Oct 14, 2009 at 8:13 am #1240236
Jay WilkersonBPL Member
@creachenLocale: East Bay
A man was mauled in Tahoe NF yesterday-I fill sorry for him and his family…But what about 300+ bears being slaughtered.. A "Top of the food chain" predator is just being wiped-out..So if there are any hunters on the website and I think there are a few…Can you explain to me why we still hunt bears? I am not looking for a fight are a huge debate…I just want to be educated on why we still hunt bears…Is it for food, fur,eating to much of our garbage are sport?Oct 14, 2009 at 8:27 am #1536198
Isn't it because the population is growing exponentially? Bears near towns/suburbs turn into giant raccoons pretty much. And that cannot lead to good things for bears or for humans.
I don't think there is problem with harvesting bears as long as the meat is eaten and hide is used. Respect for their life. My friend bow hunts problem bears in the BWCA and he loves bears more than anyone I have ever met.Oct 14, 2009 at 8:41 am #1536201
W I S N E R !BPL Member
Personally, I'm not into the idea of hunting bear.
However, according to DFG statistics, the populations are large, growing, and perfectly sustainable even with hunting.
That is, if you believe their science. I'm sure many here will debate it.
1,700 bear tags are issued each year. Bear hunting season ends when 1,700 bears have been killed or we reach Dec. 27th, 2009, whichever comes first.
Despite the enormous amount of tags purchased each year, very few people who buy them actually kill a bear. And from what I understand, the 1,700 bear limit is rarely reached- season usually closes on Dec. 27th first.
If 1,700 seams like a huge number (I certainly think it is), keep in mind the last DFG estimate I heard was that there are 25,000 to 30,000 black bears in California.
Habitat loss surely poses a greater threat than hunting ever will.
As for why? Meat, bravado, trophies, all of the above….none of the above…talk to a bear hunter.
As for whether or not it's right…that's a whole new bag of worms.
I don't like the idea of killing bear; I think they're too cool. But what about big bucks? Elk? Quail? Native salmon? Wild trout?
They're all really beautiful, amazing, unique animals….
So what should we be hunting then?
Should we even be hunting?
Should we even be eating meat?
A giant bag of worms indeed….
Oh, and one more number to throw in (if it matters):
The CA success rate for hunting bear is around 7%…that is, only 7% of all hunters who pruchase tags actually kill a bear.Oct 14, 2009 at 8:42 am #1536204
The hunters will have lots of interesting reasons.
But the answers you seek really come from the Department of Wildlife (or whatever its called in California).
Somehow they have to balance revenue, sustainability, and safety. Hunting is a source of income, and it is a means of 'culling the crop'. It is also a means of managing the social and political demands for 'protecting the public'.
When the crops exceeds carrying capacity something has to give.
I would not want to be in their shoes.Oct 14, 2009 at 8:44 am #1536206
"Orr said the group cornered three bears in a tree with the help of hunting dogs, when a hunter in the party hit one of the bears with a non-fatal gunshot. The bear then came out of the tree and began to "claw and bite" Sanders, Orr said, with Sanders putting his arms over his face for protection. Sanders sustained bites and cuts to his arms, the most serious of which broke a bone in his wrist, Orr said. Following the attack on Sanders, Orr said the bear proceeded to attack another hunter in the party. That hunter shot the bear with a rifle, Orr said, instantly killing the animal."
Can't imagine why the bear attacked…..
I hope this isn't reported elsewhere, or via word of mouth, as an unprovoked attack. An no, my comments are NOT an indictment of the hunters in any way, shape or form.
As far as 300+ bears killed, the story says "Hunting season for the approximately 35,000 black bears in California typically runs from late September until mid- to late-December, depending on the number of bears killed. Once 1,700 bears are killed, hunting season closes."Oct 14, 2009 at 8:47 am #1536208
Joe ClementBPL Member
Probably not making a dent, or even slowing down the population growth of black bears. Guess it would be more noble to let them starve, it is, after all, nature's way. Friends tell me bears are tasty. I've found bear tracks while elk hunting, and wondered if the bears had the same thoughts about me.
I predict this will be one of those 40 page threads, where everyone ends up mad.
Edit – found a LA Times article, hunting obviously isn't making a dent – The state Fish and Game Department estimates that 33,260 black bears inhabit California today — up from roughly 4,000 in 1984. Hunters have been taking about 1,800 animals annually in recent years, compared to about 1,000 per year 20 years ago, according to the department.Oct 14, 2009 at 9:01 am #1536214
"A man was mauled in Tahoe NF yesterday-I fill sorry for him and his family…But what about 300+ bears being slaughtered.. A "Top of the food chain" predator is just being wiped-out..So if there are any hunters on the website and I think there are few…Can you explain to me why we still hunt bears? I am not looking for fight are a huge debate…I just want to be educated on why we still hunt bears…Is it for food, fur are sport?"
Bears have doubled in number around Tahoe in the last few years, and also are some
of the biggest in the country now due to the feeding they
get from peoples garbage etc. Some are up to 600 lbs
which is huge for a black bear.
On the other hand, the
Mule deer populations are dwindling as that species does
poorly with the pressure of increase building into their
wintering and summer habitats.
Young bear tastes good, about like pork. Older bears can
be not so good. People hunt bears for the reasons you
mentioned, food, challenge of getting close enough to
one to take it, also it keeps them wild and wary of humans so they cause less trouble.
The game department has a quota of how many bears can be
taken in a season. When that is reached they close the season.
In terms of adequate numbers of bears there are plenty.
One broke into my friends house recently in Truckee (an
82 year old widow while she was having her morning coffee).
The LEO shot at it with a rubber bullet, but it has since
broken into several more occupied homes.
Once one bear learns where to find human food, they other bears will follow the smell of that food in the first
bears urine back to the source and you end up with even more
problem bears. Problem bears are not relocated but eventually killed.
So to maintain public safety and bear safety their needs to
be proper management and public awareness.
Do not provide food sources for bears-bird feeders, garbage
cans left out, pets fed outside etc.
Chase bears off your property when you see them.
Dogs and paintballs are often used.
Hunt a certain number to keep the population in check so
they aren't forced to find food in urban settings.Oct 14, 2009 at 9:12 am #1536216
"…the other bears will follow the smell of that [human's] food in the first bear's urine back to the source…"
Thank you for this insight. I have wondered how the "education" process occurred. I have always assumed mom taught the youngsters, but couldn't quite figure out how the others got tuned in.Oct 14, 2009 at 9:14 am #1536217Oct 14, 2009 at 9:17 am #1536219
I grew up hunting and learned to respect nature while doing so. Most hunters are good caretakers of the environment and we have a great deal of habitat set aside due to hunters efforts.
Top of food chain hunting needs to be watched very carefully but I have no problem with it as long as the animals numbers continue to grow. Habitat loss is the real issue.
That being said, I am no longer a hunter or a meat eater. In fact, I believe that anyone that is against hunting but continues to eat meat is quite hypocritical. At least animals in the wild have a fighting chance and get to live as nature intended.
Don't give me that "a cow is different than a bear crap". Everyone is outraged when Michael Vick hurts a dog but can easily turn a blind eye to where their dinner comes from.
Know what you eat, a little research could be enlightening. Sorry for the rant but I could see where this was going and anti-hunting stuff chaffs my ass.
-pOct 14, 2009 at 9:17 am #1536220
The euphemism of the day is 'harvesting'.Oct 14, 2009 at 9:20 am #1536223
"…but I could see where this was going…"
Don't worry, you Will get what you expect to see.Oct 14, 2009 at 9:25 am #1536225
"I predict this will be one of those 40 page threads, where everyone ends up mad."
Not me Joe! I'm a happy guy! LYOL :-)Oct 14, 2009 at 9:25 am #1536226
If you haven't tried hound hunting, you won't know how challenging it is. Probably only less of a workout than
mountain goat hunting.Oct 14, 2009 at 10:10 am #1536244Oct 14, 2009 at 10:23 am #1536251
W I S N E R !BPL Member
Here it comes!!!!….3….2…..1……Oct 14, 2009 at 10:34 am #1536256Oct 14, 2009 at 10:42 am #1536260
This is why we need a Hunting Forum. Especially if the IT guys/gals here add the 'Exlude/Include' function to the 'Recents Threads' search.Oct 14, 2009 at 11:14 am #1536274
go ahead, make my dayOct 14, 2009 at 11:17 am #1536277
Rick DreherBPL Member
@halfturboLocale: Northernish California
I'm agnostic on bear hunting in California.
On one hand they're not in any way endangered and I accept the idea that a WELL MANAGED hunt might perhaps instill some amount of aversion to people–which is how I prefer bears to act! I don't know whether a hunt is supposed to replace some missing predator, since the only black bear predators are other black bears and back in the day, grizzlies. Bold bears, of course, will remain widely available in our National Parks, swattin' at our canisters.
I would be a stronger hunt supporter if the fees went directly to anti-poaching enforcement, which is an entrenched problem here (in part to feed the illicit gall bladder trade).
I have not the feeblest spark of support for either using dogs or baiting bears. And after what became of the poor slain hiker in Washington last year I have no support for kids out bear hunting, supervised by other kids.
RickOct 14, 2009 at 1:33 pm #1536324
I have hunted and still occasionally bird hunt. I am not against it and if you look at the history of our National Park system, it was the Hunters who fought to protect the animals in NP's and worked to get laws and the funds necessary to protect them. Without Boon & Crockett there would be no bison left in the United States and one of the founding members of that org., Teddy Roosevelt, did more for the NP system than anyone in history, besides John Muir maybe.
What I have a problem with is how they hunt bears, which seems anything but "sporting" in my book. In N. Carolina hunters had to be forced to stop baiting bears with massive amounts of candy picked up from local factories because of damage it was doing to bears teeth, the ones they did not shoot. Placing bait on the ground and sitting 15 yards away in a tree to blow the animal away when it eats is just not hunting in my book. They hunt deer that way in Texas, use deer feeder on the Sendaros to "bring them out". Now we have plenty of deer in Texas, so many they have become pest in the Hill Country, but it's still not hunting in my book.
On the other hand, Mother Nature has a way to deal with overpopulation and if it were me, a bullet would be the way to go. Until they come up with a form of birth control that can be used on Wildlife, and I don't know why that's so hard, hunting remains the only choice for animal control.
As far as comparing a dog to a cow, don't even go there! Both dogs & cats were domesticated for companion animals to humans, we took away their ability to be self-sufficient by domesticating them and I feel we OWE them! Besides, cows just suck at catching frizzbes!Oct 14, 2009 at 2:12 pm #1536335
@rezniemLocale: San Francisco
Is it wrong that I'm secretly happy that Californian hunters killed off all the grizzlies in the state?
What a relief for backpackers here–not to have to worry about those guys. Although, yes, their habitat is shrinking, etc….Oct 14, 2009 at 4:34 pm #1536376
Tom KirchnerBPL Member
@ouzelLocale: Pacific Northwest/Sierra
"and anti-hunting stuff chaffs my ass."
Might I suggest a stick of Body Glide to ease the discomfort?Oct 14, 2009 at 6:12 pm #1536400
Jay WilkersonBPL Member
@creachenLocale: East Bay
Studies have shown that when you take out the A-Predator (check & balance)out of the Eco-system it eventually goes out of WACK. IE-(Yellowstone NP/Wolf).I think that the Sierra Eco-System is already being pushed to the max in these modern times. When are we going to learn from our mistakes and manage the parks with a bit more intelligence– Because what we have now is not going to be around that much longer if we keep F-ing with it. The clock is ticking!
Hopefully this thread dies out like our furry friends.Oct 14, 2009 at 6:15 pm #1536402
Hey – YOU started it ;-)
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.