| |
All Hunting Articles
The Wisconsin bear-hunting season did not show clear evidence of reducing nuisance complaints during 1995-2004, probably because hunting was not effectively designed for that goal. We call for additional research on hunter and bear behavior, including experimental tests of hunting individuals with different levels of involvement in property damage. At the statewide scale, complaints about agricultural damage, other property damage, or human safety concerns did not correlate with each other or with number of bears taken by hunters in the preceding 1-2 years.
This is a comprehensive look at bear spray incidents that occurred in Alaska, USA, from 1985 to 2006. The authors analyzed 83 bear spray incidents involving brown bears (Ursus arctos; 61 cases, 74%), black bears (Ursus americanus; 20 cases, 24%), and polar bears (Ursus maritimus; 2 cases, 2%). Of the 72 cases where persons sprayed bears to defend themselves, red pepper spray stopped bears’ undesirable behavior 92% of the time when used on brown bears, 90% for black bears, and 100% for polar bears. Bear spray represents an effective alternative to lethal force and should be considered as an option for personal safety for those recreating and working in bear country. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 72(3):640–645; 2008)
What's interesting about this report is that unlike what one might expect would happen if adult bears are removed through hunting or destruction, researchers didn't document subadult males moving in to the vacant habitat niches. Also, the reproductive rate of females was less in the unhunted area - they had fewer cubs and had their first litters later in life; and fewer cubs survived.
This report provides evidence that non-violent aversion techniques do more to reduce human-bear conflicts than does hunting.
No deterrent is 100% effective, but compared to all others, including firearms, proper use of bear spray has proven to be the best method for fending off threatening and attacking bears, and for preventing injury to the person and animal involved.
The following report summarises causes of changes in nuisance activity by black bears based on a review of published and unpublished literature. The review focuses first on factors that may affect the reporting rate for nuisance bear activity, then on causes of variation in nuisance activity itself.
Black bear survival and demography were studied in Banff National Park (BNP) from 1994 to 2000 to test the efficacy of National Park protection. 25 radio-collared bears were monitored an average of 1.9 years each for a total of 51.8 bear-years. Eighty-two percent of all mortality (n=11) was human-caused, composed of highway mortality (36%), management mortality (27%) and management relocation (18%). Survival was influenced by season and management status. Once bears became a management problem, survival (0.66) was lower than several hunted populations. Responsible management agencies should reduce adult female highway mortality and the likelihood of becoming a management problem, while continuing monitoring to refine demographic analyses to adequately protect this population.
We present data from 4 studies of radiomarked brown bears (Ursus arctos) in Alaska to evaluate the effects of hunting and differential removal of males on cub survival and litter size. In the Susitna area in southcentral Alaska, the proportion of males declined during a period of increasing hunting pressure (1980-96).
Understanding rates and causes of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) mortality is critical to their conservation. Using data obtained from 13 study areas in the Rocky and Columbia mountains of Alberta, British Columbia, Montana, Idaho, and Washington, the authors estimated survival rates and causes of mortalities for 388 grizzly bears radio-collared for research purposes between 1975 and 1997.
|
|
|
