It is hard to imagine a less likely proponent of repatriating the grizzly population to its native North cascades range (“Plan for grizzly bears’ return reemerges from den,” The Herald, Aug. 25). Always in the mountains, I feared, in youth, encounter with any bear. (Apparently the feeling was shared as none ever crossed my trail.)
Pope Francis’ encyclical, “Laudato Si: On Care for Our Common Home,” caused me to reconsider the grizzly in the light of human-caused habitat degradation and downright extermination. Unless we want to allow this beautiful animal go the way of the dodo and passenger pigeon “on our watch,” he (and she) will need to be purposely placed in what wild spaces remain.
Visceral fear needs to be quelled by each of us in favor of a reasoned approach to this quandary. For about 20 years the issue of re-introducing a small number of bears has been meticulously studied by wildlife and land use experts. The conclusion was that they could and should be safely settled in the North Cascade wilderness. How could we really call it a wilderness in their absence?
Dawna L. Lahti
Edmonds
Talk to us
> Give us your news tips.
> Send us a letter to the editor.
> More Herald contact information.