Did the London police have to shoot the black bear wandering about the west end of the city earlier this week? The simple answer is no.
Let's clarify this: If the bear was shot to keep the public safe, the answer is no. If it was killed to protect property, the answer is yes.
When I heard the London police were hunting a black bear near my Byron home, I was concerned. Then I learned the school where my wife works was under a lock-down order. I worried for my wife's safety and the children's. With the bear now dead, I now know I should have saved some concern for the bear.
I'm not one of those out-of-touch urbanite animal lovers with a view of nature based on Walt Disney feel-good fantasies, like the animal lovers in Ian Gillespie's column, Why animal was shot dead (April 28). But I do try to stay abreast of stuff. I read and watch a lot of news.
One topic making news is the changing view of black bears. They may not be cuddly yet, but they are no longer natural-born killers.
This view is a tough sell. I know. My daughter listened patiently to my reasons for not shooting the bear and then said she sided with the police. My wife looked at me with puzzlement. "It was a bear, Ken. What part of B‑E‑A‑R don't you understand?"
Black bears are dangerous, right? Generally, no. The police officer driving to the scene of the bear sighting was in more danger behind the wheel of his cruiser than when facing the bear. Traffic accidents kill more people daily in North America than black bears over the last century. For danger, think bees, lightning, pet dogs, even spiders.
Black bears rarely attack humans unless cornered, they or their cubs are threatened, or they are wounded, right? The part about rarely attacking is true, the rest is false.
According to the United States Department of Agriculture, "When pressed, they (black bears) usually retreat, even with cubs. Attacking to defend cubs is more a grizzly bear trait . . . Black bear mothers often leave their cubs and flee . . . "
Biologist Lynn Rogers, the famous Bearwalker of Minnesota, agrees. "A big revelation to me was how reluctant black bear mothers are to defend their cubs against people . . . "
As for black bears being more dangerous when wounded, Sylvia Dolson , one of the experts quoted by The Free Press in Tranquilizing 'not an option' (April 28), told me, "Wounded bears are of no additional threat. They retreat and find a safe place to lie as was evidenced with the bear shot in London ."
Well, a charging bear is a killer, right? Nope. Wrong again.
Bearwalker Lynn Rogers says, "When I see any bluster, I feel safe."
The bear is frightened and is putting on a fierce display. For London 's visiting bear, the display worked all too well.
Sadly, you might say the London bear was asking for it. The bear threatened the police officer with a false-charge, the officer reacted. This was his first encounter with a 115-kilogrram, male black bear and he took the bear at its word - or he took its actions at face value, which spoke louder than words - he defended himself.
What about habituation? Bears which regularly encounter people, but without getting food, simply get used to people. These bears are habituated. They tolerate people.
But add food to the story and you have an habituated bear that associates people with food. Such bears become "problems," and are judged "nuisances" and removed, one way or another. They are also more vulnerable to hunting and poaching and to becoming roadkill.
Food-conditioned bears become very bold and people mistake such behaviour as indicating the bear is tame. Big mistake.
There was a contract out on our bear the moment it entered London near schools and jogging paths. As someone explained to me: If you tell someone not to kill bees and later someone dies from a bee sting, you are not going to be sued. Just counselling people to be prudent when encountering black bears - don't run, back up slowly, fight if they attack - may not be enough. One point on which I did find agreement, those defending the killing of the bear to keep the public safe are the urbanites out of touch with nature.
As Ainslie Willock, president of the Get Bear Smart Society, says, "It's time that we all learned what to expect from bears so we can safely manage problem situations without the use of lethal bullets in an urban environment."
For further information:
Letters to the Editor, London Free Press, see below. ( http://www.lfpress.com/comment/letters/2010/04/30/13783351.html ) Still in the Dark Ages?
Regarding Bear scare (April 28).
Like many people, I am saddened and ashamed on how the City of London handled the stray bear incident. You would think we are still in the Dark Ages with no other recourse but to kill. It was a nice little hunting day for the London police, something different and fun. The sad photo of the dead bear with its paw held up like a trophy by a police officer that made the front page of The London Free Press surely depicts that, unfortunately.
The loss of a beautiful, innocent creature is sad no matter how you look at it. What does such a photo teach our kids? Had the London police advised Animal Control before going on the hunt, maybe the poor displaced bear could have been saved. And this would have been a much better example to give.
Killing an innocent animal is not the answer. Public safety is of the most importance, but we have a responsibility to try our best to preserve nature before we jump the gun.
Line Trudel
London
Killing of bear justified for the safety of community
It's quite common to take pictures of a bear's paw to document the size of the animal. A hunter holding up a bear paw is like placing a dime beside an object for a size reference.
I would rather see a story and picture about a dead bear on the front page of The London Free Press than a story about a dead child killed by a bear.
Shawn Green
London
Development forces bears to seek new territory
Tragically, the black bear wandering into London was killed, due to a police force and the Ministry of Natural Resources that do not seem to recognize that London is, indeed, part of Canada and that there are black bear populations to the north, east, west and south of us. We do not live in a bubble.
We live in North America and there are black bears all over this continent. It's time to face reality. Development is forcing the bears to seek new territory and we had better learn how to live with them here in Southwestern Ontario like our fellow North American residents have done for decades.
Regarding the news coverage, I feel the trophy picture on the front page is reminiscent of an African safari pose from an era when such killings were socially acceptable. It does not reflect today's social standards.
Jeanne Poole
London
Poor judgment publishing photo of police officer, bear
Although I can understand why an officer would shoot a bear charging at him, I cannot comprehend why you would take a picture of an officer with the bear, as if it were a trophy, and place it on the front page for everyone (including children) to see. Then, on top of that, we get to look at the poor dead bear's paw on the next page.
What were you thinking? Not enough news on Wednesday? I would hope that most people, like myself, are affronted by this picture being plastered on the paper's front and second pages. What's next - stuffing the bear and putting it in the lobby of city hall?
Susan Ross
London
MNR needs trained staff to deal with rare animals
When I arrived at my school on Tuesday, I was told to go inside the school (in the portable) because there was a bear sighting in the area. Later I found out the bear was shot and killed.
I don't think it was right for the police to kill the bear. I think the Ministry of Natural Resources should have people trained to deal with the situation even if they're rare. They should also have the proper equipment to deal with the problem.
I strongly believe the police did not handle the situation well.
Kailey Tebbutt
London
Use of a tranquilizer gun would have avoided uproar
The city police say that the use of non-lethal force is the preferred way of handling a tense situation. Here's a idea that would save lives of both humans and animals.
When police are called, they respond with officers and the SWAT team if necessary. The only reason for the SWAT team to be there is to take someone out. Why not have them armed with tranquilizer guns along with their high-powered sniper rifles?
Why take a life when you can put them to sleep? If the London police had this, we would not have the population up in arms over the senseless killing of the young bear on Tuesday.
It makes sense to me - hopefully the London police service will look into this.
Steven Scott
London
Disgusted by police actions
I am disgusted the police shot an innocent animal without tranquilizing it and transporting it to Northern Ontario . The bear most likely has been in the area for some time.
The Ministry of Natural Resources easily could have contacted a bear expert and had him sent here to take control of the situation. Had the police not stalked the bear and shot at it, it probably would have left the area without notice.
Sad for the bear and even sadder that sensible heads didn't prevail.
Jo-Ann Dunn
London
Terrified young bear had little chance to survive
I am dismayed and disheartened by the shooting of the bear in London . I also have to add that the photo of the police constable posing with the carcass reminds me of old safari photos from Africa decades ago.
With all due respect to the police officer, have we not evolved at all? I am disappointed The London Free Press would post that photo on the website.
One of the definitions of sentient humans is that we protect the most vulnerable in our society - what is more vulnerable than a lost and probably terrified young bear?
In Toronto a few weeks ago, a number of rescue organizations and police worked co-operatively to tranquilize a deer that had wandered into the Bay St. area. Could we not have done the same thing in this situation?
I would like to know who is responsible for making this decision? Is it another example of our council making reactive decisions by the seat of their pants? Is it the London Humane Society that rejected members due to them being "animal activists?'' Surely any animal activist would have protested this shooting. Or was it Animal Control, which only wants to make money? Perhaps it collected a bounty?
Terri L. Lyons
London
Police deserve praise
In regards to the public uproar of the shooting of this bear, let's keep one thing in mind - very few, if any of us, would know the right thing to do if we had encountered this bear.
Public safety in this case was the No. 1 priority and the police did exactly what was in the public's best interest - shoot the bear.
London is not Jellystone Park and this bear was not Yogi. I commend the police for their actions.
Brenda E. Sefeldas
London
Possibility bear may not have been from the wild
I have never heard of a bear coming so close to the city and that makes me wonder - has it been established that the bear was from the wild or has it been considered that some one who likes to keep large animals found the bear was becoming too much to handle and simply let him go?
Gale Allen
London
Common sense prevailed in other animal sightings
Several years ago, a cougar moved through the city of London and was sighted behind my apartment on Kipps Lane by my landlord and the London police department.
At the time, area residents were outraged the Ministry of Natural Resources and the police would not shoot the cougar, which was spotted on the Thames River Trail, which is frequented by children, pets, runners and cyclists. The authorities would not touch the cougar as it had not caused any harm to residents. It moved through the area without any further incidents. I applauded the way this situation was handled, and can tell you that I walked my disabled dogs through this area every day during the high-risk period and never encountered any problems.
Many people would agree a cougar is far more dangerous than a black bear, yet why was this one shot and killed? The area of the cougar sighting is within three kilometres of six schools, yet there was no panic about protecting the children. A coyote was also sighted recently on the University of Western Ontario campus, yet it was also not shot. Although coyotes are less of a threat than black bears, this too was handled with common sense.
What justification does the police department have for shooting this animal that has yet to do harm?
We move to locations such as Byron or along Kipps Lane to be close to the river, and close to nature. As the natural environment grows smaller for larger animals, we should not be surprised to find them in our backyards.
London police need to do a better job at being prepared for events like these.
Shoshana Verton
London
More wilderness in urban settings means more bears
Regarding the editorial, It's not about killing bears, but protecting wilderness (April 28).
Paul Berton manages to be right and wrong in the same editorial, indeed in the same sentence.
The bear issue is about wilderness protection, but not in the way you mean. The newspaper's own expert source from the Ministry of Natural Resources contradicts Berton in the lead story. Berton is suggesting the bear was in the west end because its habitat had been destroyed and it had nowhere else to live. The MNR source said bears are becoming more common in southern Ontario because more land is being allowed to revert to its natural state. My money is on the MNR.
However, you are right anyway. Wilderness is a good thing and uncleared green areas should be allowed to persist around and in the city. The natural consequence is there will be wild animals living in proximity to urban areas. Obviously, large predators cannot be allowed to roam unchecked among our children. Police have to be able to react quickly and decisively to deal with any threat, and a bear on a city street does represent a threat, regardless of what Oasis-watching couch potatoes might say.
So more wilderness is going to mean more wildlife shootings. Enviro-hysterics can have wilderness or they can have fewer bears shot, but they can't have it both ways.
Patrick Flannery
London
Better option is available rather than killing bear
Tuesday's black bear shooting brought to light some obvious shortcomings of both our provincial authorities as well as law enforcement representatives.
Paul Berton's editorial is helpful, but the issue is more about a lack of wild animal management resources in and around London than it is about wilderness preservation.
The latter is an ongoing effort, but in the meantime there is certainly a need to have trained Ministry of Natural Resources animal management people nearby to more humanely relocate any bears, cougars, coyotes, wolves (sightings reported though not confirmed) or other wild animals or escaped exotic pets when encounters occur.
These encounters may be rare, but they will most probably increase and a shoot-first mentality or comments that black bears are more dangerous than grizzlies indicate that a better option should be available and much more training of police with these types of situations is required.
Karl Teichner
London
