Last week's Question of the Week asked whether readers agree with the governor's proposal to create a brucellosis buffer zone beyond the border of Yellowstone National Park. Most readers agreed.

Among 654 responses to this unscientific poll, 522 (four out of five) favored the idea, while only 132 opposed it.

Some readers' comments:

n First priority is to eradicate the disease through development of an effective vaccine and delivery system. Until then, creating a buffer zone advances the twin goals of protecting Montana's cattle industry and preventing ineffective bison slaughter.

n No. Allowing diseased bison further into Montana without active management only pushes the problem further into the state. A buffer zone to protect Montana ranchers around Yellowstone for a problem caused by the park is not a solution. If a zone is needed, push it back into the park.

n Too many locales in the U.S. have been adversely affected by cattle ranching. Expanding the range wherein buffalo graze near Yellowstone would be good for the ecosystem and would set a national example for restoring habitat to healthfulness.

n Look how well wolves respected the boundary they weren't supposed to cross. As usual, the governor's premise is severely flawed in favor of the eco-freak agenda.

n The governor is keeping his eye on the ball: the brucellosis threat. He was also very concerned about BSE and insisted on better testing of animals and feed coming from Canada where the disease has been detected. Keep up the good work, governor.