Earth, Life & Diversity: the Plight of the Black Bear

Earth, Life & Diversity

the Plight of the Black Bear

by Karen Saura, MEd, MH

Copyright 2008, all rights reserved.

The earth contains a tremendous diversity of genes, species, landscapes, plants, and animals. Each one plays a key role in the working of the whole. This biodiversity is critically important to the success and well-being of all life on earth. Each species consumes as food the waste products of another, each fills a vital, specific, and irreplaceable role in the intricate inter-related dance which has developed over billions of years. This is a dance which cycles through and supports all species and all life on the planet. Planet Earth is currently experiencing a major species extinction crisis (Conservation Economy, n.d.). For the first time in recorded history, this crisis is being induced by the actions of a single species, and its consequences are both severe and unpredictable. Man is currently the dominant species and as he competes with other species for resources and range, he is currently driving untold species of plants and animals to precarious, barely sustainable population levels, and ultimate extinction.

As the diversity of an ecosystem increases, its biological productivity and ecosystem stability increases. As its diversity decreases, its biological productivity and ecosystem stability decreases. Biodiversity thresholds exist below which ecosystems are unable to sustain themselves over long periods of time. The planet is experiencing a rapid increase in the current species extinction rate, the most rapid in recorded human history (Conservation Economy, n.d.). The causes are many, but if left unchecked, the outcome is inevitable - a decline in the biodiversity leading to ultimate instability in the ecosystems on the planet. Earth will become an increasingly uninhabitable planet.

Consider the American black bear (Ursus americanus). A black bear and a man are both large mammals. Man and bears are direct competitors for space and resources worldwide. The competition is mediated by resource availability and the adaptability of both species. Man is certainly more adaptable and effective at resource exploitation than the bears. Man continues to develop new and effective mechanized resource use strategies while bears continue to attempt to use resources in “natural” ways. Under such a system of interaction, the more efficient and adaptable species will eventually eliminate the competitor unless means are taken to protect the habitat of the threatened species (Servheen, 1989).

There are eight bear species worldwide. Six species are likely in decline while two are probably stable. The American black bear was on the endangered list earlier in the 19th century. Due to active conservation efforts and local government intervention to protect the struggling populations, the black bear has experienced a successful rebound in its populations in many areas of the United States . So much so that communities in bear territory have experienced a dramatic increase in the number of bear/human encounters in recent years. The reason for the increase in the number of encounters is two-fold. First, bear populations in specific regions of the country are indeed recovering, but not to pre-19th century numbers and not in all ranges where the black bear once lived. Second, rapidly increasing and expanding human populations are moving into bear territory. With both populations on the rise, in their struggle to compete for the same space and resources, the bears and humans are encountering each other more frequently and with increasing intensity.

In the communities such as Tahoe , California , situated deep in bear country people and are becoming frightened for their safety and for the safety of their families, pets, livestock, and property. The Las Vegas Sun reports Nevada’s black bear population to be around 300 while the population in California is over 30,000 (Las Vegas SUN, 6/22/02). Bears are very adaptable creatures and quickly figure out how to find food when they wake up from hibernation to find their lovely forest is gone and in its place are strip malls, dumpsters, playgrounds and back yards. Nuisance bears can cause extensive and expensive property damage. They tear into cars, homes, and dumpsters looking for food leaving a wake of destruction behind. The Tahoe Daily Tribune reported on one hungry bear in the Tahoe area who managed to rip open a county-approved bear-proof metal trash receptacle. Local resident Pat Snyder complained that after investing in the “bear-proof” trash can, the bear “ripped the right door off its hinges to get to the trash.” He added, “It’s one of the better items we paid to have” (Tahoe Daily Tribune, 3/24/03 ).

Tahoe, California is a community nestled deep in bear country in the Sierra Mountain Range. During the past fifty years it become a popular recreational destination for both winter and summer mountain activities. Development has skyrocketed, populations have increased, wilderness areas are being encroached upon and the number of bear and human encounters is on the rise. As the human population grows, the number of bear related complaints grows. In a June 22, 2002 report on bears in The Las Vegas SUN, the paper reported that “complaints about nuisance bears have soared by 7,000 percent in northern Nevada in the last 12 years” (Las Vegas SUN, 2002, para.7). These complaints often fall in the lap of the California Department of Fish and Game (the Department).

The Department was established in 1870 and is the government organization charged with managing wildlife in the state. “The Mission of the Department of Fish and Game is to manage California's diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological values and for their use and enjoyment by the public”. The Department not only oversees habitat protection with the intent of ensuring the survival of native species, but it is also “responsible for the diversified use of fish and wildlife including recreational, commercial, scientific and educational uses” (Department of Fish and Game, 2003, para.2).

Most of the bear related complaints are fairly harmless, such as bears damaging bird feeders and rummaging in trash cans, and come with the territory of living in bear country. But increasingly the types of complaints are expanding in scope and becoming more serious. Bear home invasions are on the rise. According to Nevada wildlife officer Carl Lackey, he was “forced to kill a bear…after it broke into a Stateline home on Tahoe’s south shore and refused to come out” ( Las Vegas Sun, 2002, para.9).

As the number of human/bear incidents grows, the citizens are becoming increasingly concerned about how to preserve the safety of their families, livestock and property. When bears actually break into homes, often the nuisance bear is killed, either by a wildlife officer from the Department of Fish, Game and Wildlife or by the residents themselves. California allows residents to apply for permits to kill bears that have invaded their homes in addition to the fall, by permit, bear hunting season (California Department of Fish and Game, 2004).

These situations and the local residents concern and responses to bears wandering through the neighborhood are common, to be expected and universally reflected in rural towns and suburbs situated in bear country throughout the entire North American continent. Everyone in the community agrees that something must be done, but is shooting the troublesome bears the solution? A true solution addresses long-term plans which look into the related financial, environmental, and ecological issues which are part of the larger picture which the human/bear conflict situation is a part of. In order for humans and bears to co-exist without conflict, solutions must be found which actually speak to the underlying problem: how do we create sustainable communities which allow for the multitude of vital species to co-exist allowing for a healthy diverse ecosystem which meets the needs of both bears and humans.

Cultural, moral and ethical issues must also be considered when developing an effective and equitable bear management policy. Many Native Americans consider the bears to be sacred and oppose public policy which treats them as an “animal resource” to be managed for the yearly bear hunting season. The Indian Country Today newspaper publicly questioned the actions of the California Department of Fish and Game “after it refused to allow a veterinarian and team of animal rights advocates to give medical assistance to a black bear that had been shot and suffered without help for nearly a month.” The article poses the questions: “Who owns the bears? Who has the right to decide if they are jailed of killed or released back into the wild? What standing do tribes with spiritual relationships to bears have in determining their fate? And who speaks for the bears?” (Taliman, 2002). These cultural, moral and ethical questions add another facet to the ongoing debate surrounding wildlife management policies issues.

Bears hold a vital part of the eco-system. In the early 1900’s the black bear was on the endangered species list. The primary preditor for the black bear is man (Black Bear History, n.d., para.12). The San Diego area was once the home to a stable population of Southern California Grizzly (Ursus arctos magister). Unfortunately this species is now extinct due mainly to unregulated hunting (Tremor, S & Botta, R., n.d., para.15). Clearly bear population need to be managed and a wide range of management policies must be put to use to protect not only the people in bear country, but also the bears whose natural habitats are being encroached upon.

The increasing number of bear/human encounters are a symptom of - urban sprawl and loss of bear habitat. According to Bob Erickson, biologist with the Department of Fish, Game and Wildlife, “Bears are good for the natural habitat of the state. They eat insects, bees wasps and termites, and they also scavenge and eat dead carcasses of wildlife to prevent disease spreading” (Stabile, 2003).

The black bears roam throughout the Sierras. There are also large black bear populations in the mountain ranges spanning through Maryland, New Jersey, New York and up into Canada. The State of Maryland created a Black Bear Task Force to address their local bear/human encounter problems and to look for long-range, ecologically based, sustainable solutions which consider both the needs of bears and humans. The Task Force determined that bear hunting targets the wrong bears. Wild bears are hunted leaving the “problem” bears to continue their ways. Bears are essentially shy creatures, but are drawn to humans by food. Bears in the wilderness are not the problem. There exists a “fringe society” of bears who live on the edges of human communities. They forge trash cans and back yards and have come to depend upon humans as providers of part of their food source.

Fringe bears learn trash foraging techniques from other bears. These are the “problem” bears. They have developed a taste for the easy goodies humans leave lying around. Furthermore, hunters tend to take large, adult male bears from the population, leaving the juvenile males more room to expand their range. It is these young juvenile males, searching for alternative food sources, who are more likely to cause problems at homes, campsites and farms. Ultimately, the social structure of the local bear community is undermined by hunting and a new problem of juvenile delinquent bears with no adult supervision is created. According to Mike Markarian, a member of the 2002 Task Force, “Hunting is not a solution to a problem, but a commitment to a permanent problem” (Markarian, 2003). Clearly, in addition to addressing the immediate bear/human conflict issues, long-term solutions must be found.

Many non-violent alternatives to bear hunting are available and, when actively enforced, have proven to be effective in managing bear/human populations. Educating the local citizens is vital to keeping the frequency of encounters to a minimum. California wildlife officer Doug Updike sums it up succinctly, “It’s not a bear problem; it’s a people problem” (Las Vegas SUN, 6/22/2003 ). Educating the local populations as to how to live in bear country and avoid attracting bears into the community is key. The Division currently has an overall integrated bear management strategy which includes a public education campaign, black bear research and monitoring, and more aggressive wildlife control measures including aversive conditioning, trapping and removal, sterilization, and finally, euthanization of bears that pose a significant public safety threat (CA Division of fish and Wildlife, n.d.). “Immunocontraception”, an injected form of birth control, has successfully sterilized wild horses and white-tailed deer in other states and could also be applied in this situation to control local bear populations.

Bears are often conditioned by humans to hang around parks and neighborhoods. Many humans feed bears, both intentionally and inadvertently, and this teaches the bears to look to humans for sustenance. Once bears associate people houses with food, trouble starts. “A fed bear is a dead bear,” notes Dennis Schvejda, conservation director for the Sierra Club (Guynup, 2003). Legislation exists banning the feeding of bears. State law enforcement agencies should aggressively enforce this ban on feeding black bears while simultaneously cracking down on municipal and private waste management services, and enforcing the requirement to use bear-proof dumpsters and waste containers in areas with bear problems.

A major issue which must be considered in any effective long-term management strategies is the fact that the increasing number of bear/human encounters is often caused by human development intruding on wildlife areas. Now, bear country sprawls with new housing complexes, shopping centers and vacation homes. This means more bear sightings, more run-ins with humans and increasing property damage. This is a complex and dynamic issue affected by numerous factors, including an increase in suitable habitat, abundant food supplies, increasing vehicular traffic, a more urban/suburban population encroaching upon bear habitats and bears expanding their range into areas with denser human populations.

A truly effective solution involves the active implementation of existing bear control measures combined with long-term strategies involving public education, the development of creative programs to mitigate property loss caused by bears, land use planning which allow for bear habitats and wildlife corridors, and the future management of suburban growth and sprawl to prevent incursions into bears.

Communities must be redesigned to reflect the needs of the local ecology and wildlife as well as the needs of the people they will serve. Given the inter-related nature of ecosystems throughout the planet, a truly effective effort must be global in scope. This effort must reflect ecological and environmental principles such as land-use planning, connected wild lands, preservation of core reserves, wildlife corridors, buffer zones, and actively implement sustainable agriculture, forestry, and fishery principles. (Conservation Economy, n.d.).

Communities built to reflect these basic ecological principles will gradually bring a new balance to the planet through creating safe places for the maintenance of vital biodiversity in regions throughout the entire planet. As these regions gradually recover, biodiversity on the planet can once again flourish. If man is the dominant species on the planet, man must rise to the task of stewardship for the other species co-existing on the planet. Ecological sustainable community development will forge the way for a future of mutual respect and survival for humans and the multitudes of other species interrelating and co-existing on the planet.

We live in a fixed biosphere, the Earth. If we ruin our home, there is no where else for us to go. At present, if we drive a species to extinction, there is no way to bring that species back. Each species holds a critical and perhaps not yet determined role in the global, inter-species eco-system and ecology of the planet. We must begin, now, to implement sustainability community planning measures locally, nationally, and globally to effectively support humans in the creation of global communities which will successfully co-exist not only with the bears, but with all the other species involved in the vast biodiversity of the local and global ecosystem. We must preserve the local and global ecosystems and every precious species in it in order to ensure the survival of a healthy and sustainable planet which we can leave behind to sustain our future generations.

Bio: Karen Saura, MEd, MH is a master herbalist, science teacher and holistic nutritional counselor. She emphasizes the use of whole, organic foods, nutritive herbs and supplements to promote optimal health, prevent disease, manage chronic illness and to rediscover the joy of healthy eating. Phone consultations are available.
e-mail: ksaura@gmail.com


References:
Byers, M. (2000, September 6). To hunt or not to hunt? New Jersey Conservation Foundation. Retrieved April 4, 2004 from
http://www.njconservation.org/html/state/090600.html
Conservation Economy (n.d). The patterns of a conservation economy. Conservation Economy. Retrieved April 22, 2004 , from http://conservationeconomy.net/content.cfm
Guynup, S. (2003, June 16). New Jersey plan to lift bear-hunt ban spurs protests. National Geographic. Retrieved April 11, 2004 , from http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2003/06/0616_030616_tv
Hanley, R. (2003, July 9). New Jersey sets first bear hunt in 33 years. New York Times, Late Edition - Final, Section B, pp. 5.
Markarian, M. (2003, March 28). Black bear task force report and recommendations. Maryland Department of Natural Resources. Retrieved April 11, 2004 , from http://www.dnr.state.md.us/wildlife/bbtfappendg.html
New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife (n.d.). Questions and answers about NJ’s black bears.

New Jersey Division of Fish and Wildlife. Retrieved April 11, 2004 , from http://www.stateofnj.us/dep/fgw/bearq&a.htm
Servheen, C. (1989, February) The status and conservation of the bears of the world. Bear Biology. Retrieved August 22, 2003 , from http://bearbiology.com/bearstat.html
Stabile, J. (2003, July 14). The bear necessity. The Daily Record. Retrieved August 4, 2003 , from http://www.dailyrecord.com/sports/morrisoutdoors.
Citizens for Responsible Wildlife Management (n.d.) Black bear history. Responsible Wildlife Management. Retrieved May 2, 2004 , from http://www.responsiblewildlifemanagement.org/bear_history.htm
Tremor, S & Botta, R. (n.d.) History of bears in San Diego county. San Diego Natural History Museum. Retrieved April 25, 2004, from http://www.sdnhm.org/fieldguide/mammals/ursu-ame.html
Taliman, V. (2002). Tribes protest; challenge California bear policy. Indian Country Today. Retrieved April 30, 2004, from http://www.indiancountry.com/?1032223785&style=printable