in North America for at least 23,000 years – many thousands of years older than previously thought. This research also confirms that people were living with the ice age megafauna much longer than previously known.
Another article was published in July of 2020. From nature.com:
The latest discoveries, published on 22 July in Nature1,
(Excerpt) Read more at ammoland.com ...
As if that makes any serious difference, or is a serious argument.
But it is thrown about all the time.
Lots of Grizzlies in North Central Montana this year.
I do remember reading decades ago that the entire population was around 800 and that in history they were mostly populated in the La(Ca) area. They preferred the same climates as humans. Of course the condition of L.A. today would suggest the grizzlies take better care of the of the environment.
When human populations expanded to the Siberian steppes expansion stopped. Bands of adults could hunt on the steppes, but we couldn’t settle.
The problem was the hyenas. We couldn’t keep to be hyenas from skulking around the edges of the camps, dragging off the children.
Then we domesticated dogs, or they domesticated us, or some such. A population of wolves learned that there was good food going to waste around human camp sites, and they evolved to fill the niche. Not domesticated, really, or even tamed at first, but semi-tamed and no threat to the children.
But they filled the niche. And so when humans did finally move out onto the steppes, and later into the Americas, they were accompanied by a protective cloud of semi-tamed dogs ensuring that the environs were safe for our children.
Every and any little bit of woods that a wolf or a bear or a deer or a goose might think about nesting down within a days walk of a human settlement would have dogs sniffing around - often accompanied by ten-year-old boys.
And so it remained for 40,000 years. The only change was that the boys would be carrying .22s and .410s instead of bows and spears.
And then we invented leash laws. We leashed our dogs and we leashed our boys...
the condition of L.A. today would suggest the grizzlies take better care of the of the environment.
—
Yep there are no Grizzly homeless encampments ...
As to the article; Ooh, “migrants”, ooh, can’t criticize that!
BS. If mommy bear has more cubs that needed to replace existing population in the area, the extras will move on — just like any other species that is not linked to a breeding ground (e.g., salmon HAVE to return). That is not migration, it is expansion. So, quit trying to link this to some crappola about the US being a nation of migrants. That is precisely what is being tried by this ingenuous article.
The bit about “they were here first” is also crappola. Populations ebb and flow, they move about — except for animals like salmon. I live in the Bay area of Frisco. Been here for 30+ years. A burb surrounded by houses for miles. No open land for at least 2 miles. During that entire time never encountered a fox. Then, all of a sudden foxes start going after me and my pets in my own back yard. Mind, like wolverines these are aggressive “opportunity” killers — they routinely kill way more than needed for food — which is why no farmer wants one in their chicken coop. They go into a frenzy and kill ALL the chickens.
Anyhoo, I complain to authorities about the neighbor who is protecting foxes living under an abandoned barn on her property. Same foxes invade houses <quarter mile away — yes, go into the house! The response: “they were here first”. Uhh, yeah, so were bison. So, what?
Of course the condition of L.A. today would suggest the grizzlies take better care of the of the environment.Because they don't drive cars, use BBQ's, gas stoves, air conditioning and they shit in the woods?
Posted on 1/24/2021, 2:31:27 PM by Jim Robinson
Reminder: No profanity, no personal attacks, no violence.
You agreed to this when you signed up for posting privileges.
This means leave off the the cussing and swear words. No f-bombs. No c-words, no sh-words, etc.
I hate it when people say that I’m invading the territory of wild animals. Well, I have the deed.
*Of course the condition of L.A. today would suggest the grizzlies take better care of the of the environment-because they don’t drive cars, use BBQ’s, gas stoves, air conditioning and they shit in the woods?*
Nope.
* Yep there are no Grizzly homeless encampments ...* BINGO!
Exactly. What the animal worshipers are attempting is to put animals on the same moral plane as humans.
A common line of attack is to claim the animals "were here first", which is what the article attacks, especially with regard to grizzly bears.
It is a stupid argument, whose purpose is to get the opponents to accept the assumption that animals are on the same moral and legal plane as humans.
The article attacks that assumption later.
Being “somewhere first” is meaningless to Nature, red in tooth and claw.
When the Rockies and the intermountain West were settled, it was kill or be killed.
It still is.
And people do the same thing, as in "the Spanish were in New Mexico first", "the Sioux were in the Dakotas first", "the Jews were in Palestine first", etc, etc.
Title to land rest with those who are willing to kill until the opposition gives up or is exterminated.
Exactly correct.
Grow up!
Here is the link where you can send the site’s owner what you think of his rules:
https://freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/3928396/posts
Yep there are no Grizzly homeless encampmentsHomeless are only doing what bears do.
Making a home wherever they want, Ransack neighborhoods including breaking into homes, rummage through garbage cans/dumpsters strewing garbage and trash everywhere, destroy public and private property.
OH yea. great stewards of the environment< /sarcasm >.
Illegals should be treated equally.
The illegal bears from the north ahould be locked up with the illegal wetbacks pouring in from the south.
Witness the deterioration of Free Republic ....
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.