The Associated Press article on "brucellosis hot spots" gives the false impression that Yellowstone artificially feeds elk and bison - totally inaccurate reporting. Wyoming and Idaho allow this inadvisable practice even though it's well understood that wildlife feed grounds increases disease prevalence.

Ranchers and farmers oppose shutting them down because they make money feeding elk and they don't really care that it amplifies the likelihood of cattle-wildlife brucellosis transmissions. Ranchers don't mind because feeding elk keeps wildlife off of "their" grass, precisely what the whole brucellosis issue is really about: grass. Under the guise of disease control, livestock interests manipulate wildlife and enable brucellosis. Close the feed grounds if brucellosis prevalence is truly the concern.

In addition, let's remove cattle from the Greater Yellowstone Region all together, because brucellosis is here to stay - and so are buffalo and elk. The cattle industry needs to get a handle on their invasive species and stop threatening wildlife with their livestock diseases.

The AP story also points out how Montana's livestock officials don't want to touch Montana's elk, saying it's Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks' job. The same should hold true for wild buffalo. If the MDOL treated elk the way they do bison, every hunter in Montana - and those that travel here from around the nation - would raise a ruckus like you've never seen.

Neither cattle nor the cattle industry are worth the hell they put wildlife through. Hunters, stand up for buffalo like you would for elk. Ultimately, we all know the problem is cattle, not wildlife. It's time to force the livestock industry to take full responsibility for their cows and mitigate the harm they cause wildlife.

Stephany Seay

West Yellowstone