Alberta Considers Grizzly Bear Hunt
The Canadian Province of Alberta is contemplating a revival of its grizzly bear hunting season according to a recent story in the Calgary Sun. Alberta’s bear population is growing, leading to increases in human-bear conflicts. Not surprisingly, some “wildlife conservation” groups are not happy with that prospect, arguing that there are still not enough bears. However, the population in Alberta is not distributed evenly; in some locations there are as many as 18 bears per 1,000 square kilometers. As I have pointed out in previous blogs, as wildlife conservation efforts become more successful for large predators, such as bears and wolves, there will come a time–if not now, then later–where populations will have to be managed sustainably in order to maintain the tenuous balance that exists between carnivores and people. A failure to do so could result in a diminishment of local support for wildlife conservation as bear-human conflicts increase. This will likely mean a hunting season as a means to keep the popualtion under control.
Human-wildlife conflict, Wildlife management, hunting, wildlife conservation
Valerius Geist has long advocated long inefficient hunting seasons for large predators like bears. This teaches bear that humans are dangerous and to stay away. Thus you can have a relatively high population with minimum human-wildlife conflicts. In Vermont we have such a season for black bear. Houndsmen can run bear starting in June, the hunting season starts in Sept (no baiting) and ends in mid-November. This is coupled with a ban on baiting and feeding plus vigorous PR about bringing in bird feeders in the spring and trash management.
I would suggest Alberta start with low quotas but a long season to start controlling the population and educating the bears.
Eric: Good point. We certainly do not want grizzly bears becoming habituated to people, and a regulated hunt is certainly one way to “train” bears to stay away from people. This is critical to maintain large, potentially dangerous predators in a world dominated by human influences.
Where’s the link to the report/paper that suggests that the (grizzly) bear population is growing? The recently released status report that sparked all the media coverage indicates that if anything, much of Alberta is a mortality sink for grizzly bears that has seen declining populations over the last decades.
JAG: My general comments were based entirely on the article that appeared in the paper, not on the scientific literature. The article suggested that the population was growing, but potentially even more importantly, that the population was unevenly distributed. This latter factor, of course, can increase human-wildlife conflict. That being said, you are right in asking for a confirmation of the data on which these statements were based. Management policy should be based on good science. That is a core belief of The Wildlife Society.
“Management policy should be based on good science.”
Agreed. But what science is relevant? Just because a population is increasing or unevenly distributed does not mean it has passed a point where action must be taken to create/increase tolerance. Seems to me that the relevant scientific questions are (a) what population is sustainable, (b) what is the population now, (c) [perhaps most importantly] what is tolerance for the species in the areas it occupies, and (d) will hunting increase tolerance?
At its core, this is a social issue, a fact which agencies essentially ignore.
JB: Excellent points. I agree that this is largely a human dimensions issue. But, that being said, grizzly bears are probably not going to do well in areas that have relatively high human habitation. We both know that when push comes to shove, grizzlys will lose unless we set aside enough habitat for them to thrive without coming into frequent contact with people. Hunting will not “increase tolerance”, but what it will do is prevent habituation. Increasing familiarization of bears with people would be very bad for both species. I’ve always thought that we’re very lucky that grizzly bears do not kill as many people as tigers do (800 people in a 10-year period in the Sunderbans alone). If they did, I seriously doubt that we would have any grizzlys in North America today. In the meantime, grizzly conservation is going to involve a complex balancing act. Management of individual bears and populations will have to be part of that equation.