Reader comments
Yellowstone bison, elk reduction urged

Mather | 7:47 a.m. June 24, 2008

I'm glad we have wolves in Yellowstone now; they have reduced the population density of elk to more healthful (for the land) levels. No doubt they are helping Montana's brucellosis issue, as well. Is there a lesson buried here for the state of Wyoming?

Reduce the Cattle | 7:55 a.m. June 24, 2008

Why don't we reduce the cattle around Yellowstone? That would be easier... Plus it would give the native animals their right to be there.

Bison boy | 8:21 a.m. June 24, 2008

Pray and Daniel are not anywhere near the Yellowstone boundary, and any bison that tries to leave the boundary area is either hazed or captured for slaughter. That happened with 1600 bison this winter. Elk are the source of those 2 cases. If you thought wolves were bad for elk, wait until there is a brucellosis control program that starts killing elk to reduce the disease.

Comments continue below

JD Kotrla-Chipps | 9:17 p.m. June 24, 2008

There has never been a transmission of brucellosis from buffalo to cattle so why reduce a species that doesn't transmit the disease?

This needs to be approached with some degree of intelligence.

nomoreburgers | 1:21 a.m. June 25, 2008

I have had it with cattle ruining our public lands for private profit. No more beef for me.

NRDC Josh | 10:39 a.m. June 25, 2008

This year saw the highest rate of buffalo slaughter since we nearly eradicated the species in the 19th century. State and federal wildlife officials already cut the Yellowstone buffalo numbers by more than half this winter... What, short of "no buffalo" would make the Cattlemen Association happy?

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.