PLEASE NOTE: OFFICIAL PUBLIC
COMMENT PERIOD CLOSED JAN. 2, 2003.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND
PARTICIPATION.
Due to the volume of comments received on the Draft Black Bear Task Force
Report and Recommendations, DNR has decided not to post on its website
comments clearly received from citizens out of state and not more than one of
comments generated via an organized writing campaign which duplicates language
specified in that campaign.
Rest assured, however, that all comments will become part of our public
record and will be considered in the formation of Maryland's Black Bear
Management Plan.
Thank you again for your interest and participation in this important
issue.
Public Comments to be Posted Here Beginning Nov. 14,
2002 and running through January 2, 2003.
Date: Thursday, January 02, 2003 10:36 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, M. S., Columbia, Maryland
Date: Thursday, January 02, 2003 08:36 PM - Subject: black bear
Dear Sir or Madam, The concern I have is people's safety. It is only a matter of time before someone is injured by a bear because the bears are losing fear of man. Bears are wild animals and their behavior is not predictable. I was at first thought supportive of a very,very limited bear season, but after reading comments now feel that relocation to areas east of Fred. MD. would be better. This should be done with the problem bears first and would serve as adversive training and also let others enjoy
bears. Another benefit would be to spread bears thruout the state.
My Family owns property in Deer Park, MD in garrett county , but we live in the Balt. area. We have children and are fearful to let them in the forest alone for fear of coming in contact with a mother bear and cubs.
If a bear season were approved I feel it should be a very limited lottery like there was for the anterless deer some years back. Anyone could apply for the permits,as long as they had a hunting license. There could be a fee to apply and a fee if you were awarded a permit. This would help with compensating land owners for damages without added taxes. If someone didn't want bears hunted they could apply for a permit and not use it.
I feel bears, if hunted, should be allowed to be baited, but only with bait that is human scented (garbage type materials) because that would become adversive stimuli.
Do what is best for People and bears in that order. Thank You, C.E.S. Linthicum, MD
Date: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 10:36 PM - Subject: Comments on Black Bear Task Force Report and Recommendations
On behalf of the over 200,000 members and supporters of The Fund for Animals (The Fund), including 5,000 members and supporters who reside in the state of Maryland, I submit the following comments on the Draft Black Bear Task Force Report and Recommendations (hereafter “Task Force Report”). These comments are offered in addition to and as a supplement to the statement of Mike Markarian, President of The Fund for Animals and member of the 2002 Maryland Black Bear Task Force. See Appendix M in Task Force Report.
The Fund has been involved in Maryland black bear management issues for nearly a decade. In the mid-1990s, D.J. Schubert, a wildlife biologist with The Fund, was a member of the original black bear task force. At the conclusion of the deliberations of the original task force, The Fund and Vance T. Davis (an individual who served on the original task force) submitted a “minority report” objecting to several recommendations agreed to by the members of that original task force. The minority report, which is hereby incorporated by reference and attached as Exhibit 1, provided a comprehensive critique of a proposed black bear hunt, discussed the benefits and consequences of a compensation program for black bear damage, disclosed a variety of non-lethal techniques to reduce and/or prevent bear damage, and recommended that the Maryland Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) prepare a substantive report on the status and severity of the black bear depredation/conflict “problem” in Maryland. While, to its credit, the MDNR did not reestablish a bear hunt and has taken positive steps to increase its ability to respond to human/bear conflict incidents and to educate the public about living with bears, it has failed to implement other recommendations made by The Fund in its minority report.
The Fund’s perspective on black bear management in Maryland has largely remained the same since the original task force completed its deliberations. The interests of The Fund and the bears during the deliberations of the current task force were represented by Mr. Markarian. In response to the recommendations of the current task force, Mr. Markarian submitted a statement supporting several proposed actions, strongly objecting to other recommendations -- particularly a renewed effort to reestablish a black bear hunt. See Appendix M in Task Force Report. This time, The Fund was joined in its criticism of a proposed hunt – See Appendix H, J, and K in Task Force Report – demonstrating an increase in concern associated with reestablishing a general bear hunting season after nearly 50 years of protecting black bears. These statements, including a statement from Dr. Ronald Barry, a professor of biology at Frostburg State University, concluded that the significant paucity in biological and ecological data on Maryland’s bear population does not support the establishment of a hunt, that the impacts of a hunt to the population are unknown, and that a sport hunt would not effectively address human/bear conflicts.
Though the current task force provided a more balanced perspective on black bear management in Maryland compared to the original task force, the membership of the current task force remained biased toward a black bear hunt and was not reflective of the interests of all Maryland residents. Based on data from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, there are 126,000 Maryland residents 16-years of age or older who hunt representing only three percent of the total Maryland population. 1996 National Survey of Fishing, Hunting, and Wildlife-Associated Recreation – Maryland and U.S. Census Bureau Quick Facts. The overwhelming majority of Maryland residents do not hunt and a portion of that subpopulation are staunchly opposed to hunting. It the black bear task force or any task force established to address a wildlife issue in Maryland were to legitimately represent the state’s population, the breakdown of interests represented on the task force must reflect the interests of the state’s population and should include representatives from throughout the state. While the residents of Garrett and Allegheny Counties may be more likely to experience a human/bear incident than other Maryland residents, selecting task force members to achieve a desired result is inappropriate and unacceptable.
The Fund also objects to the MDNR’s efforts to favor the interests of Garrett and Allegheny County residents over the interests of other Maryland residents in selecting task force members and in encouraging public involvement in this process. The public trust doctrine – as the MDNR is well aware – provides a basic blueprint for the management of all wildlife which is that wildlife is held in trust for the public to be managed in a manner consistent with the public’s interest. In other words, black bears in Maryland are held in trust for all resident of Maryland and, indeed, all residents of the United States. Black bears are not “owned” by the State of Maryland, the MDNR, or the residents of particular counties – they are held in trust for the public. Thus, while black bears may primarily inhabit Garrett and Allegheny Counties in western Maryland, the interests of those residents should not receive greater attention or preference than the interests of, for example, Montgomery County residents in regard to the management of black bears. Stacking the task force with representatives from Garrett and Allegheny Counties and the MDNR's decision to only host a single public meeting in Garrett County to accept public comment on the Task Force report are in clear violation of the public trust doctrine and clearly conflict with the task force’s recommendation to “determine the perceptions, desires, and attitudes of people in Maryland concerning black bears and to enable the public to provide input on the bear management program.” Strategies implementing Goal 9 in Task Force Report (emphasis added). These decisions also reflect the MDNR’s unwillingness or inability to understand that all Maryland residents must have an equal voice in the management of Maryland’s wildlife, including its bears, regardless of where they live and whether they hunt or not.
Despite its concern for the composition of the current black bear task force and the failure of the MDNR to provide for greater public participation in this process by hosting public meetings to accept public testimony about black bears and their management throughout the state, The Fund does support a number of recommendations contained in the Task Force Report. Those recommendations include:
1) further studies of the biology, ecology, and habitat needs of black bears in Maryland;
2) conducting public attitude surveys;
3) identifying and protecting black bear habitat;
4) providing non-hunting opportunities for bear observation and enjoyment;
5) continuing and expanding public education programs pertaining to bears; and
6) implementing non-lethal strategies to reduce, eliminate, and prevent black bear/human conflicts.
These issues are broadly discussed in the Task Force Report. If these recommendations are incorporated into a bear management framework, the details associated with implementing each proposal may or may not be supported by The Fund. To avoid potential disputes over such details, The Fund recommends the continuation of the current task force or the establishment of an advisory committee to oversee and discuss the details relevant to the implementation of any goals and strategies contained in the final black bear management plan or framework.
While The Fund supports many of the broad goals and strategies contained in the Task Force Report, if the past is any indication, it has no confidence in the MDNR to follow through on such goals/strategies. A review of the MDNR’s Black Bear Management Plan (1992-2001) (hereafter Management Plan) clearly demonstrates that the MDNR has grossly failed to implement the majority of objectives and strategies contained in that report – objectives and strategies that were deemed of great importance in 1992 to improve the MDNR’s understanding and management of Maryland’s black bears.
For example, the Management Plan recommends public opinion surveys to “determine the perceptions, desires, and attitudes of people in Maryland concerning black bears and to enable the public to provide input on the bear management program.” Management Plan at 17. As conceded in the Task Force Report, this survey – recommended 10 years ago -- was never conducted. Task Force Report at 4 and 15. The Task Force Report specifies that such a survey is necessary to “determine the CCC (cultural carrying capacity) for black bears for each county,” and to “establish a black bear population objective for each county in consideration of the CCC.” Despite this stated need, the Task Force Report inexplicably and recklessly recommends proceeding with a bear hunt even before such a survey is conducted. This is a perfect example of placing the cart before the horse as a well-designed and conducted survey may alter black bear management strategies consistent with public desires, perceptions, and attitudes. Moreover, while establishing a CCC may be an interesting academic exercise, it is a meaningless standard to use to justify a hunt because the CCC is not necessarily indicative of public support for hunting and since it is a highly dynamic standard which can vary in response to a number of factors – including public education about bear biology, ecology, and how to peacefully coexist with bruin neighbors.
The Management Plan also sets forth strategies to estimate parameters that influence the dynamics and ecology of black bear populations in western Maryland. One such strategy is to obtain an “accurate density estimate” of black bears which the MDNR concedes “is necessary for responsible management of black bears, including a reasonable harvest.” Management Plan at 19. The MDNR has recently engaged in efforts to estimate the black bear population size and population trends through the use of hair snares and DNA analysis and scent stations. The results of the hair snare research were only partially disclosed in the Task Force Report and in a document entitled “Black Bear Population Survey.” These results and the methodology used to estimate the number and density of Maryland’s bears are flawed and/or have been improperly interpreted as detailed below.
1. Each bait station was located in “good bear habitat” within each grid. See “Black Bear Population Survey.” By purposefully locating bait sites only within good bear habitat, this increased the likelihood of one or more bears visiting each bait station and leaving a hair sample potentially resulting in an overestimate in the number and density of bears within the study area. The MDNR has not disclosed – and may not even know – the proportion of good versus marginal versus poor bear habitat within the study area or within each survey grid. That information is crucial if anyone is to be able to understand and properly interpret the study results.
2. The MDNR failed to discuss or evaluation how 108 bait stations placed in good bear habitat within the survey grids in western Maryland may unnaturally alter black bear movements and distribution patterns and how this may have influenced bear population and density estimates. The fact that 20 of 42 bait sites where usable hair samples were obtained contained hair from more than one bear may indicate that the bait stations did alter natural bear distribution and movement patterns.
3. Despite locating bait stations within good bear habitat, only 65 of 108 bait stations collected one or more hair samples. This may suggest that black bears are not as widespread throughout western Maryland as the MDNR would like the public to believe. If, as the MDNR asserts, the black bear population “has grown significantly” since 1991, see Black Bear Population Survey report, surely hair samples would have been obtained at more than only 39 percent of the bait sites, particularly since these bait sites were located in good bear habitat.
4. Based on obtaining hair samples from 92 different bears during the study, the MDNR asserts that the black bear population in western Maryland from Cumberland to the West Virginia line is estimated to be 227 bears with a 95% probability that the bear population ranges from 166-337 bears. See Black Bear Population Survey at 2 and Task Force Report at 11. Not only is the given range of potential black bear population size quite large, but the MDNR provides no explanation as to how a sample of 92 bears is extrapolated to a population estimate of 227 bears. Undoubtedly, this is the result of using the CAPTURE computer program but the MDNR should have, at a minimum, provided a description of the key characteristics of the program, the assumptions inherent in such a program, and elaborate on how the program calculates a bear population estimate based on the available data. Without such information, the public has no means of assessing the adequacy or accuracy of the CAPTURE program in developing population estimates. Moreover, the large variability in the estimated size of the black bear population in western Maryland demonstrates the need for a more cautious approach to bear management in Maryland to prevent adverse direct, indirect, or cumulative impacts from hunting, development pressures, or other threats to the black bear population that could number, assuming without conceding that the MDNR estimates accurately reflect the status of the population, as low as 166 bears.
5. The MDNR concludes that Maryland’s black bear population is conservatively estimated to consist of 266-437 bears based on a wholly unsubstantiated claim that at least 100 bears exist east of Cumberland, Maryland. The MDNR has no valid scientific data to substantiate that claim and, therefore, it must not be used or considered in developing a bear management plan, framework, or in assessing the appropriateness of a black bear hunt.
6. Even if it The Fund were to assume that the recent bear hair snare study is of rigorous design and that the results provide an accurate reflection of the status of the black bear population in western Maryland – which, of course, is not the case – the results provide no evidence that the black bear population has increased in size. The black bear density estimate from the recent study of 27.3 bears per 100 square miles is no different from the density estimate (25-28.3 bears per 100 square miles) calculated from black bear population data collected in Garrett County (approximately 600 square miles) ten years ago (see statement of Dr. Ronald Barry, Appendix H in Task Force Report). Thus, the only data collected on the black bear population size makes it clear that the black bear population has remained stable throughout the past decade and has not increased as claimed by the MDNR.
The minimal description of the scent station research included in the Task Force Report does not allow the public to assess the accuracy of this technique in determining bear population trends. Though the MDNR states that 9 scent station were surveyed in Garrett (8 stations) and Allegheny (1 station) counties in 1993, 2000, and 2001 – a rather small number of stations – it provides no additional details of the study design. For example, it is not clear if the scent surveys were conducted on the same survey routes each year, if the same bait was used to attract bears, what influence the bait had in unnaturally affecting bear distribution and movement patterns, or what impact other factors, particularly, the availability and abundance of natural foods, may have had on bear visitation to the bait sites.
Another strategy identified in the Management Plan related to the dynamics and ecology of black bear population is to determine age-specific mortality rates that the MDNR concedes are “an important population parameter and essential to most population models.” Management Plan at 19. Through a radio collar study of female black bears, the MDNR has determined that black bear cubs have a 56% survival rate to one year of age, Task Force Report at 16, but concedes that “no information is available on survival rates beyond the cub age class.” Id. Without age-specific mortality rates beyond the cub age class, the MDNR does not have sufficient data to use in any type of population model and, without such data, the MDNR can not possibly understand or evaluate the direct, indirect, or cumulative impact of hunting in relationship with other black bear mortality factors.
The Management Plan specifies that black bear natality and recruitment rates will be determined in order to understand the dynamics and ecology of Maryland’s black bears. While the MDNR’s research from 1986-2000 provides an average of 2.92 cubs/sow and a cub survival rate of 56 percent over that time span, the MDNR has not disclosed data or may not have valid data on age-specific natality rates, changes in bear natality and mortality rates over time, nor has it ever conducted a systematic study to understand black bear recruitment or the factors influencing such recruitment. Without such data and other data on the dispersal of black bear young, the MDNR can not understand the dynamics of the population, the significance of natural and human-caused threats to the population, nor can it responsibly implement a bear hunt without potentially harming the bear population. Considering that black bears are one of the slowest reproducing mammal species in the world, the MDNR must reject any recommendation to resume a black bear hunt until far more is known about black bear natality rates and age-specific survival rates in Maryland.
The availability and quality of black bear habitat is of critical importance to the future viability of black bears in western Maryland. In the Management Plan, the MDNR set forth an objective “to determine both quantitative and qualitative habitat requirements for black bears in Western Maryland and to develop habitat management guidelines for implementation on private lands and particularly state and federally owned and managed lands.” Management Plan at 20. Strategies designed to achieve this objective include identification of preferred bear habitats in western Maryland, determine the seasonal abundance and utilization of various bear foods, and the development of specific habitat management guidelines for the management of timber prescriptions and other uses occurring on public lands in Maryland. Though some studies have been conducted to identify and assess black bear habitat (e.g., Webster 1994, Dateo 1997), a comprehensive study of black bear habitat and past, present, and potential future threats to that habitat has not been conducted. In addition, despite having some data on the habitat needs of Maryland’s bears, the MDNR has not developed specific habitat management recommendations, Task Force Report at 17, despite explicitly recognizing this as a critical component of black bear management on private, state, and federal owned and managed lands in Maryland. Management Plan at 20.
Finally, the Management Plan sets forth an objective of developing a simulation model of the bear population in Western Maryland. Management Plan at 21. The MDNR explicitly recognizes that the models “would be used to evaluate the effects of sport hunting, land use changes, and other factors that potentially affect bears in western Maryland.” Management Plan at 22. Clearly, such models must be developed before any sport hunt is implemented. To develop such models, reliable data on black bear population dynamics including age-specific natality rates, recruitment, age-specific mortality rates, sex and age composition data, must be collected to input into the model program. While no model can accurately reflect the actual condition of the population in the wild, the ability of a model to predict changes in the bear population in response to any number of factors is based on the quality and quantity of the data used in the model. Thus, to develop a suitable model for black bears in Maryland, data on the relevant biological and ecological parameters must be collected over several years in order to improve the sensitivity and accuracy of the model. Remarkably, despite conceding ten years ago that a population simulation model was essential to, among other things, understand the effects of sport hunting and land use changes on the bear population, “population models have not been developed.” Task Force Report at 18. Moreover, even the task force concedes that “additional biological information” must be collected to permit the development of such models. Id.
The failure of the MDNR to implement many of the strategies to achieve the stated objectives set forth in the Management Plan is appalling. Without such evidence, it was irresponsible and reckless for the majority of current task force members to propose the establishment of a bear hunting season and would be equally inappropriate for the MDNR to initiate a bear hunt. While The Fund is unalterably opposed to sport hunting of any species on moral and scientific grounds, in this case, the MDNR must not even contemplate a hunt until, at a minimum, it:
1) collects the biological, ecological, and habitat data that it concedes is critical to properly manage Maryland’s black bears;
2) develops an appropriate population simulation model;
3) prepares a new black bear management plan providing a comprehensive review of all studies and surveys, including survey methodologies, relevant to black bear management in Maryland;
4) evaluates the impacts of a black bear hunt on black bears, non-target species, and state and federally protected species and assesses all reasonable and feasible alternatives to a black bear hunt; and
5) develops and implements a plan to maximize public involvement in the development of the management plan and the broader black bear decision-making process. In addition, if the MDNR decides to propose a hunt it must prove with indisputable evidence that a hunt is necessary and biologically justified, that a hunt will effectively address human/bear conflicts, and that there are no non-lethal strategies available to address human/bear conflict situations.
In addition to the evidence presented above, information contained in The Fund’s 1995 minority report (exhibit 1), and the comments by Mike Markarian in response to the task force recommendations (Appendix H of the Task Force Report), The Fund provides the following additional comments on the proposal to establish a black bear hunt, other recommendations contained in the Task Force Report, and the Task Force Report in general.
1. The Fund supports both the continuation of the black bear stamp program to raise money for damage compensation and, under certain conditions, legislation to establish a source of compensation money funded by general tax revenue.
The Fund endorses the continuation of the black bear stamp program to, at a minimum, provide a means by which persons interested in Maryland bear protection and conservation can specifically contribute to such efforts.
While efforts to raise funds for a black bear damage compensation program have not generated sufficient money to provide 100% compensation, completely compensating residents for damage caused by a wild animal – a species managed in the public trust – is not advisable. If any compensation is to be provided, partial recovery of the costs associated with damage attributable to a black bear should be sufficient. Fully compensating individuals for black bear damage reduces any incentive for the complainant to attempt and implement non-lethal strategies to humanely resolve conflict issues and may create an expectation that all forms of wild damage should be covered by a statewide compensation program – an inordinately expensive potential problem.
The Fund also supports an annual appropriation from the Maryland legislature should also be pursued to establish an account – funded through general tax dollars – to provide sufficient (but not complete) compensation to residents who experience a conflict with a bear. The Fund will only support such legislation, however, if the MDNR rejects the Task Force proposal for a bear hunt.
Any type of damage compensation program, however, has to require the use of non-lethal alternatives prior to initiating any lethal control. At present there is no evidence that a person experiencing a bear conflict must try using a non-lethal strategy first to resolve the conflict before seeking compensation. The damage compensation program rules – regardless of the funding source – must be altered to require complainants to attempt the use of non-lethal strategies before any compensation will be provided.
2. The Task Force Report is not sufficiently detailed and lacks reference to supporting scientific evidence – a more substantive and comprehensive report is required.
The Task Force Report does not contain sufficient detail to provide the public with a full understanding of the need for and full range of impacts associated with the Task Force recommendations thereby compromising the ability of the public to submit fully informed comments on the proposals. This is not the fault of the Task Force but, rather, represents an error by the MDNR for electing to solicit public comment on the Task Force Report without first developing a more comprehensive report detailing the biology, ecology, and management history of black bears in Maryland and assessing the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts associated with the recommendations contained in the Task Force Report. Such a report could have and should have been released with the Task Force Report and would have enabled the public to provide far more informed comments on the various proposals. At a minimum, the MDNR should commit to developing such a report and releasing the report for public review and comment prior to enacting any changes in bear management policies. To do otherwise and to simply initiate a bear hunt without disclosing the details of such a hunt, evaluating the impacts of the hunt, or considering alternatives to the hunt is entirely arbitrary and violates the basic tenets of administrative law. Whether Maryland state law requires such a report is irrelevant as the controversy surrounding bear management in Maryland warrants the preparation of a comprehensive report.
3. A scientifically valid and statistically significant public opinion survey must be conducted prior to instituting a black bear hunt and/or altering lethal bear control policies.
As explained above, the MDNR has already conceded and the Task Force has emphasized the importance of conducting a public opinion survey on bears and bear management in Maryland. Such a survey should not be used to assess the Cultural Carrying Capacity for black bears in western Maryland since estimating a CCC from such data is difficult if not entirely impossible, since a CCC does not measure the public’s support for or opposition to a bear hunt, and because a CCC is highly influenced by a number of variable, most notably public education. In addition, to be consistent with it public trust responsibilities, such a survey cannot be limited to the residents of western Maryland but must assess the opinions of a subsample of all Maryland residents. The survey must be conducted and the results published before the MDNR formally proposes to establish a bear hunt or modify black bear nuisance control policies.
4. Efforts to educate the public on how to peacefully coexist with bears must be expanded.
To its credit, the MDNR has employed public education as a strategy to resolve human/bear conflicts by teaching residents about bear biology, ecology, behavior, and the use of various non-lethal strategies to reduce, eliminate, and prevent bear/human conflicts. Such programs must be expanded and new innovative ideas must be developed to deliver this important educational message to the public. In addition, the MDNR must require complainants to utilize non-lethal strategies before considering an application for compensation for damage attributable to bears and must enact rules or support legislation to ban the feeding of wildlife, particularly bear and deer, and/or more aggressively enforce any rules that may already exist.
5. The recommended bear hunt must be rejected as biologically reckless and unsupportable.
The available evidence presented in the Task Force Report and in other documents does not and cannot support the proposed black bear hunt. Contrary to the statements of the MDNR and contained in the Task Force Report about a black bear population increasing in size, the available data suggest that the population has remained stable in western Maryland. Moreover, the methodology used to estimate bear population number and density is flawed and, therefore, the results are highly questionable.
The MDNR has also failed to follow through on many of the recommendations contained in its Management Plan such as conducting a public opinion survey, developing an accurate estimate of population size, determining natality and age-specific mortality rates, and developing a simulation model – recommendations that the MDNR claimed were critically important for proper bear management. To now enact a sport hunt without, at a minimum: conducting the relevant surveys and studies to understand the biology, ecology, and habitat needs of the bears; evaluating alternatives to a proposed hunt; and to assess the potential impact of a hunt on the bears, non-target species, and protected species is biologically unjustified and reckless. The failure of the MDNR to conduct the requisite biological and ecological investigations of the black bear population in Maryland is particularly egregious considering that Maryland law requires the MDNR to establish a hunting season only with due regard for the “distribution, abundance, economic value, and breeding habits of wildlife.” Maryland Code at §10-205. In this case, the MDNR has no valid data on black bear distribution, abundance, or breeding habits yet it is contemplating establishing a hunting season which, if established, would squarely violate state law.
Furthermore, the notion that a sport hunt will resolve bear/human conflicts is pure fiction as there is no way sport hunters will be able to target the specific bear or bears responsible for such conflict incidents. Nor has it been documented that killing bears who are known to be causing conflicts is even necessary considering the variety of non-lethal techniques and strategies available to resolve, prevent, reduce, and/or eliminate such disputes. Therefore, any hunting season premised on the alleged need to resolve human/bear conflicts will be irrational on its face and will represent the pinnacle of arbitrary and capricious decisionmaking.
Finally, considering the territorial behavior of bears, intraspecific aggression among resident and transient bears, their biological ability to self-regulate their population size, and how slowly they reproduce, hunting black bears has no biological justification and must not be considered.
CONCLUSION:
If the MDNR objectively evaluated the available evidence on bear biology and ecology in Maryland, considered the objectives/strategies contained in the Management Plan – many of which have never been fulfilled or implement, and recognized the abundance of non-lethal strategies to reduce, eliminate, and prevent bear/human conflicts, it would have to conclude that a bear hunt cannot be justified at this time or in the future. Alternatively, the MDNR should expand its effort to educate the public about bear biology, ecology, and behavior and to introduce residents to the numerous non-lethal techniques and strategies available to humanely reduce, eliminate, prevent, and resolve human/bear conflicts. If damage compensation is offered as a means to ameliorate bear damage incidents, The Fund supports a continuation of the bear stamp program and efforts to obtain an annual appropriation from the legislature for partial compensation of damages attributable to black bears. Persons applying for such compensation, however, must have attempted to use a non-lethal strategy to reduce or prevent such conflicts prior to the awarding of any compensation.
Therefore, while the MDNR must reject the proposal to establish a bear hunt, other recommendations contained in the Task Force Report – increased study of the black bear population, conducting a public opinion survey, expanded public education efforts – must be embraced by the MDNR and incorporated into a new and comprehensive bear management plan. Such a plan must:
1) provide a comprehensive analysis of black bear biology, ecology, behavior, habitat needs, and historical management practices in Maryland relying on the best available scientific literature;
2) assess all reasonable and feasible alternatives to a black bear hunt and evaluate the impact of any proposed hunt on non-target species including any state or federally protected species;
3) comply with all relevant Maryland laws; and
4) must be released for public review and comment prior to any substantive change in Maryland’s bear management program, particularly any change that will permit the sport hunting of bears or increase the use of lethal bear control techniques.
Thank you in advance for considering these comments. Sincerely, D.J. Schubert, Wildlife Biologist
Date: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 04:36 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft Report produced by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. There is absolutely no rationale for a bear hunt in Maryland or anywhere else. There is no scientific justificatioh for a bear hunt as a solution for bear/human conflicts. People must learn to stop feeding them. Please use the solutions that already exist by non-lethal methods for example: removing trash that attracts bears and installation of electric fences around crops and beehives. Thank you for your compassion. Sincerely, Col. & Mrs. R. R.
Date: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 03:21 PM - Subject: No Black Bear Hunting!
Dear DNR: I wanted to get my comments in under the wire and let you know that, as a citizen of Maryland for the last 8 years, I am appalled to hear that our state might consider allowing a sport hunt on our tiny black bear population. I've supported the bear stamp program, generously, over the years, and would be horrified to think that we are compensating farmers and NOT protecting our bears. I would no longer be able to buy stamps if we instituted a bear hunt. I am convinced, after reading the Black Bear Commission's report, that there is absolutely no scientific relationship between having bear hunting and reducing bear damage. There's NOTHING to support that. In fact, I think it will have the opposite effect. I've spoken with farmers and hunters in the Western region of the state and they want help dealing with bears, but not necessarily in the form of a hunt.Those that are for it have not read the materials and don't know that hunting does not equal bear damage reduction.
I do think it will tarnish our reputation as a state to allow sport hunting of our bears...don't we have room for the 300 or so bears we have? Can't Maryland give them sort of sanctuary and instead teach them through the more aggressive hazing techniques that are available and HAVE NOT BEEN TRIED in Maryland to learn to stay away from crops and homes. We must attempt non-lethal and humane approaches BEFORE we start shooting, randomly, at bears for fun and trophy.
I camp, hike, and socialize in the western portion of our state often --I love it there. I love the people there. I believe they have not been given adequate information and will not be happy with the result of killing the bears. I know the rest of the state will not be.
Please consider the longterm effects of this decision and remember all the citizens of Maryland --- please do not authorize a bear hunt. Don't overturn the longstanding tradition of bear protection in Maryland. Sincerely, N. P., Bethesda, MD
Date: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 12:06 PM - Subject: Comments on Black Bear Task Force Report
I oppose the proposal to hunt black bears in Maryland and ask that black bears be reclassified from a game to a nongame species.
As I understand it, there is not an excessive number of bears in Maryland, but there are increasing instances of bears initiating contact with humans, some property damage, and more car collisions with bears. Also, I understand that DNR has more or less gotten into the habit of killing targeted species as a means of animal control or management. This pleases hunters and hunters pay into the system, while others generally do not.
I am a biologist. My position is closest to that of the HSUS representative, who asked for a "biocentric" view of bears. I think of bears as Marylanders, albeit of a different species, and that they have a right to existence as bears, and not as things we label according to how we might want to use them. Respect of other species is not a bad value to have or to develop in our daily lives. I think of the state's role as that of stewards.
I lived for a while in Colorado where there is or was a lot of hunting. George Falter, one of the Task Force members, cites hunting accidents as an excellent reason to ban a bear or any other kind of hunt. I agree with him. Hunting injuries to people and livestock are no small matter. These ARE ALL preventable. Not instituting a bear hunt will prevent them and mean a safer environment for all.
Tom Rooney, Maryland Sportsman's Association's representative on the BBTF, writes that hunting is a way for men and women to "value the outdoors and the rich experience of communing with nature." I would propose that it is possible to do that and have that very rewarding experience without hunting or killing and recommend that he and his fellow hunters sometime genuinely try it.
Instituting a hunt would also invite poachers to reapply themselves to killing black bears in order to illegally sell their gall bladders and other parts. BBTF member, Mike Markarian, of the Fund for Animals, also makes this point. I think law enforcement would agree, that to a poacher or a potential poacher, a species is either protected or it is not. If Maryland hunters push their desire forward to have a bear hunt, limited or not, poachers aren't going to make fine distinctions. If they see it's okay to kill black bears, they'll give themselves "eligibility" and kill them. Their depredations have been a real danger to the continued existence of black bears for a long time.
And this is an anecdote, but I think it has value in telling: a relative of mine had an encounter with a bear, drawn to the property by food stored in a shed. It had come to the shed on several occasions. At first the thinking was that the bear was trespassing. He shouldn't have been there. It was up to the bear to make the decision to change what he was doing. Then my relative found himself between the bear and the shed. He managed to make the bear move off by making a lot of noise, and then, although it was inconvenient to find another place to store the food and hard work to move it, my relative, being bright, moved it. I think Marylanders are no less bright. I anticipate that making changes similar to his will mean initial inconvenience to people, but if DNR puts its approval behind doing things like that, people will go along. They might even come to take a certain pride in using their heads to come up with ways that serve both bears and people, especially if it leads to achieving improvement in bear-people co-existence.
Perhaps DNR or the State of Maryland could mount some sort of state appeal for a peaceful black bear fund that wildlife enthusiasts and others could donate to. I agree with BBTF Chairman, Tom Mathews, that "...the future of bears and other wildlife species will be more secure if Maryland develops a wildlife conservation program formulated for and funded by all the citizens of this state." and I also agree with him that "hunter dollars (should) no longer be used".
Lastly, addressing car collisions with bears, there is some data that suggests straight-line-of-sight tunnels constructed under highways are effective in decreasing such accidents. I don't know if that would work in the terrain of western Maryland, but I bet someone could come up with something that would. - L. W., Kensington, MD
Date: Wednesday, January 01, 2003 08:51 AM - Subject: Bears
I urge you not to have a "Shooting Bear" season with a gun but only with a camera.
If people would stop spending money on buying camouflage outfits, guns, and the list goes on and on, they could be feeding, and spaying and neutering some of the animals, and make sure that they have a safe environment in which to live...especially since the animals were here first and we have taken their space.
Killing is killing and that is what we are teaching our children...compassion should be taught...feeding, photographing and honoring...at a distance, of course. Thank you , J. A. D.
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 02:36 PM - Subject: Bears
My name is R. B. and I have properties at both Accident and Friendsville, Maryland. I would like to voice my opinion regarding the bear issue in Garrett County.
Although I have lived in the mountains of Garrett County for 9 years I have only seen about 12 black bear in total. Not only do I enjoy seeing bear in the wild, but on every encounter the bear has run off within seconds of our meeting. I sincerely believe that between natural death, poaching, and death by motor vehicles, that the bear population is held in check. There is no need for bear hunting in Garrett county and I am strictly opposed to it.
Educate the locals and visitors to stop feeding the bears, take in their garbage, and let the bears alone. The little damage that is exacted on the farmers can be compensated by some means even if it demands another tax.
The evidence does not support a hunt for bears. Example - no one has ever injured by a bear in Garrett County - bear meat is untasteful and therefore not popular - A BEAR RUG? - IS THAT ANY REASON TO HUNT BEAR??? Only those ignorant enough reagarding our natural resources would think so.
As a hunter of 40 years, it's my hope that bear hunting never comes to Garrett county, because once it does, you can say good bye to the small bear population as the hunting will only continue to escalate.
I appreciate the efforts of the DNR and hope that the people in Garrett County will speak up to protect the bear population. -R. W. B.
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 01:51 PM - Subject: black bears
Please do NOT recommend a bear hunting season. We need to protect animals and the Earth. Please do the right thing, find humane alternatives. - J. M.
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 01:51 PM - Subject: Bear issues
I would like to contribute my opinion regarding the bear issues in Maryland. I have lived at ___ Bear Creek Road, Friendsville MD for 9 years. I have enjoyed seeing bears on several rare occasions. Each time the bear ran off in seconds. I see no problems with bears in garret County Maryland and want to express my opinion that they not be hunted. In situations where farmers can show evidence of damage, they should be paid for their losses. This type of damage does not in my opinion in any way justify a hunt.
People should continue to be educated not to leave garbage outside or to leave animals tied outside.
I appreciate the efforts of the DNR and hope that the people in garret county will speak up to protect the bear population. Sincerely, D. H.
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 11:53 AM - Subject: NO BEAR HUNTING SEASON!
Thank you for extending the deadline for public comments on the Maryland Black Bear Task Force draft report.
Please DO NOT allow bear hunting season in Maryland. There is no good scientific reason to support such a hunt and we don't need any more "trophy hunters" with loaded rifles roaming the state. After the D.C. sniper case, I would think ALL HUNTING should be banned permanently to reduce the number of rifles being carried around in vehicles. Thank you for your kind consideration. - C. P.
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 10:51 AM - Subject: please help asap
All Concerned: Maryland Black Bear Task Force: This letter is to respectively urge the task force NOT to recommend a bear hunting season. Please make a difference today. Thank you very much for your time. Please confirm receipt of this e-mail if possible. Sincerely, K. H.
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 12:21 AM - Subject: Comments on Draft Black Bear Task Force Report
Dear Black Bear Task Force, I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft Report produced by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. There is no rationale for a bear hunt in Maryland. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific "problem" bears and would not address any bear/human conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to bear/human conflicts. A bear hunt is biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated at only 266-437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist to resolve bear/human conflicts in a non-lethal manner. Simple, effective solutions already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to behave. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
I am one of the vast majority of Maryland citizens who want to see bears protected in the state. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears protected. Please take the common-sense approach of removing the bear hunt recommendation from the Black Bear Task Force Report. Sincerely,
Note: The message above was sent by the following:
M. R., Rockville, MD
A. W., Columbia, MD
T. J., Cumberland, MD
N. H., Bethesda, MD
C. A., Arnold, MD
E. K., Baltimore, MD
A. G. W., Laurel, MD
C. J., Salisbury, MD
J. H., Columbia, MD
P. B., Joppa, MD
L. K., Nottingham, MD
T. R., Buckeystown, MD
A. C., Phoenix, MD
G'N. J., Rockville, MD
H. Q., Baltimore, MD
B. K., Gaithersburg, MD
R. F., Rockville, MD
C. R., Baltimore, MD
S. S., Keedysville, MD
N. D., Potomac, MD
J. G., Germantown, MD
M. R., Rockville, MD
R. S., Potomac, MD
K. B., Chevy Chase, MD
M. L., Columbia, MD
S. T., Silver Spring, MD
L. A. E., Laurel, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 31, 2002 12:21 AM
Do not allow black bear hunting this season. Thank You. - W. P.
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 08:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a regulated black bear hunt in the
state of Maryland.
The Task Force Report is well done and most of its recommendations are
undeniably on the mark. At this time, however, a black bear hunt would be
biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between
266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the viability of the
population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago. Black bear
populations should be allowed to reach biological carrying capacity.
While I applaud the Task Force's recommendation that hunters conform to "fairchase" ethics, there is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as
a solution to human-bear conflicts. Simple, effective solutions to
human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that
attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and
using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people
would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a
majority of Maryland citizens and tourists would welcome opportunities for
non-hunting recreation associated with Maryland's black bears. Please do
not initiate a regulated hunting program at this time. Reclassify black
bears from a game to a non-game species and, instead of hunting license
revenues, authorize new funding sources for black bear management such as a
Maryland State Lottery. Sincerely, J. B. T., Adelphi MD
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: Comments on MD Black Bear Task Force Draft Report
I am opposed to a black bear hunt in Maryland. Barely returned from
the brink of extinction, Maryland's black bear population may be
jeopardized by even a limited hunt. Other solutions exist to prevent
bear-human conflicts and should be implemented in Maryland to
condition bears to avoid humans. In any case, a recreational bear
hunt would not be directed at specific problem animals. The interests
of recreational hunters should not take precedence over the majority
of Marylanders and other locals who prefer bear protection. Thank you. - S. K.
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: Bear Season
Just an FYI.....I was recently talking with a friend of mine who hunts
Spring Lick in Garrett County. On the 1st morning of gun season he saw (1) deer and (7) bear.....something's not quite right with this ratio! Thanks, R. M.
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 03:36 PM - Subject: Bears
We request that the DNR task force NOT recommend a
bear hunting season. Your agency is supposed to
protect wildlife not destroy it. - D. J.
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 10:36 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
Good Morning and an early Happy New Year to you!
Let's start out the new year on a new page! It truly is a new era in Maryland--one where a better understanding and appreciation of wildlife and the environment is emerging. Please focus on positive ways to handle problems with wildlife---killing is so
Neanderthal. The population of these bears is so small that to reduce it further would be foolish. Why cut off our noses to spite our faces? Solutions to this problem are founded in pure common sense: take away the food supply provided by people who leave their food outside. Anyone who is hungry-- be it bear or human---is going to be attracted to the smell of food. The public needs to be better educated in this regard. Electric fencing also works well to "educate" the bears to stay out of forbidden areas. Bears are not stupid: they will catch on to the shock therapy quickly. To me, this is a "no-brainer." It's nearly 2003--we can absolutely do better than our forefathers. I hope our sensibilities and
sensitiveness have evolved further.
PLEASE DO NOT ALLOW the HUNTING of BEARS.
Sincerely, M. G., Ph.D. (I teach a course entitled, "The Earth, Animals, and You," for children. Even my class knows killing is not the way to go. Let's set a positive example to those who will inherit the earth after we are gone. Thank you!)
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 06:06 AM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force Public Comment Web Site
Dear DNR, There is half a page concerning this web site in the Dec. 29, 2002 Sunday issue of the Cumberland Times-News. The outdoor Editor questions many things, including the usefulness of this very website (maybe to sell more newspapers). He published verbatim some of the comments in the newspaper at his web site to get people to submit comments to this web site, in what I believe is his attempts was to encourage a bear hunt because the odds were not looking good at this site. He tried to discredit the site since the DNR web master probably suggested to use initials for security purposes; maybe people don't want their names published. Even the Republican newspaper used numbers to describe for and against concerning a black bear public meeting and it didn't add up to what people had expected - the Republican being another newspaper in Garrett County, MD.
I think the scare tactics influence most people who don't hunt. Bears are generally bigger than other woodland animals. If you have one woodland animal that is capable of defending itself or thinking like a wild animal, then there is always a safety concern. I think people have and still are defending their lives and property weather or not their is a hunting season for any animal. Furthermore, I don't think you can compare Maryland's counties to other out-of-state counties that have bear hunts.
The next question is who has a right to make a comment and who will have the right to hunt?
I don't care if this gets me in trouble, but if you are not registered to vote or live off welfare without paying taxes, then I don't think you should be concerned about this issue and making comments.
Finally, I think the proposal to pay $25,000 for a survey needs to be looked at again. It looks like a money making opportunity for a spin off of a State University.
It's no secret, most people in Western Maryland favor a bear hunt, but they don't go to public meetings, write letters, or submit comments - they have no reason to because bears are mostly talk.
The Outdoors Editor says "During the past eight years, task forces have been formed to deal with swans, non-lethal wildlife management, and bears. Perhaps, with the gubernatorial changing of the guard in Annapolis, we have seen the end of the decade of natural resources task forces". If this is true, then how can the public submit comments, or who will work on tasks forces free of charge offering their opinion?
I also want to let people in Western Maryland that people down state think we don't do very well because we are not "educated" - comes from this web site and from what one person said at the black bear meeting. I have a 2 year degree and quit school, so I'm, close my bachelors, but don't let education or what other people say stop you from posting comments here. Write what you want to say, put it down for 12 hours, re-read and edit, and let some in you family make comments on what you want to submit.
From my first letter to this web site, you should already know I'm opposed to an open bear hunt. - R.A.D., Kitzmiller, MD
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 10:06 PM - Subject: (no subject)
Please do not recommend a hunting season for bears. Not only is it cruel and
inhumane, but totally ineffective in controlling human-bear conflict. - R. F.
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 08:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I am a 25 year resident of Washington county and would like to voice my objections to bear hunting. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to bear/human conflicts. Maryland's bear population of 266-437 is not a large enough population to sustain hunting. Only a small number of people would support a hunt while the majority of Maryland citizens want bears protected. Thank you for continuing to use the measures already in place, such as relocation. -J. S., Rohrersville, Md
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 11:06 AM - Subject: <no subject>
Maryland Black Bear Task Force: Thank you for extending the deadline for public comments on the Maryland Black Bear Task Force draft report. Please register my firm opposition to a bear hunting season in Maryland. I strongly encourage the DNR to not cater to the marginal interests of trophy hunters.
If human-bear conflicts are among the reasons for the proposed hunt, a blanket kill approach won't resolve the steady encroachment into bear habitat that brings humans closer to bears. A more reliable and humane response would be to inform residents and/or campers about ways to circumvent human-bear conflicts, namely to avoid habituating bears to
humans. A bear hunt will not remedy situations in which people feed bears or permit them to raid garbage cans.
Aversive conditioning, which conditions bears to distrust and shun humans, is another more sensible solution. A bear hunt, on the other hand, would give hunters license to slaughter non-nuisance animals that occupy outlying areas nowhere near human development.
Bears and other large carnivores are a critical part of any ecosystem; their value far exceeds the isolated risk they pose to humans. Please do not initiate a bear hunting season in Maryland. Thank you,
Note: The message above was sent by the following:
D. S. F., Ph.D.
K. M., BSc RN
S. R., Esq., Cockeysville, MD
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 09:06 PM - Subject: black bear hunt
Dear Black Bear Task Force; As a Maryland citizen who has had experience with black bears, I am urging you
to please NOT recommend a black bear hunting season in Maryland. These
animals were extinct in this state only 50 years ago. Today, there are only a
few hundred. Surely, we can resolve human-bear conflicts using non-lethal
methods! Aren't we supposed to be the more intelligent species? Hunting
never solves these problems. It never targets the "problem" animals. Hunting
animals to resolve these conflicts would be like randomly murdering people to
decrease the crime rate! It is not a solution.
Please recommend the use of non-lethal methods (electric fencing, etc.) to
resolve these problems. Killing is permanent and irreversible.
Thank you for allowing me to express my views, and for taking them under
consideration. Sincerely, J. L. G., Germantown, Maryland
Date: Thursday, December 26, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: SAVE LIVES!!!
To Black Bear Management Plan, I urge you NOT to allow a season to slaughter bears. People must be educated about how to live peacefully with wildlife. Slaughter should NEVER be an option! Killing bears is totally unnecessary. Their lives are in your hands. Choose life instead of death! Sincerely, J. J.
Date: Thursday, December 26, 2002 04:51 PM
Please do not allow a hunting season on the Black Bears of Maryland. We can't continue to kill our wild animals. People have encroached on their territories for so many many years. There must be ways of handling this without killing. Please I implore you, don't pass this legislation. Sincerely, C. K.
Date: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 11:51 PM - Subject: 12/25/02
I would like to ask the Maryland DNR to please not recommend a bear hunting season. Hunting is simply cruel and a horrifying form of "entertainment." Invading someone's home and murdering them to mount their head on one's wall is savage and uncivilized. Please do not encourage the act. Thank you. - W. H.
Date: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 10:51 AM -
Hello, I am writing to you to ask you to please not recommend a bear hunting
season. It is so unfair to the bears. Please give the bears this very helpful
Christmas gif, ad don't recommend the bear hunting season. Your friend, Lauren, 12 yrs. old
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 03:06 AM
To whom it may concern at DNR: I am writing to voice my opinion, and request that the task force NOT recommend a bear hunting season. Thank you, T. A. T.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 08:36 PM
Hello and thank you for taking the time out to read my e-mail. Please, I
urge you to give Maryland's black bears a holiday gift by having the task
force NOT to recommend a bear hunting season. Thank you and God bless. - K. T.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 05:36 PM - Subject: help
please do not recommend a bear hunting season. thanks, d. m.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 03:36 PM
This is to request you NOT to recommend a bear hunting season. Thank you. - S. G.
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 09:06 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
* No rationale. A recreational bear hunt does not target specific, problematic bears. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
* Biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Sincerely, A. H. W., Deale, MD
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 08:51 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
PLEASE find another way. Stop the hunt. There are alternatives. Thank you. A.
D., Columbia, MD
Date: Monday, December 30, 2002 08:21 AM - Subject: Bear Hunting Season
I would like to write to express my opposition to a bear hunting season in Maryland. I believe we should allow the population to increase. I would
further argue that we should set aside even more space and resources to protect the existing bear population. Thank you for you time.
D. J. V. D., Baltimore, MD
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 10:51 PM - Subject: black bears
Have I heard correctly that hunting of black bears may be allowed in Maryland? I thought we only had 200-500 of them left, mostly in Western
Maryland (an area where I camp twice a year). If this is true, I urge you to oppose it. That is one of the draws to western Maryland.
S. L., Dunkirk (Calvert County) Md
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 09:21 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
I vote no bear hunts at all.....M. L.
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 07:06 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of
Maryland. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would
not address human-bear conflicts. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts
already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric
fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to
avoid areas where people live.
A hunt would also be biologically reckless and ultimately shortsighted. Even a limited
hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50
years ago. Biological diversity is important to the overall health of the forest ecosystem;
just take a hard look at the damage being done by deer overpopulation - disease,
property destruction, auto/deer collisions, etc. Sincerely, S. K. N.,
Baltimore MD
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 06:51 PM - Subject: Black Bears in Maryland
Dear Black Bear Task Force, I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft Report produced by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific "problem" bears and would not address any bear/human conflicts. A bear hunt is biologically reckless, as Maryland's bear population is estimated at only 266-437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Simple, effective solutions already exist to resolve bear/human conflicts in a non-lethal manner, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to behave. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens wish to see bears protected in the state. I respectfully urge you to enact policy consistent with this majority by taking the common-sense approach of removing the bear hunt recommendation from the Black Bear Task Force Report.
Best regards, P. F.
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 03:11 PM - Subject: Bears
Dear Sir or Madam, Thank you for your time in reading this email. I totally understand the problem that bears can pose
to the public.
Is it possible to keep the bear population down by:
1. Dart select Male Bears
2. "Geld" them
3. Tag the Gelded bears on the ears so when the next season comes around, the wildlife
management team already can recognize a Male Bear who has been "Gelded".
4. Gelding produces (a:) 'quieter' animals that can be SAFER in an environment that includes people.
(b:) they cannot breed so numbers are kept down. Over the long run it can be cost effective way of
management.
I am sure there are vets who might volunteer their services. Gelding is a "clean" procedure (vs a
'sterile' procedure) and farmers often do it themselves to their male animals that they do not
desire to breed.
Over the long run, Gelding male bears could be a cost effective and SAFE, as Gelded male animals are calmer
than their counterparts.
Thank you for your kind attention to the above matter. - N.
Date: Sunday, December 29, 2002 02:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force draft report
We are writing to you to ask that you NOT recommend a bear hunting season. It seems that every time there is a conflict between man and nature, the first response is to kill something. These conflicts arise because we are systematically wiping out vital habitat. Please devise a humane way of bear control that does not involve killing innocent animals. Thank you for your time and consideration.
- J. & S. S.
Date: Saturday, December 28, 2002 08:36 PM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear Task Force
Maryland Black Bear Task Force: Please spare the bears and protect God's precious creatures from
hunters. Isn't there enough terror and killing in the world?
Bears can be contained by much more humane and compassionate ways. Thanks for taking into consideration all
perspectives including that
of the Creator. - Rev. T. D. and the People of SoulJourn
Date: Saturday, December 28, 2002 10:51 AM - Subject: No Bear Hunts in Maryland
To Whom It May Concern: I was very upset when I learned of the suggested hunting of MD's black bears as a response to the few cases of bears venturing too close to human developments. Hunting this already small population of between 260-440 bears would jeopardize their species existence in Maryland. The effects of losing such an important member of an ecosystem could have disastrous results, as the extermination of other species have had in the past.
In addition to my ecological concerns, monetary issues are a factor as well. The tourism draw to Maryland is due in part to the opportunity to see our diverse wildlife. Fewer people will want to come, especially if hunters put them at risk of injury.
There are several possible solutions to the bear problem, including installation of electric fences, moving trash receptacles, and educating tourists about the risks of feeding the bears.
The people of Maryland do not want a bear hunt. We value the contribution of this noble species to our environment, and we know that it is possible for us all to coexist. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, E. W., Citizen / Voter of Maryland
Date: Saturday, December 28, 2002 08:51 AM - Subject: Black Bear Season
As in all of Maryland's surrounding States, it is time to have a Maryland Bear Hunting Season. Any questions, just contact Dr. Gary Alt of the Pennsylvania Game Commission. Now that the Maryland voters got rid of the anti-hunting Paris Glendening Administration, hopefully, with Governor
Ehrlich, a bear hunting season will happen. - D. H.
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: re black bear hunt
Please register my opposition and that of my family to the proposed bear hunt. This is an unsatisfactory (and likely ineffective) method of solving the problems it intends to address. A better solution, and certainly a more humane one, would be education regarding how to avoid unwanted encounters, not leaving trash which will attract the bears, and not trying to feed them.
It's about time we learn to coexist with the other creatures who share our planet (and whom we have displaced) without trying to blast them to bits.
Many thanks for you attention. C.A.T., M.D.
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: Opposition to Bear Hunt
Dear Sirs/Madams: I am writing as a lifelong resident of Maryland to oppose the proposed bear
hunt recommended in your draft report. I grew up in Anne Arundel County surrounded by woods--woods in which many animals thrived. Since that time,
I have developed a very strong concern for the way we treat animals who we perceive as posing a threat to us. It truly saddens me to think that in
this day and age, we must resort to killing animals as a way for us to "live" in harmony with them.
I hope you will strive to develop a policy where hunting as a tool for preventing human/animal conflicts is no longer an option. We all know there
are better and more civilized ways.
Thank you for your consideration. I hope that you do the right thing by removing the bear hunt recommendation from the final Black Bear Task Force
Report. Sincerely, M. K.
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 01:06 PM - Subject: Please help the innocent Black Bears.
I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft report by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. There will be no good results from a bear hunt. This recreational hunt will not end the problem of human/bear conflicts. Arming humans to kill innocent bears and possibly cubs is most inhumane and reckless. It may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct 50 years ago.
There are solutions that already exist, remove trash, put up electric fencing. We need to follow through. We are humans and have the mental capacity to coincide with all living creatures that share our world. We are not barbaric animals that just do the easy thing and kill anything that gets in our way.
Please do the right thing and be a voice for the innocent bears that so desperately need our help.
-A. McC.
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 12:36 PM - Subject: Bears
Please do not recommend a black bear hunting season. Thank you. For the animals,
- S. H., PETA member
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 02:21 AM - Subject: Bear hunt
Dear Dept. of Natural Resources, Please do not institute a bear hunting season. Hunting is neither an effective nor humane method of managing animal populations. There is no guarantee that so-called "problem bears" would be killed/removed, and it makes no sense to indiscriminately kill members of already small populations. Non-lethal methods of control should be tried first for problem bears, and only after these methods have failed should killing be considered, and only for these types of bears. A general hunting season is too broad and deadly a response to very specific bear problems.
Yours truly, P. P.
Date: Friday, December 27, 2002 01:21 AM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear
Task Force
Maryland Black Bear Task Force: Thank you for extending the deadline for public comments on the Maryland Black Bear Task Force draft report. Please register my firm opposition to a bear hunting season in Maryland. I strongly encourage the DNR to not cater to the marginal interests of trophy hunters.
If human-bear conflicts are among the reasons for the proposed hunt, a blanket kill approach won't resolve the steady encroachment into bear habitat that brings humans closer to bears. A more reliable and humane response would be to inform residents and/or campers about ways to circumvent human-bear conflicts, namely to avoid habituating bears to humans. A bear hunt will not remedy situations in which people feed bears or permit them to raid garbage cans.
Aversive conditioning, which conditions bears to distrust and shun humans, is another more sensible solution. A bear hunt, on the other hand, would give hunters license to slaughter non-nuisance animals that occupy outlying areas nowhere near human development.
Bears and other large carnivores are a critical part of any ecosystem; their value far exceeds the isolated risk they pose to humans. Please do not initiate a bear hunting season in Maryland.
Thank you,
Note: During the past week, the above message was sent by the
following:
M. Y.
J. F.
M.J.
J.K.
N.S.
C. M. L.
M. D.
D.R.
G.Z.
K. U.
E. F.
Dr. S. T.
B. J. H.
J.D.
J. C.
Date: Thursday, December 26, 2002 12:36 PM - Subject: Just say NO to bear hunting season!
"The greatness of a nation is determined upon how it treats its animals," Ghandhi.
What does that say about us to kill bears for what???!!! Trophies?
Please remember that, "Humans aren't the only species on this earth, we just act like it."
Sincerely, K. M.
Date: Wednesday, December 25, 2002 02:06 AM - Subject: Black Bears
Dear Sir or Madam, I am writing in regard to the Maryland Black Bear Task Force's hunting proposal. I am asking you to please
prevent the hunting of the only 266 to 437 Black Bears we have in Maryland.
It is cowardly and irresponsible to favor killing as a solution to bear-human conflicts, when there are
non-lethal alternatives to help the problem. It is also common-sense that wild animals will often look
for food in human communities. It is no reason to kill them.
I have to take many preventative measures to keep other humans from stealing my belongings and it
doesn't always work. That's just how life is. Wild animals being in this world is also 'just how life
is'. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, R. M., Rockville, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 08:51 PM - Subject: Please Protect Bears
Please do not recommend a bear hunting season. Please protect all animals and demonstrate that humans are compassionate and intelligent beings capable of a higher order of action.
Sincerely, A. F. C., M.Ad.Ed.
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 07:51 PM - Subject: bear hunting
I am writing to urge you NOT to recommend a bear hunting system. Thank you - C.
K.
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 06:36 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
Hi, Please do not support a Bear hunt. It is not necessary, and it is very cruel. Leave the Bears alone.
Thanks, J. F.
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 04:51 PM - Subject: Black bear hunting/ Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: I sincerely hope that you will not recommend a bear hunting season this year. I, personally, disagree with the hunting of black bears altogether. In my opinion, I find it inhumane and useless as far as management goes.
Sincerely, JEB
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 03:51 PM - Subject: bears
PLEASE DO NOT RECOMMEND BEAR HUNTING IN MARYLAND!!!!
THANK YOU FOR PROMOTING KINDNESS TO ANIMALS. - J. F., SCHOOL SOCIAL WORKER
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 09:36 AM - Subject: bears
The reason for this email is to urge the task force not to recommend a bear hunting season.
Maryland's black bears should be protected not hunted and I as a member of the HSUS ask that there be no hunting season at all.
Your attention is appreciated.- P. L., Member HSUS
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 09:36 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
Given the recent numbers of "home invasions" by bears in New Jersey ( I believe the number is at 54 ) since their cancellation of bear hunting, the death of the elderly woman also in New Jersey, and the death of the infant in New York by
bears,,, it can only prove prudent to start a limited hunt in Western MD. Pennsylvania's
bear herd continues to grow both in numbers and animal size despite a bear season, proof that the bear populace can withstand hunting pressure.
- S. M.
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 01:06 AM - Subject: Please -- No Bear Hunting
Hello -- I urge your task force NOT to recommend a bear hunting season. Instead,
please protect them. Thank you. P. F.
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:36 AM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear Task Force
I am sincerely urging that the task force NOT recommend a bear hunting season!!! There are other solutions to resolve the bear/human conflicts in a non-lethal manner and, should be applied. I would truly like to see the bears protected in the state. Thank you.
Respectfully, M. H.
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:36 AM - Subject: NO BEAR HUNTING!
Per the HSUS, I'm requesting that you please NOT recommend a bear hunting season. Our wildlife needs your protection and it takes all of us to work together to save our wildlife.
Thank you. The H. Family
Date: Tuesday, December 24, 2002 12:06 AM - Subject: bear hunting season
Please do NOT recommend any bear hunting season whatsoever. Sincerely, J. P., Ph.D.
& J. F., Ph.D.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: MARYLAND'S BEARS
To the Black Bear Management Plan: I would like to express my support for the bears and to urge the task force NOT to recommend a bear hunting season.
Thank you, D. Z.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 09:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
Please do not recommend a bear hunting season. These are beautiful creatures and many people do not wish to see them hunted. Thanks and have a happy holiday season.
- V. A.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 08:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing to ask the Maryland Department of Natural Resources to NOT recommend a bear hunting season. I, like many residents, am very opposed to bear hunting. Thank you.
Sincerely, J. G.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 07:51 PM - Subject: RE: Black Bears
Dear Madam/Sir: Please do NOT recommend a black bear hunting season. By doing such, black
bears could become endangered, as they were 50 years ago. Also, other non-lethal solutions could be implemented instead, such as electric fences
and/or cleaning up trash and food that attract bears. I also believe that a bear hunt would be ineffective in dealing with the
conflicts between these awesome creatures and humans. Please do not implement the bear hunting season. Thank you so much for your time.
Sincerely, S. B.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 05:06 PM - Subject: Maryland's Black Bears
I implore the Task Force to NOT recommend a bear hunting season for Maryland. It is in the best
interest of all concerned. Thank you! -P. W.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: Bears
Please so not recommend a bear-hunting season. - J.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: BBTF
I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft Report produced by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. There is no rationale for a bear hunt in Maryland. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific "problem" bears and would not address any bear/human conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to bear/human conflicts. A bear hunt is biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated at only 266-437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist to resolve bear/human conflicts in a non-lethal manner. Simple, effective solutions already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to behave. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
I am one of the vast majority of Maryland citizens who want to see bears protected in the state. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears protected. Please take the common-sense approach of removing the bear hunt recommendation from the Black Bear Task Force Report.
Note: During the past week, the above message was sent by the following:
S. D.B.
H. C.
C. H.
D. W.
J. M.
S. S. & Family
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 04:06 PM - Subject: black bear management program
I am writing to oppose the Black Bear hunt. I feel that we should be the keepers of this great earth, and we should respect all life on earth. Never should we hunt that beautiful creature. Other ways have been found to solve the problem some humans feel the bears cause, so why don't you take the gentle, kinder approach and ban this proposed hunt.
Sincerely, D. W.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 03:36 PM - Subject: Bear Hunting Season
Please don't allow a Bear Hunting Season to take place. Thanks, M. A. W.
Date: Monday, December 23, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: bear Hunt
Please cancel or do not start a bear hunt, as this is a non necessary solution to a non
existing problem there a very few bears in Md as is and a hunt would only profit a few gun ho hunters that want to prove they are superior to
defenseless animal. thanks - A. Q.
Sent: Friday, December 20, 2002 8:21 PM - Subject: bear protection
Good Evening: As a concerned citizen regarding wildlife safety, I would like to ask you to
to consider protecting Maryland's bear population. Please consider alternative humane methods such as aversive conditioning and relocation to
protect people and bears. Thank you for attention on this matter. Sincerely, P. V., Rockville, Maryland
Date: Friday, December 20, 2002 01:51 PM - Subject: BBTF Draft Report Comment
I'd like to thank those individuals of the Black Bear Task Force for considering all of the information, and putting forth a draft report with proposals that will benefit the Black Bear population of Maryland to the greatest degree. Although I don't live in Western Maryland I have occasionally spent some time in the State Forests, Parks and WMAs of the Garrett and Allegany Counties. I have had the wonderful experience of seeing Black Bears there many times, and am concerned for their well being.
There are only a few points that I would like to comment about.
Since the bear population of Western Maryland has reached the saturation point, and there is a never ending influx of bears coming into that area from the burgeoning bear populations of West Virginia and Pennsylvania, why doesn't the Task Force recommend the trap and transfer of excess bears to suburban areas around Baltimore and Washington D.C., where there seems to be quite a bit of concern about the possibility of Black Bear extinction. With a little education I'm sure the residents of these areas could 'learn' how to co-exist with the bears who rightfully hold claim to those lands. If we continue the Bear Stamp program those funds could pay to replace any damages to pets or loved ones who don't learn the do's and don'ts of living with bears quickly enough.
Secondly, I find the characterization of hunting with hounds, bait, or spring hunting, as unethical, to be uninformed and ignorant as to how those methods work when applied to hunting bears. If the Task Force wants to recommend that those types of hunting for Black Bears not be used in Maryland, in order to keep the harvest numbers low, that is fine, but to call those methods unethical is wrong.
Other than that, I find the BBTF Draft Report to be 'right on target'. I hope for the bears sake that the proposed recommendations are adopted so that we can fully enjoy the future with Black Bears living in the forests and fields of Maryland.
- A. C.
Date: Friday, December 20, 2002 10:08 AM - Subject: Bear hunting
I believe that DNR will do what is best for the animal, The biologist can now look forward to a responsible decision without getting fired by the
governor.
I'm a hunter and would love to have a chance to hunt western md instead of Canada for a bear.
This would be a limited hunt and lottery system and money raised can go back to the
DNR.
Remember, think before you speak, most people wear leather shoes and eat meat. Bill, Dundalk
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2002 05:51 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Dear Sirs, Please find another alternative to shooting black bears. I've heard there are other ways to deal with
the man and bear interactions. Since it was only 50 years ago that black bears were almost extinct in MD.,
and now there are no more than 400 or 500 bears in MD. it seems very destructive to shoot any of the
remaining bears. Thank you for taking the time to listen to me. Signed, R.
L.
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2002 03:36 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force recommendations
I am writing to voice my support for the recommendations by the Black Bear Task Force. We have formed a committee and they have made their
recommendation after considering all options. Those that claim, there are better ways, were not on the committee and I feel are making an emotional
plea and not basing their decision on what is best for all involved. I support a limited season on the bear to keep them in control and still
coexist with humans. - JP Centreville
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2002 02:21 PM - Subject: Black bears
Let's have a bear season. E. H. E., Huntingtown
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2002 12:36 PM - Subject: stop killing the black bears
To Whom it May Concern: I am writing to oppose the black bear hunt in Maryland.
1) There are too few bears left. And you cannot control how many human animals will kill how many bears, leading to possible extinction.
2) Hunting the bears will not fix any problems that exist between the human animal and the bears. Teaching the human animal how to live with what is around them would be a better solution to pursue.
Thank you, B. B., RN, BSN
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2002 09:51 AM - Subject: Bear Hunting
I am opposed to any type of bear hunt in the state of Maryland. Maryland's bear population needs protection, not extinction. Rather than destroy the bear population of Maryland and imbalance the eco-system we have here, people need to be educated about how to keep the bears away from residential areas. "Bear Proofing" neighborhoods is where our
time, money and effort should be concentrated, not on killing. Thank you, B.
F.
Date: Thursday, December 19, 2002 01:21 AM - Subject: Bears
I want to vote my opposition to your having a bear hunt. There are only a few hundred
bears left, and a hunt could make them extinct. This could be a rough winter already for wildlife. There is no guarantee you would get the
problem bears, and the people complaining should take steps not to invite bears on their place by leaving food or trash around. Please find a
different solution. - J. R.
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 05:51 PM - Subject: bears
to whom it may concern, i am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt.
there is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts and only the hunters benefit by claiming trophies. wildlife needs to be protected now and for the future.
sincerely - d. l. c., m.d.
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 01:06 PM - Subject: Yes, to a MD black bear hunt!
Please put all that anti-hunting rhetoric aside and open a limited black bear hunting season. Yes, I would like an opportunity to hunt black bear in Maryland.
T. W. F. - Stevensville, MD
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 03:51 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force
My husband and I own property in both Allegany and Garrett Counties. The bear problem in Garrett County has gotten very frightening.
Bears frequented the dumpster at Red Run last summer which is where we have a condo. Almost every owner (28 owners) had seen at least one bear by the end of last summer. Several times it was a mother and cubs. They were trapped, set free, and then returned the next night. We have a small dog (25 lbs.) and I especially worry about her safety.
Therefore, we are in favor of an unlimited bear hunting season and also no penalty for those who shoot bears on their property. The bears have become much too plentiful for an area used by humans and domestic animals.
Thank you. - V. S.
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 12:51 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunting
I am strongly opposed to Black Bear hunting.
The main purpose served is the thrill of the kill---they are not a food source.
Let the Bears live--and give the hunters something better to do ---life is sacred and that unnecessary killing is morally wrong.
- J. T.
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 10:51 AM - Subject: black bear task force
Dear Sir or Madam- I am writing this letter to express my concerns with the proposed recreational hunt of black bears. First, it is my understanding that the black bear population is very limited and the animals are slow to reproduce. We fought hard to bring them back from near extinction less than a century ago, why would we propose to put them back in that precarious position?! Are we not years beyond sport hunting? Haven't we outgrown the antiquated notion that torturing animals for our own amusement is permissible and even encouraged? As I understand it, there are many options to control problem bears, to deal with their behaviors. Shooting them isn't the answer.
I am from Cumberland, Maryland. My dad is a forester for your agency. I support most of your decisions and view them as positive, but this decision seems to benefit a small group of people and be detrimental to the bear population. Please rethink this position, I implore you!!!
Sincerely, J. L. C.
Date: Wednesday, December 18, 2002 09:36 AM
I think if bears are the problem I'm reading that they are then there should be a lottery (mail in) held, and permits issued for a stated
amount of bears taken! It's sound and practical management. Come on, Sportsmen and women contribute
a lot of funds to your Dept. Lets give a little back! - R. M., St. Mary's County, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 09:06 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
Dear Sir or Madam: I am writing this letter to oppose the possible "Trophy Bear Hunt," the very idea makes me want to vomit. I think it would be a great show of advanced thinking in coming up with a way that the citizens of Maryland can live in peace with the bears. I have spent part of my life living in Montana with black bears and mountain lions. It took nothing but common sense and awareness that the animals are around to keep us from ever having anything but great times watching the animals. I am really tired of all the laws in this country that take into consideration the feelings of hunters and not anybody who wants the animals to be able to live in peace. Not everything is about how much money can be made by selling hunting licenses, if you create an area that people can watch the bears from a safe distance the state could make a lot more money.
Thank you very much, I am really hoping for the bears not to be shot. Just do the right thing and value the bears, I have never been able to see one in MD in my life. It would be great if my daughter gets the opportunity!! - Sincerely, M., R. and K. M.
Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 08:38 PM - Subject: Black Bears
To whom this may concern: I find that what the people of Maryland want to do is sad and just plain wrong! Save the black bears and leave them be! - L. B.
Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 05:36 PM - Subject: bear mangement
PLEASE HAVE A BEAR SEASON IN THE WESTERN COUNTIES
THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE BEST WAY TO MANAGE GAME. - G.L.C.P.
Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 02:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I believe it is time to begin a bear season in Maryland. Virginia has a bear hunting season and it has dramatically improved the relationship between bears and people. The surviving Virginia bears work hard to avoid people. I would like to see the Maryland bears subjected to the same type of education. Bear hunting license fees would also raise funds to promote habitat conservation for those bears remaining. - B. B.
Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 09:21 AM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
To whom it may concern, I am an avid hunter, and have started traveling the States in respects to hunting big game animals where the populations stand strong for themselves. In terms of the Black Bear population in Maryland. In my opinion it is rediculous to start a season because residents have had complaints. As with the deer and other forest wildlife, we as humans have encroached on their territory so I see it only fit to live with the technicallities that come with living within and amongst the wild life populated areas. Money can not buy everything. I am only guessing as to who is complaining, but your money was not spent to live in an apartment within the city. My only concern is that politics will not take this into an area that the bear population can withstand at this moment in time. DNR and other organizations have done a great deal of work to protect these beings which have every right to live amongst us. I lived adjacent to Rocks State Park In harford County Maryland for a few years. There was sightings of Black bear, turkey, and auditory of what seamed to be bocats at night. The beauty was that they were so close and that naturalization was on an up climb. We all know that there are other ways of handling this with out some trigger happy hunter taking advantage of a qucik kill out of his bathroom window.
Also I believe an open season would open the population up to more poaching in terms of out of season kills.
Once again I am an avid hunter but feel all of us need to understand the facts of your work at DNR, and need to be more patient with the populations stabilization. Tracsh cans and automobiles can be replaced quickly wiht money, these frail populations can only be done so over a matter of unquestionable years and hard work. Thank you for your time, TC L.
Date: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 07:51 AM
To Whom It May Concern, The black bear should continue to be listed as a "Game" species in Maryland. There should be a limited black bear hunting season to keep the bear numbers within the cultural and biological carrying capacities. Although some would disagree, I think hunting bear over bait actually allows the hunter to be more selective in what is harvested. A knowledgeable hunter can pass up a female bear on a bait, whereas just shooting one that happens past in the woods can often lead to harvesting sows. Therefore, I think a limited hunt over bait is an acceptable method to cull excess bears. I also do not think we need a public opinion survey. The decisions should be made by trained biologists and management specialists, not by the emotions of people stirred up by the anti-hunters. - R. N.
Date: Monday, December 16, 2002 07:51 PM - Subject: no black bear hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts.
Solutions are already in place and I do not want to see the bears become an endangered species. Sincerely, C. J., Cambridge, MD
Date: Monday, December 16, 2002 03:06 PM
Dear Sir/Madam, I am a concerned resident of MAryland writing regarding the recent suggestion by the task force to to allow recreational bear hunting. I think this is a senseless act that will benefit no one except for a handful of hunters who merely wish to accumulate trophies. If the bear-human conflict is at question then I strongly believe that hunting is certainly not the answer. There are currently several very effective solutions that exist to deal with the bear-human conflict, I suggest that we pay more attention to enforcing those regulations and guidelines instead of hastily resorting to hunting that will only deplete the population beyound redemption. The black bear is a vital component of Maryland's landscape. I beg you not to take the black bear out of the picture! I myself together with hundreds support the black bear compensation stamp that goes to farmers - if a sport hunt were allowed a funding source for Maryland's farmers would be lost.
Thank you for your consideration and I pray you make the wise decision to save our black bears! Sincerely, R. S.
Sent: 12/13/2002 10:07 PM - Subject: Comments on Black Bear Management Plan
We strongly oppose any public bear hunt as recommended by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force!!!
The very limited black bear population could be destroyed with the resulting loss of a major mammal to Maryland's biodiversity and loss of reputation for protecting wilderness areas.
Bear damage is not sufficient to warrant hunting. Maryland DNR and the Humane Society of the U.S. have been selling bear protection stamps and collectables and having fund-raiser events to offset any damage to human property. We attended one of these wonderful educational events this summer at Seneca Creek State Park.
Occasionally baby black bears have been seen in Montgomery Village just outside Seneca Creek County Park much to the delight of Village residents and local newspapers.
"Smoky the Bear" is a great symbol of our National Park System. Don't kill Smoky!!!
The best solution to bear/human conflicts is a good educational program on coexistence with wildlife!!! Sincerely, R. & J. W., Montgomery Village, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
Please do not let someone living in a town house in Montgomery County influence how Western Marylanders live their lives. If the Western Maryland citizens want the bears gone, then the problem should be taken care of. And there are obviously problems arising from the current Maryland black bear population (otherwise we wouldn’t be having this discussion). It doesn’t matter if the number is 350 or 350,000, if the bears are becoming a problem, then the problem should be addressed.
Hunting has proven itself to be the most effective method of population management. Without the ability to bait and use dogs to hunt the bear, I predict that the bear harvest will be relatively small and not cause long-term detriment to the bear population. The hunt will indeed be “limited” as advertised. Sincerely, C. B., Mayo, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear Comment
Thank you for your year's worth of effort in studying the black bear population in Maryland. I read the Overview. You mentioned wanting input from citizens with regional variation. I must admit I'm from suburbia (Germantown). I stand behind efforts to protect the black bear population. I would like to see the black bear classification changed from Game to Non-Game species status. I applaud education efforts for discouraging BB from human activities; for people to put in the effort to avert bears.
When visiting my brother and friends in California 12 years ago, we went to Yosemite and backpacked for a full day to a more remote campground. We followed all the rules to hide food, etc. from the bears, and rangers came by each campsite in the evening to remind everyone to put food in the steel boxes. We woke up in the morning to find that someone had left an army-issue type container of suntan oil or toothpaste out on the picnic table. It was obvious that a bear had tried to bite into it. My brother had decided to sleep out of the tent that night beside the picnic table. He slept unmolested and undisturbed. Truly amazing. But it goes to show that bears don't want trouble and are not blood thirsty. They would run from humans in most instances.
I appreciated when the report cited rare incidence of bears attacking humans.
I was surprised that the recommendation is to discontinue the sale of BB Conservation Stamps. How can that be, if I've never heard of them? I plan to contribute right now. People would buy them if you advertised across the entire state.
I could not argue that an individual, highly problematic bear should be removed and relocated or destroyed. This should be carried out by paid Natural Resources employees. It's not right to have open hunting. I don't support allowing individual humans to kill bears. They should be brought to justice if they can't prove that it was an immediate life or death situation.
A book that I loved by a fellow Michigander, James Curwood, called BEAR, written about 100 years ago and made into a movie (didn't see it), is highly recommended (by me).
Thank you for this opportunity to comment. I appreciate it. Sincerely, C. and F. P., Keedysville, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear Hunting
Sir: This matter of our X-Gov. attempting to manage wild life that he knows nothing about is unreal. We all know ( with the exception of the Anti everything people ) that the way to solve the problem of over population of bears is to have a regulated bear hunt and leave politics out of it. Gov. Ehrlich please appoint an individual as SEC.of DNR that knows Wildlife and instead of playing politics let the DNR do the job they are trained to do. - H. C. E., Jr., LaVale, Maryland
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bears
I am very opposed to any hunting of black bears in western Maryland. There are so few of them left, if any are destroyed there will not be enough bears to keep the population viable and healthy.
I know there are other ways to control the bear population, but first perhaps we should try to control the human population. Sincerely, J. E. H., Whiteford, MD.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Stop the Black Bear Hunt
To whom it may concern- I am writing in regards to the proposed Black Bear Hunt. This hunt is ethically and environmentally wrong. There is no evidence that this will do anything but put the bears nearer to extiction. We live in a state that has destroyed most of the air, water, land and animals. How could anyone think of killing more when there are so few? This hunt is an old-school of thought -kill the things that we don't like or that bother us. This needs to end. These animals are dying-it is our responsibility to be an educated society. Trash left out, thrill seeking tourists and development are killing them. What is an animal supposed to do when it is fighting to survive? It will seek food where it can when it's land and food have been taken away. Just as humans have a will to live-so do ALL animals. They all deserve the right to live.
If you plan for the future, in an evironmentally and ethically sound manner, these issues can be handled correctly without any more loss of life. Evolution has taken milliions and millions of years to be where it is today-and tomorrow-if it can. We have no right to interfere with that. Use other methods that have been proven to work. Look into other countries GREEN solutions that create a positive existence for ALL living things.
Please stop the slaughter of innocent live just trying to survive. Thank you- A. D., Baltimore, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Maryland Bears
To Whom it may concern, This letter is in reference to the potential hunt on Maryland Black Bears. Hunting these bears is not going to solve the problem. People need to take responsibility for themselves and their belongings. People are the ones responsible for building in bear territory. We should not hunt and kill bears when none of this is their fault, it is unethical.
People can find better ways to avoid bears. First, we need to stop building! We are destroying wildlife habitat. People need to remove food and trash that attracts bear. Farmers can install electric fencing around crops and beehives, and use aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Hunting and killing bears is not going to solve the human-bear conflict. If you allow this hunt to proceed, you will be responsible for the destruction of the Maryland's Black Bear population.
I hope to hear that you have made the ethical decision by not allowing this or any other bear hunt to be implemented. For The Animals, Darlene Spence, Vice President, Animal Awareness
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Maryland's Black Bears
To Whom it May Concern: I am writing this letter to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in Maryland. I have learned that Maryland's bear population is estimated at less than 500. Though this is an improvement from years before, when they were nearly extinct, it is still quite small, and thus we're talking about a very sensitive population. We need to protect these noble creatures and seek out other ways of solving human-bear conflicts. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, I. F., Kensington, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Adamant opposition to hunting black bears in Maryland!
Dear Sir or Madam: Please register my adamant opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. I count myself among the majority in the state who, while they want protection from bears, want this accomplished in a sane and sensible way other than the biologically reckless one of attacking the three- or four-hundred or so who remain.
There is no rationale for a recreational bear hunt, since it would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
Far better to turn to simpler, more effective solutions to human-bear conflicts that already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Please "bear" the majority in mind! Sincerely, M. L. K., Bethesda MD
Subject: Against black bear hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected.
The comments above were sent by the following:
N. H., Columbia, MD
J. M., Odenton, MD
C. Z., Ingleside, MD
M. Z., Ingleside, MD
J. McC., Glen Burnie, MD
S. M., White Hall, MD
V. B., Silver Spring, MD
S. & P. M., Timonium, MD
A. C., BOWIE, MD
N. L., Bel Air, MD
T. K. Silver Spring, MD
D. E. K., Silver Spring, MD
M. W., Olney, MD
N. H., Columbia MD
C. E., Olney MD
J. McC., Germantown, MD
A. G., silverspring, md
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Submitting public comment re: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: As the public is being given the opportunity to submit comments to The Maryland Black Bear Task Force, I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the State of Maryland.
First of all, there is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A number of simple, effective, not to mention humane, solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist. These measures include removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
I would also like to point out that only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while the majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, C. K., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Sunday, December 15, 2002 09:06 AM - Subject: Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is absolutely no rationale for a bear hunt!! Only 50 years ago the black bear population was nearly extinct! We must be careful not to ever allow that to happen again.
There are humane methods of dealing with humane-bear conflicts. Please do not vote for what only a few would benefit from.
Vote NO to the bear hunt in Maryland. Sincerely, B. F.
Sent: 12/13/2002 8:32 PM - Subject: BBTF Report and Recommendations
I oppose the recommendation in the report for reinstituting a black bear hunt in Maryland.
I support and endorse the views of Task Force member Ronald E. Barry and his opposition to a renewed hunt.
Yes, problem bears must be either humanely destroyed or relocated but please do not permit killing for the joy of killing. Sincerely, B. C.
Date: Saturday, December 14, 2002 08:51 AM - Subject: Opinion on black bear hunting season
Dear Black Bear Task Force: I am writing to urge you not to begin a black bear hunting season.
Maryland's bears have a right to live their lives naturally, and without fear. Furthermore, as we've seen with other animal populations such as deer in Maryland, killing bears will not solve human-animal conflicts in the long-run. Rather, changing human behavior is the solution.
Please do what is right and what is humane, and do not implement a bear hunting season. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, S. M.
Date: Saturday, December 14, 2002 12:51 AM - Subject: Black bear hunt
I am writing with great concern regarding the management of black bears in Maryland through a public bear hunt. As a citizen/resident of Maryland for almost fifty years, I loudly protest and request that you not put your plan into action!
I have been a Maryland public school teacher for almost thirty years and have had the responsibility and privilege of teaching natural science and the geography/ecosystems/government of Maryland to fourth and fifth graders. So this subject of hunting Maryland's limited population of black bears to "control them" is directly connected to my work in the classroom. How can I discuss the natural habitats of western Maryland and the fact that just fifty years ago, the black bear population was nearly extinct and then inform my students that the DNR is going to allow a bear hunt? How can I teach my students that our state government is a fair and just institution when decisions like this are being made?
There is no logical reason to allow a recreational bear hunt just because some bears have been a problem. This would not solve the conflicts between humans and bears since the problem bears would not be specifically targeted. If hunters are allowed to kill even a small number of bears, this could completely jeopardize the survival of the remaining bears. Many detailed studies have been completed in the past few years that show the importance of the family structure, including the several-year process of the raising of the cubs by the mother. If you allow recreational hunting, family groups will be affected and certainly cubs will be orphaned and most likely not survive to continue to repopulate the species.
Bears have become a "problem" due to the number of humans who are choosing to live in areas that previously were wild areas. DNR can provide the necessary guidance in the use of simple, effective, proven solutions to these problems. These include the removal of food and trash which attracts bears and other wild animals and the installation of electric fencing around crops, beehives, etc. We know that black bears are intelligent creatures and can be taught to behave by using aversive conditioning. Relocation is certainly another possible solution. And since the DNR already has the authority to euthanize repeat offenders if all else fails, the reasons for any type of hunting are just not acceptable!
Next spring, when my classes study mammals and we discuss the black bear population in Maryland, I hope that I will not have to inform my students that these intelligent, special creatures are being hunted for recreation or for trophies. Does the state of Maryland work on storing a species merely to attract hunters, fisherman, etc., to our state for the revenue? Or does the state government/DNR work to truly restore the balance of nature in our special natural areas? I hope that I can discuss the latter with my students and let them discover that the state of Maryland is run with reason and with a concern for our natural areas.
Please do not allow the hunting of black bears in Maryland! Sincerely, K. D. C., Annapolis, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 04:51 PM - Subject: Black Bears
To whom it may concern: I find it appalling that this environmental conservation issue may become a politically based issue. Environmental conservation which encompasses natural resource and wildlife protection should be an issue which is addressed with careful prospection on the future, regardless of political ideology. Members of all societies have a duty to protect and promote not only human resources but natural resources as well. Please do not let partisan politics affect the protection of our natural resources and wildlife. Please continue the efforts of the BBTF to conserve and protect black bears and their habitats. Thank you, A. R., Baltimore, Maryland
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 04:06 PM - Subject: black bear management plan
To Whom It May Concern, I'm writing to express opposition to a black bear hunt in Maryland.
Much more effective methods of avoiding bear and human conflicts exist now and only a tiny fraction of Maryland's population would benefit from hunting bears. Thanks very much, E. E., Prince Frederick, MD
Sent: 12/13/2002 10:04 AM - Subject: Bears in Maryland
Please do not have a bear hunt in the state of Maryland - there are so few bears in our state that a hunt could possibly jeopardize the survival of the population. Please, please use the methods that already exist for problem bears - We need all of God's creatures on this earth. What a sad world without animals. If we keep killing them and taking away their habitats that's just what we will have.
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 02:51 PM - Subject: Comments re: Black Bear Task Force Recommendations
Good afternoon, First of all, we would like to thank the BBTF and DNR for their time and efforts to try and establish a "win/win" outcome regarding the black bear population and MD residents. Your time is greatly appreciated.
We are the caretakers for Rock Lodge Trust and over the years have been very fortunate to have been involved w/the black bear
sightings, trapping and research. We have also had destruction to our own private property due to their
curiosity and hunger. The decision we have made is to learn to live with the bears and consider each
sighting to be a great experience. We do not hang out feeders at any time except from Jan. through mid march, plant trees and flowers for the hummingbirds and song birds
throughout the summer, burn off all outdoor grills, keep trash inside a locked garage and take it
regularly to the landfill, do not leave any food in the vehicles and make sure all vehicle windows are closed. These are some of the ways we have learned to live w/them and avoid personal loss.
We strongly support the B.B.T.F. recommendations and would like to offer a few suggestions.
- We have felt since the 1st B.B.T.F. and still to this point, that there needs to be a limited hunting season implemented (ie: a small number of black bear hunting tags issued) . Our suggestion is a lottery by where the application is accompanied with a non-refundable fee ($20.00 or higher) followed by a in state B.B. tag with a fee ($100 -200.00) issued to the person that is drawn. This money then could be used to reimburse farmers for their crop damage and also establish more black bear habitat since so much is being lost due to
development.
We feel that a greater percentage of the lottery tags should go to Garrett and Allegany county residents. If there are out of state chances - their fee should be higher for the tag (ie:$200.00-$500.00) depending on the fee charged in that state for a bear tag for out of state tags. Farmers that
receive crop damage permits and do not choose to harvest the bear should have access to those names that are successful in the draw and contact one of them to handle the
nuisance bear. Farmers should not be allowed to sell their crop damage tags and ALL bear harvested should be reported to DNR for weight, sex and age etc. Any tags issued in the future could be based on return info. from years past.
- We feel it should be mandatory for lake homes and where ever needed to provide bear proof trash cans. A resident that purchases one is trying to
eliminate the problem, but the effort is defeated if his neighbor does not.
- The black bear is known for having poor eye sight but their ear and eye sight are what helps and hinders them. They are just doing what comes natural to them and that is searching for food. Whether it be acorns and berries or an open bird feeder or trash can. They are just hungry. Where we get into trouble is when they are not afraid of human scent. When one person feeds them and the next does not, there can be trouble. There are a good number of bears that are NOT
leery of human scent. Education for the bear and humans, especially our tourist population should continue each year from early spring through early winter. Improving our understanding of the black bear will help to continue it's survival in the western region of the county. And this will stem back to our suggestion #1 for a limited hunt - educating the bear to fear human scent.
- We do not agree with opening the discussion on the subject state wide. The state has two very diverse kinds of habitat for two different kinds of wildlife. Maryland has been blessed with mountains and the wildlife that it can support and the eastern shore and the wildlife that it can support. We do not deal with the problems down east and their decisions or at least none that we have had a chance to vote on and we feel that it is hard to give a fair
judgment on an issue with out experiencing the problem first hand.
- We know that the B. B. T.F. might not be able to help with this next suggestion, but we would like to bring to everyone's attention that the wildlife
personnel positions at Mt. Nebo and state wide have decreased tremendously due to cut backs. They do not have the staffing they once did to properly manage all of the work that is placed before them. Once a position is fazed out, their
responsibilities are placed on someone else along with their prior work. Technician positions can not keep being cut or there will be no one to complete field work and burn out occurs rapidly.
A question that we have had for some time is that - Why have we hired highly educated men and women for the field of wildlife if we do not listen to their recommendations to the problem before us? They have the best training and resources available.
In closing, we hope that again a "win/win" solution can be figured out before we loose this great animal. They are being shot or killed
inhumanely and in turn a TOTAL loss. The animal is wasted and the revenue from the application and tag that could have helped in crop damage reimbursement and/or help
acquire more habitat is lost as well. Farmers need to know that steps are being taken to insure their
livelihood and the general public to know that the bears will learn to fear human scent or the measures that are presently happening will continue. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, A. & B. F.
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 02:51 PM - Subject: Black Bear management Plan
I am registering my strong opposition to hunting black bears.
These animals were nearly extinct in this state only 50 years ago. They reproduce slowly and are in need of our support to allow them to co-exist with humans. Bears are shy creatures and not given to wanton attacks on man. Precautions must be taken to avoid enticing them to populated areas, such as removing food and trash, using aversion conditioning to teach them to avoid areas used by humans, or the use of electric fencing to protect sensitive areas. The DNR has the authority to eliminate problem bears that have not responded to these methods. They should be the only ones allowed to eliminate bears from our state.
The wildlife population is crucial to our environment and must be protected. I would purchase black bear stamps to protect them from being hunted.
Save them. Don't allow a bear hunt to take place.
(Yes, I have lived and do love to walk in the woods where these animals roam.) - J. B. G.
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 02:21 PM - Subject: Comments on Draft Black Bear Task Force Report
Dear Black Bear Task Force, I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft Report produced by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. There is no rationale for a bear hunt in Maryland. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific "problem" bears and would not address any bear/human conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to bear/human conflicts. A bear hunt is biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated at only 266-437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist to resolve bear/human conflicts in a non-lethal manner. Simple, effective solutions already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to behave. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
I am one of the vast majority of Maryland citizens who want to see bears protected in the state. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears protected. Please take the common-sense approach of removing the bear hunt recommendation from the Black Bear Task Force Report. Sincerely, V. K., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: No To Black Bear Hunting
I support actions to protect the black bear! There are other ways to respond to problems with the bears and it should be our responsibility to do those things before just killing them. - K. S.
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunting Opposed
I am adamantly opposed to black bear hunting. Have we not learned a single lesson from years past? These are slow reproducing mammals that we nearly drove to extinction one time already in the not to distant past. There are other ways to respond to problems with the bears and it should be our responsibility to do those things before just killing them. This is a travesty! I support actions to protect the black bear!
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 11:36 AM - Subject: NO TO BEAR HUNT!!!
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is absolutely no rationale for a bear hunt!! Only 50 years ago the black bear population was nearly extinct! We must be careful not to ever allow that to happen again.
There are humane methods of dealing with humane-bear conflicts. Please do not
vote for what only a few would benefit from.
Vote NO to the bear hunt in Maryland. Sincerely, O. S., Clarksburg, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 09:36 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is absolutely no rationale for a bear hunt!! Only 50 years ago the black bear population was nearly extinct! We must be careful not to ever allow that to happen again.
There are humane methods of dealing with humane-bear conflicts. Please do not vote for what only a few would benefit from.
Vote NO to the bear hunt in Maryland. Sincerely, M. McN, Ijamsville, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 09:21 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is absolutely no rationale for a bear hunt!! Only 50 years ago the black bear population was nearly extinct! We must be careful not to ever allow that to happen again.
There are humane methods of dealing with human-bear conflicts. Please do not vote for what only a few would benefit from.
Vote NO to the bear hunt in Maryland. Sincerely, K. L., Germantown, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 09:06 AM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is absolutely no rationale for a bear hunt!! Only 50 years ago the black bear population was nearly extinct! We must be careful not to ever allow that to happen again.
There are humane methods of dealing with humane-bear conflicts. Please do not vote for what only a few would benefit from.
Vote NO to the bear hunt in Maryland. Sincerely, E. McN., Monrovia, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 09:06 AM - Subject: Opposition to Bear Hunt
Dear Task Force: I strongly oppose the proposed bear hunt in Maryland.
We have a tiny population of bears (about 300) and even a small hunt may jeopardize the survival of these slow-producing mammals. Black bears were nearly extinct in Maryland just 50 years ago. Moreover, a recreation hunt would not target specific bears that are causing damage and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no evidence or scientific justification for a hunt as a solution to human-bear conflict. Please consider other solutions (many of which already exist). Please also note that I will support the bear stamp only if there is no hunt. Thank you for your consideration. Sincerely, A.F.G., Reisterstown, MD
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 08:21 AM
To Whom It May Concern, On behalf of Animal Advocates of Howard County and our more than 500 members and supporters, we would like to strongly urge you to reconsider proposing the hunting of the already small black bear population.
Supporters of the hunt claim they are addressing the bear nuisance problem, however, a random trophy hunt will not target specific "problem" bears. Black bears are slow to reproduce and already face threats from hunting in neighboring states as well as habitat fragmentation.
If certain areas within the state are seeing an increase in human-bear conflicts, non-lethal solutions exist. We strongly urge the implementation of electric fencing, bear relocation and the removal of trash before endorsing killing the bears.
I hope you agree that Maryland is a better place with species such as the black bear that are native to our state. Lets not risk the extinction of the bear similar to what took place 50 years ago.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this proposal. Ann Selnick, President, Animal Advocates of Howard County, Ellicott City, Maryland
Date: Friday, December 13, 2002 12:36 AM - Subject: black bear management plan
Dear Sir or Madam, I am a lifelong resident of Maryland writing to state my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state. A bear hunt is not justified scientifically as a solution to bear-human conflicts and would only benefit a small percentage of people who want to hunt for trophies. Even a hunt limited in size could jeopardize the survival of Maryland's bear population, estimated at around 350. Thank you very much, S. H., Prince Frederick, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 11:51 PM - Subject: RE: Black Bear Task Force
Maryland Black Bear Task Force Members: I am a resident of Montgomery County Maryland with a retirement home recently built in Garrett County. I was born and raised in Pennsylvania and have lived in the Western U.S. for 12 years in Grizzly Bear country. I would like to go on record with the following statement.
I believe the Task Force recommendation regarding proposed mandatory bear proof trash cans is the most responsible approach for the residents of Garrett and several other counties where bear have become in the public’s words a “threat” to life and property. I am in strong support of this action because “it works”. This is a proven method of control without the loss of life to people or bears. When I arrived in Garrett County as a home owner I was extremely surprised at the outright ignorance regarding bears and trash dependency in spite of the education that is presented in the County. I attribute some of this to the fact that the County has a large amount of residents who do not leave here full time and do not have a sense of responsibility to others in the County.
Bears will forage extensive miles for food, they will return continually to easy trash areas and teach their young to do the same. By cutting off the learned easy food source of “trash picking” the bears will learn to forage over larger ranges. This will allow for bears to die naturally at a greater rate especially when their are drought years. Also Maryland bears will roam into other States such as Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Virginia where I believe their are bear hunting seasons. I believe West Virginia has bear proof containers, they may not be mandatory however, they took the responsible course of action many years ago and their bears are natural foragers, unlike ours.
Granted this action I am proposing since never practiced in Maryland would take time to re-train the bears to forage in their natural habitat. However, bears are survivors and are fast learners when their easy food sources are taken away. I do not have actual numbers at this time regarding how well this system works, but I’m sure those in DNR know and if not can find out from the other agencies such as the National and State Parks and the National Forest Service who have been managing bears for a long time using trash control and education about responsibility.
The frequent bears I have seen in Garrett County at my new home and other places throughout the county are clearly trash raised bears. The stories I have read in the local new paper and heard from neighbors for the last 4 years of bears destroying peoples property and threatening their lives, breaking into homes to reach open trash compactors, etc. proves my case. We are raising “trash picking” bears in this County and then expecting them to not destroy or harm. This is certainly not how we raise our own children.
I understand the peoples fear of our children being attached or worse killed by a bear. However, I also understand that “bears” are “not” are natural predator they do “not” attack us their behavior has been learned by their “loss of fear of people” as trash raised bears. We have taught this behavior to the bears and we should re-teach them to be the wild creatures that they are so we can enjoy their beauty and their part in nature without harm to them or us.
I know that the State of Maryland has taken pride in having bears in Maryland it is clear just driving through the State. Since we are so small in size regardless of the size of our human population we should be able to continue to enjoy the bear as part of our natural habitat . I realize that no one is suggesting killing off all the bears in Maryland, however without hunting laws already their are many, many, poachers and folks who take pot shots at bears. A hunting season will only escalate the removal of bear in Maryland to the point where we will rarely if ever see them. I realize this is what people say they want, however, the loss of bear in Maryland would be a tragedy for our children would never learn how to live with responsibility within nature. I realize this is a complex situation however, I believe our fears may be driving us to make extreme decisions that in the long run may provide results that we did not intend. Just as we would never let our young children alone in a shopping mall and we would teach them not to speak to strangers, we should also be teaching them to not “raise trash bears”.
It is true my proposal will not aid the farmers and ranchers of the area. On this I would say I am “not opposed” to allowing the management by DNR of farmers and ranchers shooting bear if caught killing live stock, horses, etc. However, I would hope that these same farmers and ranchers also take responsibility by using guard dogs and any other known herding animal to protect their herds as well. I have lived in prevalent coyote territory and have witnessed first hand ranchers and farmers managing their herds very well with “large” breeds of herd dogs and suffering little or no loss. The Western U.S. has been fighting coyote herd loss for decades with both the assistance of the Government and the responsibility of the people. Usually the folks in the West who are the loudest heard regarding the “coyote epidemic” are the smallest number of folks who do not take their own responsibility seriously.
Because these proposals have costs associated with them which the people would have to bear, then I would further like to recommend that fund raising subsidies as well as an appropriate size of State and County funds should be directed to assist those that may not be able to comply with any mandatory decision and assistance in herd management.
One suggestion in mind for example is an organizations such as the Lions Club or others could have the children with assistance of adults build wood bear proof trash can containers as a fund raising event or service. The children would learn two things how to construct something as well as how to teach responsibility to themselves and the community. This is one of many ideas that if brainstormed by a large number of individuals could be created. The lack of ideas to raise money in our entrepreneurial society has never been a problem and neither has been the lack of spending it.
Lets really begin teaching ourselves responsibility by taking it and making bear proof trash containers a mandatory way of life and provide the farmers and ranchers a managed means when their proven responsibility has failed so they can shoot bears that have attacked or are attacking their herds.
I would finally like to go on record saying I myself am not a hunter, however I do eat venison and am not against hunting in a humane manner as long as the intention is to eat. I am opposed to hunting for the sack of hunting as in having a trophy. I feel so strongly about my statements that I am willing, if asked, to commit in participation or assistance in any means possible to see this responsibility be taken.
Thank you for providing to us this forum for commenting. Sincerely, S. H., Kensington, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 06:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Dear Sir or Madam: I am strongly opposed to having a black bear hunting season in Maryland, and I am having difficulty understanding why hunting black bears is even a consideration, in light of there being fewer than 500 in the entire state. We need to be protecting black bears to ensure their survival, not killing off (or maiming) the few there are.
In regard to human-black bear conflicts, Dr. Lynn Rogers of the Wildlife Research Institute states, "Many people are moving into black bear habitat. The bears’ future depends on how well we understand and tolerate them." This is what we should be encouraging—understanding of and tolerance for black bears. Bear-human conflicts can be resolved simply and humanely by educating people about bears—that they are intelligent and very unlikely to attack people, even if provoked. We need to insist that people keep their food and trash in bear-proof containers, and that farmers and gardeners use humane methods—such as electric fencing—to protect their crops. Killing "nuisance" animals is never a
long-term solution—if the environment fills a need, the animals always come back (unless you kill them all to extinction). This has been proven over and over again, with feral cats and other species.
A black bear hunting season would benefit only those very few people who would take delight in killing a bear. I am a member of Maryland's majority, we
citizens who are not black bear hunters and do not wish to see Maryland's black bears hunted. Thank you. Sincerely, V. S., College Park, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 06:06 PM - Subject: BBTF Comments
COMMENTS FOR THE MARYLAND BLACK BEAR TASK FORCE - I am writing regarding the proposed black bear hunt in Maryland. I am an apprentice wildlife rehabilitator with Second Chance Wildlife Center in Gaithersburg, Maryland. I would also like to explain that I was a zookeeper in Boston, Massachusetts, 30 years ago, and was the primary caretaker of a black bear cub brought to the zoo from Maine. It is from both perspectives that I submit these comments.
I. First, let me state why I am opposed to a black bear hunt, from a wildlife rehabilitator's point of view. In the state of Maryland, there is no rehabilitation of black bears. According to DNR's own black bear biologist, Harry Spiker, any report of an "abandoned" cub or injured bear is examined on a case-by-case basis. As Mr. Spiker explained to me, policy dictates that cubs found without a mother are given to a female bear with cubs of her own, when possible. Injured bears may receive some assistance by DNR, but if too badly injured, are euthanized.
If a black bear hunt were allowed in Maryland,
- How would hunters know an adult male from an adult female bear?
- How would hunters know where to find the cubs, if the bear they shot was a female with cubs?
- How many female bears with cubs will be needed to serve as foster mothers when the natural mother is killed by a hunter?
- Who will treat injured bears, if they can be caught?
Unless DNR can come up with answers and plans for all these scenarios, allowing any kind of hunt would be both irresponsible and inhumane. It would also be sentencing the black bear population to a very shaky future, not just in Maryland but in our entire region. Killing a female with young cubs, even when unintentional, would also be killing the cubs. Baby black bears need to nurse for at least three months, and are then dependent on their mother at least another seven months.
Additionally, if DNR does allow a black bear hunt, it must commit to funding and providing space for the rehabilitation of cubs and injured adults, as this will surely be a consequence of such a hunt.
II. Second, I am against a black bear hunt from the point of view of a zookeeper who actually cared for a black bear cub. In 1972, I worked at the Franklin Park Zoo in Boston, MA, as a zookeeper. "Thunder" was brought to the zoo in August, after his mother had been killed. He and his sibling had been kept in someone's garage, until his sibling died. Finally he was placed at the zoo. The first weeks of his life there were hell. He hung from the top of his corn crib cage and cried all day. At night, he would finally descend to eat his food. Eventually, he began to come near me. Finally, he allowed me to touch him. He then was so desperate for companionship, he overcame his fear and would sleep in my lap. My job was not to prepare him for release; it was to prepare him for a life of captivity, for there was no wildlife rehabilitation at that time.
Ultimately, he was shipped to another zoo in New England. When I visited him there are few months later, he was rapidly becoming a "vegetable". Stuck in a concrete and chain-link "exhibit", he had already developed stereotypical pacing and a faraway look in his eyes: the look of a life wasted.
Lest anyone think that an orphaned or injured bear could live happily in this situation (i.e., if an injury occurred via hunting that made the bear non-releasable), think again. No bear deserves to live its life in such an environment.
III. Finally, I would like to comment on some of the points made by the task force in the draft.
1. Much of the debate about whether or not to allow a black bear hunt centers on the estimated numbers of bears in the state. Black bears are transient, traveling great distances at times for food. To say there is X or Y number in one state is misleading; the black bears of this region are not "residents" of any state, but residents of all states!
2. Mr. Rooney states that, "The MSA believes that farmers, landowners and beekeepers would be more tolerable with the growing black bear population if …..DNR would implement a limited bear hunting season that could be used as a means to control nuisance bears…."
Farmers, landowners and beekeepers are not qualified to determine which bears are nuisance bears and which are not. They are, however, useful in reporting to the DNR information about bear encounters. The DNR should take full responsibility for regulating, if necessary, the numbers of bears in Maryland, and only the DNR should be permitted to determine whether a particular bear is a nuisance, and what its fate will be. Citizens seeking revenge for damages done should not be given permission to resolve the matter themselves.
3. "The Black Bear Task Force recommends the discontinuation of the Black Bear Conservation Stamp program as a revenue-generating program for bear damage compensation program. The present investment in this program……appears to be greater than the revenue generated."
Reimbursement to farmers and landowners for damage done by bear(s) needs to be reconsidered. First, claims of damage by bear(s) should be handled in a manner similar to any other claim where reimbursement is involved, i.e., auto accident, fire damage, etc. A representative from DNR trained in this area should be contacted to survey the damage and determine if, in fact, a bear caused it. Only then should funds be released to the individual. I feel sure that this would reduce the amount of overall funds required for compensation.
There is a conflict of interest in using funds from bear hunting licenses and permits to reimburse individuals who have incurred damage by bears. A better idea would be to funnel money collected from crimes against wildlife (hunting out of season, etc) and deposit it to the Black Bear Conservation Fund. Furthermore, individuals who wish to see the black bear listed as a nongame species could make contributions to it yearly.
There are many other concerns I have regarding the recommendations put forth by the task force. In order to conclude them, however, I simply wish to state that I concur with the recommendations of Dr. John Hadidian, HSUS task force member. I feel strongly that a wildlife rehabilitator should also be a part of the task force, and I am volunteering to be that person, should you consider this. Thank you for your attention.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 02:06 PM - Subject: The Bear Hunt
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. With that low number, there is a chance that the bear population would drop significantly. I have not heard of any human-bear problems. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago. I ask you to stop and look at the danger that this bear hunt poses to the low Black Bear population in Maryland. - M. H.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 02:06 PM - Subject: Don't shoot the bears! Give them a break and let them live in pe ace!
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my strong opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
I have reviewed the details concerning this proposed bear hunt and I am angry that with less than 500 bears left in our great state - you would even consider such a hunt! I am even more disgusted that it sounds like it will be a recreational bear hunt. I am aware that sometimes it is necessary to target specific, problematic bears but there is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago. We are supposed to be rational human beings...we are not the only species that deserves to live on this planet. Maybe if you preserved the bear habitat by stopping the constant erosion of their wilderness by developers they would have a place to exist away from humans.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
As a Maryland's citizens I want these bears protected. Only a small number of people would benefit from killing these beautiful animals (if you can call it a benefit - I think it is pretty sad when a person hunts a living and breathing animal for a stupid stuffed trophy that they can display in their den).
I have seen what has happened to Montgomery County (over development) during the past 20 years. We have pushed wild animals out of their habitats and then complained that they are a nuisance! Boy do we have it wrong! We are the nuisance...people have no regard or respect for the wildlife in our state nor do they recognize the need to share our environment with other species. My gosh...out in Cumberland County there is still so much wilderness...I would think a wild animal could live in peace out there at least!
Thank you for your time and consideration of my strong opinions concerning this matter. Sincerely, S. K., Gaithersburg, Maryland
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:36 PM
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
I realize that people sometimes are frightened of bears and don't want them around their homes or recreational areas, but people also forget that we are the ones who have intruded on bear territory in most instances, and there are other ways to address bear "nuisance" problems. For example, people can remove food and trash that attract bears, install electric fencing around crops and beehives, and use aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Hunting bears would pose the risk of exterminating a population of animals that really isn't that numerous in Maryland. I am sure you are getting feedback from other Maryland residents who oppose bear hunts. There is already plenty of animal hunting in the state, and adding bears to the unfortunate list of victims for trophy hunting does little but boost egos of the killers.
Please decide to prevent bear hunting in Maryland. I like to think we are a compassionate state. We humans are the species with power, and, as we encroach more and more on various animals' habitat, we should try to use that power wisely, rather than simply killing off every animal that gets in our way. Our lives would be, I think, seriously impoverished without the animals, including bear, that are different from us, even if they sometimes inspire fear and cause problems. Thank you for your attention, M. H., Silver Spring, Maryland
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:08 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Hello, from my contacts from inside DNR, I say the report has incorrect data and request that a new task force committee is put together to look at the
management plan again. Thank you, R. M., Finksburg, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management
To Whom It May Concern: As a lifetime resident of Maryland I expect my opposition on the black bear hunt be counted.
The black bear population in Maryland is "estimated" to be between 266 and 437.
Solutions to the human-bear conflicts are well known to the DNR but not enforced. Electrical fencing is a major deterrent; teaching "humans" to keep trash and food in proper disposal facilities and "sealed" is adamantly necessary.
We all know who will benefit from a black bear hunt - the "hunters" and their trophies of a wall hanging.
It makes me sick to think that the Maryland DNR has become so distanced from the realities of their job - to "protect" our wildlife...NOT offer it up for a trophy wall.
Is this an example of new administration control in Washington? .... or possibly the fact that our Democratic state has been handed over to republican control? Let's not pretend that politics do not play an intricate part in wildlife (control) protection....(ref. Montana DOL and the Yellowstone Bison). I will not sit by and watch Maryland turn into a slaughter state.
I strongly oppose any consideration of a Black Bear hunt in Maryland. The Maryland DNR needs to take heed to Maryland citizens who expect our wildlife be "protected" and NOT offered up to a hunters demand.
I am hereby requesting reports on the Black Bear population and intended decisions concerning this animal. If I am not privy to that printed information by mail, I expect to be advised "why"? - K. C., Nottingham, Baltimore County, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear hunt
I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Conducting a bear hunt is certainly not a scientifically valid solution to any human-bear conflict problems. Can your Task Force not think of any better solutions? The key is to educate the public about how to avoid conflict. Why should animals be killed because humans are too lazy to do the right thing?
It is my understanding that Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
The public wants what is best for the bears and it is your job to meet their desires. Don't do this hunt--for the bears and for Maryland citizens. Sincerely, K. C., Montgomery Village, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
To whom it may concern: I oppose any Bear Hunt in Maryland.
The few who want to kill these animals will make any excuse to do it.
They are so eager to experience a sick thrill and to have a trophy they don't want to use all the simple and humane methods to keep bears away from beehives or crops.
The vast majority of people do not hunt nor do they want to see the bears killed.
Let's handle any "problems" non-lethally. Sincerely, A. K.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt in Maryland--URGENT
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Solutions do exist. Simple, yet effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist. Removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live are a few recommendations.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Why can we not look at the humane, compassionate and reasonable solutions? Thank you for your time, M. D.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: no black bear hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. - S. M., White Hall, Md 21161
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: please cancel bear hunts
There is no rationale for a bear hunt
A hunt would be biologically reckless.Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Please cancel the idea for bear hunts. Thank you, R. G.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Support for Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my support in favor of a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Suggestions regarding ways to remove human-bear conflicts have not worked in Maryland. The bears are comfortable searching for food in areas that have become dangerous to both humans and bears.
Successful hunts are conducted in West Virginia and Pennsylvania that have had results similar to DNR-implemented deer management programs in Maryland.
I feel a plan involving a limited hunt for black bears will provide similar, successful results. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, J. T., Westminster, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Protection for the Black Bear in Md.
What is the point in buying black bear stamps if were going to hunt them into extinction. - B. D.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
Hi, I think the state of Maryland should have a bear hunt . If you are going to hand out money for damages for bear . You need to pay for the damage done by your deer first. I have lost a lot of money to deer. That little $50,000 would not cover Damage over the years. Thank You, A. E. B., Marion Station Md
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force Comments
As a lifelong citizen of Maryland and a registered voter I would like to express my opinions on some of the Black Bear Task Force recommendations. First, I would strongly support a Black Bear hunting season in the State of Maryland for both recreational and economic reasons. I believe that the decision on a Black Bear season should be scientifically based and NOT based on a public attitude survey. As an example, just because an individual or group might think that Zebras are neat creatures does not qualify them to make management decisions on Zebras.....let the experts make those decisions based on sound scientific evidence, not warm cuddly cartoon generated ideas. Also, I believe that the Black Bear conservation stamp should be continued. We should allow all of the non-sportsperson individuals the chance to help pay for the cost of Maryland Wildlife management like the licensed MD hunter does. In addition to the revenue stream (currently negative) this stamp would also give the department the chance to accurately gauge the true interest of the citizenry in supporting the Black Bear for non-lethal "bear watching" opportunities. I wonder how many of these stamps have been sold since the inception of that program? It probably doesn't even come close to the 18,500 MD duck stamps sold in the year 2000 let alone the 140,000 MD hunting licenses sold in that same year. I also wonder how many of the people who so vehemently oppose the MD Bear Hunting Season put their money where there mouth is and purchase this "Bear Conservation Stamp". If the State is admittedly losing money on the stamp program it doesn't sound like many people are truly that interested in the Black Bears' well being for aesthetic purposes. In closing, I truly hope that with the current Governor Elect that the Maryland Department of Natural Resources will return to being an admired, scientifically based, world class organization using sound, proven wildlife management techniques for the benefit of the Maryland Sportsperson who is the Department's largest customer and provides the majority of the funding for the Department's operation. - B. C. L.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: opposition to Black Bear hunt
I am writing to express my opposition to legalizing Black Bear hunting in Maryland.
First, Black Bear hunting is not necessary to protect human safety: the Draft Task Force Report [“Report”] itself describes the event of a bear attack on a human as “extremely rare.” Only the elimination of all bears would eradicate the possibility of human injury.
Second, Black Bear hunting is not an effective means of protecting human property. The Report implies that reducing the number of bears will ipso facto reduce the number of unfavorable human/bear interactions, but that logic may be flawed as hunting will not be limited to problem bears. In fact, it seems more likely that hunters seeking a “recreational experience” will want to hunt those bears that are living in their natural habitats and have not become
accustomed to humans.
Third, Black Bear hunting is an unethical means of protecting human property. While the Report implies that the bear population has increased (a fact which seems to be in some dispute), the Report contains no information suggesting that the Black Bear itself is in jeopardy as result of this increase. Although property damage complaints have apparently increased, the Report itself states in Objective 5 that “the increase in nuisance complaints cannot be directly related to bear populations. Many factors play into the amount of nuisance complaints, ranging from natural food shortages to human encroachment into bear habitat.” It hardly seems right to allow bear hunting for the first time since 1953 because humans have staked a greater claim to what has traditionally been the bears’ domain, or at least a domain that was more successfully shared by bears and humans.
I commend the Task Force for outlining numerous creative approaches to fostering an workable relationship between human and Black Bear populations in Maryland including a variety of public education initiatives and Black Bear population tracking programs. Hunting, however, is hardly one of the “innovative ideas and cutting edge techniques,” the Task Force calls for in the Summary of the Report.
I urge you reject black bear hunting in Maryland, and I thank you for your consideration of my remarks. - M.K. Baltimore, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Comments Black Bear Task Force Report and Recommendations
Dear Black Bear Task Force, I am writing in response to your draft report and recommendations issued on November 4, 2002. Although I am a citizen of Maryland (Elkton, MD), I also have over 10 years of experience researching black bears and am currently employed by the University of Delaware as a faculty member in their wildlife conservation curriculum. My dissertation investigated human attitudes toward black bears, habitat suitability, and black bear ecology with the intent of developing a plan for black bear restoration in Mississippi. In conducting my dissertation research, I wrestled with many of the same issues that were debated by your group. Black bear management is a challenge for every state within their range. Few animals evoke the emotional responses that black bears receive. Therefore, I recognize that managing black bears is as much a social and political issue as it is a biological issue. Below are my comments to your report and recommendations.
My first impression of your report was that it lacked a detailed discussion of the biology of the bear. A thorough understanding of bear biology is paramount to developing management strategies. Most of the results of the research conducted in the 1990’s on Maryland’s black bears were relegated to an appendix. After a thorough reading of the report and recommendations, I realized that your group focused on the sociological and political aspects of bear management. Although I understand the focus, I would caution that biology of a species should determine its management not human attitudes. Having been involved in numerous human dimension studies, I know that allowing the public to dictate management is easy but not always preferable for the species of interest.
I think the Maryland Wildlife & Heritage Service should be commended for the amount of resources they have invested in black bear management and research. The population survey conducted by biologists in 2000 was “cutting-edge.” Not only did their biologists conduct “cutting-edge” research, but they also had it published in a peer-referred scientific journal. Therefore, I am confident in the population assessment provided by the Maryland Wildlife & Heritage Service. I do, however, think that the task force should consider Maryland’s black bear population within the proper context. Our population is not an isolated island. We are surrounded by Pennsylvania, West Virginia, and Virginia, which all have healthy, expanding bear populations. Furthermore, Maryland’s population should be considered part of the large eastern black bear population that stretches from Maine to Georgia along the Appalachian Mountains. Therefore, the impact of adjacent state’s management activities must be considered. I believe Maryland’s biologists are already doing this by actively participating in an interstate/agency group of bear biologists. Understanding that Maryland is part of a large population is important to understanding the impact of particular management activities. I was somewhat surprised by the resistance to lethal control as an option for managing Maryland’s black bears. Both states adjacent to “bear country” in Maryland currently conduct a harvest and their bear population in the counties adjacent to Maryland continue to increase. A harvest season can be established to achieve any desired outcome; therefore, a harvest season can be designed to either allow the bear population to increase, stabilize, or decrease. Additionally, the current paradigm among bear biologists is that harvest seasons do help alleviate human-bear conflicts. With this said, the task force should clearly articulate that whether to harvest or not is really a sociological and political issue.
My only other major comments about the report and recommendations concern the public attitude survey. My comments are based on the letter to Mr. Paul Peditto in Appendix G. Nine objectives are listed in the letter. The first objective is of particular concern because it seems to suggest that a survey will be used to communicate that a problem exists with black bears. For most of the state, a problem does not exist with black bears, so telling survey recipients that black bears are a problem would bias the results of the survey. Additionally, surveys should be used to gather information, not to convey information. I am also concerned about the second objective. Although I recognize the importance of understanding cultural carrying capacity, I question whether the remaining seven objectives can be achieved while attempting to quantify cultural carrying capacity. I believe a better approach would be to conduct a statewide survey that would achieve objectives three to nine. This survey should be sufficiently large to allow quantification of demographic, regional, and residency (i.e., rural versus non-rural residents) variability. The next step would be to attempt to quantify cultural carrying capacity by developing a “bear sensitivity index” (Peyton et al. 2001) or more general categories such as to increase, stabilize, or decrease the black bear population (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 2001). Cultural carrying capacity is just as difficult to determine as biological carry capacity, so I would caution you to carefully consider your assessment methods. Some sort of long-term assessment framework, in which, cultural carrying capacity is reassessed every 5-10 years would be preferable. In my research (Bowman et al. 2001), we documented differences between attitudes, when we compared areas with high black bear populations to areas with low black bear populations. A long-term assessment framework would allow for temporal shifts in human attitudes. This type of framework should incorporate a stakeholder based model (Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries 2001) versus a more general public model (Peyton et al. 2001). With all this said, I recommendation that you carefully consider the objective(s) and methodology of the survey so that the survey is sufficiently focused to yield usable results.
In addition to the points expressed above, I have a few additional points concerning conducting public surveys for wildlife management. These points are merely to highlight some of the most common problems I have encountered in survey research. Many surveys have objectives that are poorly defined or with very broad objectives; these surveys often fail to provide useful information. Objectives for the survey should be clearly defined and be obtainable. The most common error I see in survey research is research that attempts to answer too much with a single survey. I believe the most effective surveys are very focused. Often times, objectives are clearly defined but methodology fails to account for sufficient variation making the objectives unobtainable. Failure to account for sufficient variation often results for incorrect sampling of the population. How you draw your sample from the population is very important. Additionally, the survey media can affect what population you have available to sample. Mail surveys, although cheap, have many disadvantages when compared to telephone surveys. Because survey methodology is often complex, researchers conducting this survey should have experience conducting surveys on wildlife related topics. I think the public survey should be carefully designed and administered. Although designing and implementing an effective survey instrument can be time consuming, the end result will be preferable to a hastily designed and implemented survey.
I recognize the difficulty of managing black bears. I think the Wildlife and Heritage Service has been proactive in actively managing the black bear since 1992 with the implementation of the first black bear management plan. Because I feel that any wildlife management should be based on sound scientific research and not on emotions, I believe that the Black Bear Task Force Report and Recommendation are an important first step to developing an updated black bear management plan for Maryland. Your group should be commended for its hard work and dedication to Maryland’s black bear population.
I appreciate the opportunity to comment on your report and recommendations and am willing to assist your group in any way.
Literature Cited
Bowman, J. L., B. D. Leopold, F. J. Vilella, D. A. Gill, and H. A. Jacobson. 2001. Attitudes of landowners toward black bears compared between areas of high and low bear populations. Ursus 12:153-160.
Peyton, B., P. Bull, T. Reis, and L. Visser. 2001. Report summary: public views on bear and bear management in the Lower Peninsula of Michigan. Department of Fisheries and Wildlife, Michigan State University, Lansing, Michigan, USA.
Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries. 2001. Virginia Black Bear Management Plan (Draft). Virginia Department of Game and Inland Fisheries, Richmond, Virginia, USA.
Sincerely, J. L. B., Ph.D., Elkton, Maryland Resident and Assistant Professor of Wildlife Ecology, University of Delaware, Newark, DE
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Letter of Concern
To Whom It May Concern: I have been informed of recent events in the state which requires attention: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
A hunt would be biologically futile. I have been informed that Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
I believe that solutions already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
As an employee of the National Park Service, I am more than unusually concerned. As you are aware, our Bureau's primary function is resource preservation and visitor education. Its animal population is no less sacred than its historic and natural resources.
Although I am voicing concern as a resident of Maryland, I share the views of the Park Service. Sincerely, W. J. W., Upper Marlboro, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: My testimony regarding the Black Bear issue in Maryland
Dear Sir or Madam: As I and my family testified in Annapolis earlier this year, there is no sound scientific, human welfare, nor any other reason to institute a hunt of black bears in the state of Maryland.
There have been alternatives presented to you over and over so I shall not bore you by repeating them, but why are they not being considered? Because a handful of hunters come first before the rest of the citizens in Maryland who know there are other ways and who do not want to see the black bears extinct in their state?
A black bear hunt does not help the people, bears or state of Maryland. It is your mission to institute an alternative. Please consider doing so. Very truly yours, The McC. Family
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, J. F. W., Upper Marlboro, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear hunting
Please open a bear hunting and trapping season in coordination with sound scientific management and sustained use. The trapping season could be the same as Maine's or only cage traps could be used on non-agricultural lands. In addition Wildlife Control Operators should be able to manage damage complaints and keep the bear as partial compensation. - P.M.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear Season
To Whom it may concern! The residents of rural Maryland should not have to put their lives, livestock and crops at risk so the urbanites can ride across our county roads to see a bear. Agriculture is already suffering from over population of deer and other wildlife species. Now is the time to start managing the bear population. Through hunting and wildlife damage permits, we can control this species without interruption to our human needs. Taxpayers should not have to pay for DNR's mismanagement of wildlife caused by pressure from animal activist groups. Respectfully submitted, P. & R. Leggett
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black bear hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
A recreational bear hunt does not target specific, problem bears and would not prevent further human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist: removing food and trash, installing electric fencing around crops, using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid populated areas.
when there is a problem, the humane solution is not to blast away. - S. G., Potomac, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: black bear hunt
To Members of the Task Force: As a Maryland Resident, I am writing to express opposition to the proposed black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. Because Maryland's bear population is estimated to be only between 266 and 437 animals,alternative control measures would be entirely sufficient to manage such a small population. There are multiple solutions to human-bear conflicts such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. Let’s avoid using the mindless solution of killing the few of these creatures that remain. Sincerely, L. B. M., Bethesda, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: oppose bear hunt please
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected.
Sincerely, M. A. B., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Save Maryland's Black Bears
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection!!!! Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, T. O., Germantown, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black bear hunting
Dear Ladies and Gentlemen: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, T. A. B.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to express my strong opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. As a permanent resident in Garrett County, MD, I find no rationale for a bear hunt, especially a recreational hunt, as any part of the black bear management program. Specifically,
- A black bear hunt would not address bear-human conflicts. Those bears that are designated as “nuisance bears” live in areas populated by humans and therefore are in areas where hunting would not be allowed. Bears that will be killed in a recreational hunt will for the most part be those bears that do not interact with humans. Therefore, a bear hunt is not a solution to bear-human conflicts.
- Even a limited bear hunt will jeopardize the survival and continued repopulation of an already tiny bear population. Estimates of the number of bears vary, ranging from somewhere in the 200’s to around 400. There are not enough bears in the state to justify systematically killing even a percentage of the population. As recently as 50 years ago, the black bear was almost extinct in Maryland. In 50 years, the growth of this population has not grown to the point where a hunt can be justified in anyway.
- There are non-lethal solutions that already exist. The problem is that not enough people are using these solutions, preferring instead the inhumane solution of killing these animals. Non-farming residents have the option of removing food items from their property that attract bear and using bear-proof containers for their trash. Farming residents have the option of using electric fencing to surround crops and beehives. Both types of residents have the option of using better locks and barriers on buildings that contain items that attract bear and of using aversive conditioning techniques such as rubber bullets and small explosive items that produce noise.
Again, I can find no rationale for a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland and believe that the immediate solution lies in educating people in more human aversive conditioning techniques, how to safely interact with black bear, and how to use the system that is already in place that allows DNR to euthanize “repeat offender” problem bears. Also, before we can even begin to think about a hunt, much more research is needed to get a better understanding of the exact number of black bear in Maryland, the specific problems they cause (e.g., how much of crop damage is bear-related as opposed to deer-related), and the development of other, more humane ways to manage the black bear population (e.g., sterilization, relocation, etc.).
I am one of the majority of Maryland citizens what want bear protection and humane bear management. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation and/or trophies, a number which is not high enough to justify recklessly altering our small black bear population. Sincerely, K. C., Swanton, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Opposition to Black Bear hunt
Dear Task Force members: I believe that there is no rationale for a recreational bear hunt. Such a hunt would not target specific "problem" bears or address any bear/human conflicts. There is no evidence that there is an overpopulation of bears. Only 50 years ago they were nearly extinct. I have read in the newspaper of incidents in which residents killed bears which seemed to threaten them and these people were not prosecuted. Therefore, people who have a serious problem with a bear are able to eliminate the problem. DNR also has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender bears." Instead of an open hunt, why not allow residents with a problem bear to obtain a permit for that particular animal. Thank you for allowing me to express my concerns. - S. O., Cumberland MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern, As a permanent resident of Garrett County, MD, I am very OPPOSED to a black bear hunt as a part of a black bear management program. We are frequently visited by black bears at our home and enjoy the interaction each and every time. True, it takes some effort on our part to safeguard our property, but that is a tiny price to pay compared to the enjoyment of watching these beautiful creatures and knowing that we are living in harmony with the black bear and other wildlife.
There are several strong and compelling reasons that make a bear hunt a ridiculous option in my opinion:
FIRST, the number of black bears in the State of Maryland, especially in Garrett County, is not large enough to justify a bear hunt. With no more than 400 or so bears in the state (and 400 is one of the higher numbers I have seen), it is biologically reckless to hunt bears in even a limited hunt. A hunt jeopardizes the lives of those healthy bears that will keep future generations strong and viable. A hunt jeopardizes the lives of females who are with cub, and therefore jeopardizes the cubs’ lives as well; this also places a strain on the viability of future generations. With such a small number of bears in the state — a population that was nearly extinct 50 years ago! -- any hunting, especially for recreation and/or trophy, is an immoral and unjustifiable way of managing the bear population.
SECOND, simple and non-lethal solutions already exist and have not been fully utilized and fully advertised to those residents of the state who are being affected by nuisance bears. These solutions include: removing food and trash that attract bear, installing locks and other barriers on buildings that house food and other items that are appealing to bear, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives (this would also help out with the massive problem of crop damage by deer), and using aversive conditioning that reduces bear interaction (e.g., rubber bullets, small exploding devices that scare the bear away, etc.). Very few farmers here in Garrett County are using such non-lethal solutions, making killing bear as a solution a premature step.
THIRD, a bear hunt as a way of eliminating problem bears would be giving in to the almost mass hysteria around the problem bears that has developed here in Garrett County especially. I attended the public hearing on November 14, 2002, at Garrett College and was horrified by the misinformation that existed in the minds of many of the speakers and more of the population at large. The fear that people expressed about bear possibly killing people, especially children, is unjustifiable. Deadly encounters are rare — only 52 cases in the past 100 years — and are usually the result of an interaction where the human has not reacted knowledgeably and with respect for the animal. What is needed is EDUCATION....not killing and hunting animals that are only behaving in ways that are natural. We must explore EDUCATION as a solution to the fullest extent before even considering a black bear hunt. What message would we be sending our children otherwise at a time when there is already too much violence in our world?? Killing is not an option to solving our problems. There is also a great need to help farmers distinguish between deer crop damage and bear crop damage. So many of those who made comments at the public meeting talked about damage to their crops being attributed solely to bear, when the more obvious culprit is deer. Not to say that bear don’t damage crops, but the number of deer far outweigh the number of bear, and before crop damage becomes the rationale for a bear hunt, there needs to be much better information on actually how much is attributed to bear vs. deer.
FOURTH, a recreational bear hunt would do little, if anything, to reduce the small number of bears who are designated as nuisance bears. Hunters will be in those areas that are not populated by humans and, therefore, will be targeting bear that have less (if any) conflicts with humans. DNR already has the authority to euthanize “repeat offender” problem bears if the more humane options of aversive conditioning and relocation are not effective. While I would much prefer that the power to kill bear be made by knowledgeable people such as DNR, instead of a recreational hunt, I would be much less opposed to DNR being able to offer farmers specific bear hunting permits, much like they are issues deer crop permits. This at least would better insure that the “problem” bears are being targeted and that DNR has an opportunity to interact with the farmer to encourage the farmer to use non-lethal methods first.
In summary, I can find no rationale for a bear hunt and strongly believe that it would be irresponsible, immoral, and totally unjustifiable for the State of Maryland to institute one. We have a responsibility to be good stewards of the land on which we reside and the wildlife that shares this land with us. A bear hunt is at best a lazy solution to problems that can be rectified in more effective, more humane, and more justifiable ways. Thank you for considering my comments. Sincerely, J. A. C., Swanton, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Save MD's Black Bears!!
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Maryland does not need to gun down the few remaining bears left in the state. I understand that Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Perhaps a handle of these bears are causing problems, due to the fact that their environment has been destroyed by human encroachment.
A random, for-sport bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. The residents of MD need to be beter educated that simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Education, not hunting, is the answer.
I live in Western Maryland and I want the bears to live here too - in safety.
Please help us. Thank you, V. S., Jefferson, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: black bear hunt proposal
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Hunting the black bears will jeopardize the already small population. I encourage you to try non-violent solutions to human-bear conflicts, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. There is no scientific rationale for the hunt and human-bear conflicts would still continue. Killing the bears will do no good.
Marylanders want protection for bears. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while most Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, S. M. F., Chevy Chase, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
Please do not allow bear hunting in Maryland. Bears have no defense against high powered rifles. Hunters are people who take pleasure in KILLING innocent creatures. There is enough horror in the world at this time without sanctioning this frivilous waste of innocent life. Yours truly, R. D. A.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force
To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to express my opposition to a Black Bear hunt in Maryland. It has taken over 50 years of a hunting moratorium for the Black Bear population to increase from less than 20 to the now fewer than 400. To jeopardize this small population of bears in Maryland for the sake of satisfying the relatively small numbers of hunters here is irresponsible.
A hunt would not necessarily address the issue of bears which have become habituated to humans since it would likely occur in areas away from places where bear/human interactions take place. Rather, a hunt would target bears which are living in the woods, away from people, doing what bears are "supposed" to be doing.
The DNR already has the ability to act when nuisance bears create a problem. We should support their efforts and say "no" to sport hunting of bears. Sincerely, P. S., Owings Mills, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Save Maryland's Black Bears
Dear Sir or Madam: We are vehemently opposed to a black bear hunt in our state. The bear population is estimated to be between 266-437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which nearly ceased to exist 50 years ago. Do not act with reckless abandon and allow a small minority (the hunters) to dictate biological and ecological solutions.
Thank you for your time and consideration in this most urgent matter. Sincerely Yours, M. & D. M., Ellicott City, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Letter for concern and your attention
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
I strongly urge you to consider against it and propose better and humane solutions. I am writing this letter as a consumer, customer, taxpayer, citizen and representative.
This state will be highly looked down upon within the public and media vicinity for doing such a inhumane act of a bear hunt which would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts. I am positive that we and many, will look down upon this as to threaten toward extinction in the near future as your major fault in hasty decision-making.
Alternate solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Once again, I strongly urge you to stop and consider alternative methods to deal with the animals who share the earth with us. Murder is not the
solution.
We will be keeping in touch with your progress and decisions and they will indefinitely affect you for the rest of life and future to come. So please re-consider the bear hunt. Sincerely, The C. Family, Severn, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Stop The Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am opposed to the idea of having a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. This is an inhumane and ineffective way of attempting to minimize bear-human conflicts. With black bear populations only numbering in the few hundred, this makes a recreational hunt totally stupid. It is sad to think that our publc officials find killing the only way to solve issues with other species. Killing is not the solution. Removing food and trash is one idea. Installing electric fencing around crops is another alternative. Please choose non-violent solutions over killing. Sincerely, C. F., Gaithersburg, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM
To Whom It May Concern, I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
Hunting down and killing bears is biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Any hunting at all would jeopardize the survival of the population which only fifty years ago was nearly extinct.
There are simple effective solutions to bear-human conflicts. You can remove trash and food that the bears are attracted to. You can install electric fencing around crops and beehives and you can use aversive conditioning to teach the bears not to come around humans.
There is a very small number of people that get pleasure out of killing animals. Most of the people in Maryland want the bears protected. Sincerely, S. B., Potomac, Maryland
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
The current black bear population in Maryland is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt could seriously jeopardize the survival of the bear population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Additionally, a recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problem bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. It would ignore simple, effective solutions that already exist to human-bear conflicts, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using negative conditioning to teach bears to avoid human-populated areas.
Maryland's citizens -- by a large margin -- want protection for bears. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a large majority want the bear population to be protected. Sincerely, E. K. K., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Say No to Black Bear Hunting in Maryland
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my extreme opposition to a black bear hunt in Maryland. First, I oppose recreational hunting of any sort. Killing is a cruel and unintelligent approach to solving human-animal problems.
Furthermore, a bear hunt would be biologically reckless. Even a limited hunt could jeopardize the survival of the incredibly small bear population, which was nearly extinct just 50 years ago.
Effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist. These are as simple as removing food and trash that attract bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live? These are humane solutions that won’t jeopardize the existence of the black bears.
I am part of the majority of Maryland’s citizens that wants our black bears to be protected. I urge you to reject the idea of a limited hunt as a means to “manage” our bear population. There are other, better alternatives. Sincerely, M. A. Z., Bethesda, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:07 PM - Subject: Save Maryland's Black Bears
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no reason for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops etc., and using conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection but only a small number would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies. A majority of Maryland citizens want our bears to be protected. Sincerely, S. O'H., Kensington, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: I oppose the bear hunt!
I am writing to say that as a Maryland resident I am STRONGLY opposed to a black bear hunt. The majority of Maryland citizens want protection for these amazing creatures, they should not be hunted for recreation and are not causing any harm!!! Please take a stand and protect the bears. Sincerely, S. F., Takoma Park, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, D. R., Bel Air, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my strong opposition to a black bear hunt in Maryland.
Maryland's animals, who are one of our most precious resources, are under duress from uncontrolled
over development of housing projects, shopping centers, and highways. Instead of permitting the slaughter of our small black bear population, we need to protect our animals.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts. Simple, effective solution exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid
areas where people live. We must set aside land for our animal population and place restrictions on human incursions into our remaining wilderness areas.
Maryland does not belong just to its human residents; the animals with whom we share this space deserve thoughtful, responsible care. Most Maryland residents do NOT want our bear population slaughtered by the few people who derive pleasure from destroying innocent animals. Sincerely, C. S. R., Gaithersburg, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: BLACK BEAR HUNT
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: I HAVE READ THAT THIS GREAT STATE OF MARYLAND IS GOING TO HAVE A BLACK BEAR HUNT!
WELL, I AM WRITING TO YOU TO EXPRESS MY OPPOSITION TO THIS!
WHAT RATIONALE DO YOU HAVE FOR A BEAR HUNT? A HUNT WOULD ALSO BE BIOLOGICALLY RECKLESS. MARYLAND HAS AN ESTIMATED BEAR POPULATION OF 266 TO 437 ANIMALS. BUT EVEN THOUGH A LIMITED HUNT WOULD JEOPARDIZE THE SURVIVAL OF THE POPULATION, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS NEARLY EXTINCT 50 YEARS AGO!
THERE ARE SOLUTIONS! I AM SURE YOU KNOW THIS, BUT REMOVING TRASH AND FOOD WHICH EVERYONE KNOWS ATTRACTS BEARS! HOW ABOUT ELECTRIC FENCING AROUND CROPS AND THE BEEHIVES?
AS A MARYLAND CITIZEN, I WANT THE BEARS PROTECTED. THERE IS ONLY A SMALL AMOUNT OF PEOPLE WHO WOULD BENEFIT FROM HUNTING BEARS, FOR RECREATION (WHICH IS CRUEL) OR TROPHIES.
PLEASE TAKE ALL THIS INTO CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND FOR LISTENING. - D. W.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Sincerely, K. G., Waldorf, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
I can not believe that this is even an issue that is being considered. How can anyone justify killing these few animals. The bear population in MD could be irreparably damaged if this bear hunt is allowed to take place. These animals were nearly extinct only 50 years ago. They are struggling even now to survive.
It is inhumane and can not be tolerated in this society. There are options that would please the people who view the bears as a problem that needs to be dealt with and the people that see these animals have a right to live. PLEASE look into these, (ex.: electric fencing, removal of food and trash, conditioning of bears to avoid areas with human inhabitants, etc.).
A bear hunt, in my opinion, is insupportable as a solution. Please reconsider and do not let a tragic event like this take place in MY STATE. Sincerely, A. S., Rockville, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: No to bear hunts in Maryland
Dear Sir or Madam: I am adamantly opposed to any bear hunts in Maryland. There are approximately, at most, 450 bears left in this state. It is outrageous to even consider allowing such a hunt. I understand that one rationale for this misguided proposition is the removal of nuisance bears, yet how will the hunter in the woods know which bear has caused a problem, and which has never ventured near people? Will the bear have a sign around its neck?
Nonsense!
Rather than killing these animals, which by the way, have every right to be here, the State should inform the public of simple, nonlethal steps they can take to prevent problems. Any camper knows that you secure your food and garbage away from your tent and preferably, in a manner where bears cannot reach it. Homeowners can secure their trash in garbage cans, rather than leaving it lying around in plastic boxes. Beekeepers and others with attractive crops can use electric fencing. People who live in areas where bears might wander can keep an air horn handy; a few very loud blasts will scare the bear away. Truly problematic bears can be dispatched, one way or another (preferably nonlethally), by trained professionals.
A recreational bear hunt caters to the small minority of Marylanders who
want to add a stuffed bear head to their walls; there is no shortage of deer
in the state to provide meat and trophies for hunters. I want my children
to have the opportunity to see bears in the wild. Allowing a few people to
wipe out the few remaining bears in Maryland for no good reason is a lousy,
antidemocratic idea and should not be allowed. Yours truly, M. G., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Please don't kill the black bear
I understand that debate is ongoing as to whether or not to have a black bear hunt. There is no justifiable reason for having this hunt. There are less than 400 black bear in the entire state of Maryland. The few bears that there are can not cause much damage. If people are concerned about bears near there home they should take precautions, such as removing trash or having motion sensor lights. Farmers or bee keepers can run an electric fence around the area they feel is being jeopardized. Personally, I purchase several black bear stamps every year to help compensate the farmers loss which is being blamed on the black bear.
The black bear is a beautiful animal that does not deserve to be killed just to please the small population of hunters in Maryland that would love a new trophy animal. Sincerely, H. E.
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM -Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Hello DNR Folks: The Black Bear Task Force examined several salient points regarding the black bear in Maryland and made a number of recommendations in concert with accepted game management practices in effect in many other states. The task force voted 6-4 to have regulated hunting to keep black bear numbers down and within an acceptable range for both humans and bears. We find that this is a sound solution and agree that it should be implemented.
However, we disagree with several other ideas that you are now contemplating:
- Human - bear encounters are increasing and damage is being incurred, but to have bear numbers increase and then pay for those damages 100% with public funds really misses the mark.
- The idea of throwing the whole issue open to a "public attitude survey" rather than taking the advice of biologists and trained game managers and the task force is nonsense.
We are hoping here that the new governor removes Mr. Glendening's henchmen and other spineless yes-persons in DNR who are pretending to represent Maryland's natural resources and its sportsmen but who all the while keep pushing another agenda. It would do some folks well to remember that the sportsmen of Maryland got out to vote in November in record numbers and that we threw out "one of our own" in one 'Cas" Taylor.
Lastly, if you really want opinions, then why aren't you talking to the Western Maryland Coalition of Sportsmen? - John Barone, Chairman, Appalachian Conservation League, Inc., Frederick, Maryland
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Don't hunt black bears!!
To Whom It May Concern: It's disturbing to me that my state would even consider the hunting of black bears. They are a beautiful animal and their numbers are far too few to making hunting them a rational thing to do. Hunting itself is a primitive, arcane practice that sets a poor example for how to live and condones violence. All hunting should be banned. - J. M., North Potomac, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: I Oppose the Proposed Black Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I strongly oppose the establishment of a black bear hunt in Maryland under the guise of the "Black Bear Management Plan".
There can be no credible scientific rationale for such a hunt. On the contrary, it would recklessly endanger Maryland's current bear population of fewer than 450 animals.
Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
I join my fellow Maryland citizens who want bear protection. The wild black bears belong to ALL people in our state, not just the small number of people would see these magnificent animals as merely targets and trophies.
Please enter my comments in the record. Sincerely, J. M. W., Baltimore, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: MD Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. I find it absolutely appalling that you are even considering this. There are only between 266 and 437 of these beautiful animals left in the state and you want to kill them. There is absolutely no valid reason for this. There are very simple non-lethal methods of controlling problem bears that would spare the lives of the innocent animals. As a citizen of the state of Maryland I urge you to pursue these non-lethal methods and spear the live of these beautiful innocent animals. Sincerely, G. K., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Thursday, December 12, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Please do not start bear hunt-public comments
Dear DNR and the Black Bear Task Force: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. Most citizens around the state do not hunt and would like the see bears protected. Opening up a bear hunt would benefit the very small number of people would want to recreationally hunt bears.
One of my main reasons for opposition is that hunting bears will not solve the human/bear conflict that some people in rural areas complain of. Problematic bears should be dealt with on a case by case basis. Hunting bears in the deep wilderness will not change human/bear conflicts. Their is no scientific evidence that bear hunts is the solution.
Considering the low population of bears in Maryland, starting a hunt again would be irresponsible management. After 50 years of recovery, I fear bears could become very rare again if a hunt was allowed.
We can solve human/bear conflicts in non lethal, sensible, and simple methods. For example, removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and bee hives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid human homes and businesses are all ways to reduce problems.
I would like to thank the Task Force for considering the public's comments. Sincerely, A. M. C., Gaithersburg, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:21 AM - Subject: Opposition to black bear hunt!!
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected.
Please let reason and common sense prevail, and do not allow a bear hunt in Maryland!! Sincerely, B. C., Germantown, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:06 AM - Subject: Maryland's Black Bears
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
It is my understanding that Maryland's citizens want bear protection. I feel that only a small number of individuals would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while the majority of Maryland citizens feel the bears should be protected.
Sincerely, C. B., Union Bridge, Maryland
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 11:06 AM - Subject: PLEASE, No Black Bear hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am writing to express my opposition to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland. Please know that the citizens of Maryland want bear protection. I don't think there is ANY rationale for a bear hunt.
Solutions to this problem already exist! Simple, effective, humane solutions to human-bear conflicts should be attempted first!! Methods such as removing food and trash that attract the bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live should be tried before using an inhumane, lethal action. Even still, a recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address the root problems of human-bear conflicts. I do not see any scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts!
As I understand, Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Please, please don't do anything that will jeopardize the survival of this limited population. Sincerely, D. L., Mt. Airy, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 10:36 AM - Subject: To the Black Bear Task Force
Sir or Madame, I am writing to state my emphatic opposition to the suggestion of a bear hunt in Maryland. Due to the already small bear population, a hunt seems wasteful and foolhardy. Instead of relying on a hunt, which will do nothing but decrease the already dwindling numbers of bears, consider making life better for the bears by creating wildlife refuges. These bears' land has already been almost completely taken from them. It is up to you to restore their habitat, instead of killing them off as an easy way to solve the problem. Please, reconsider. Sincerely, B. B., Student, Villa Julie College, Towson, Maryland
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 10:36 AM - Subject: Black Bears
Dear Friends: I respectfully urge you to use your good offices to have the Black Bear Task Force implement non-lethal methods for preventing human conflicts with black bears such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live.
These methods are not only more humane but are also more effective as they actually address the roots of the problem rather than offering a "quick fix" by killing the bears.
Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Thank you! - R. C., Germantown, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 10:36 AM - Subject: Do not hunt Maryland's Black Bears
To Whom It May Concern: I am opposed to a black bear hunt in the state of Maryland.
A bear hunt is not the solution to dealing with the bears. Rather than hunts, other answers are effective for people who have encountered bears in populated areas -- removing food and trash that attracts them, installing fencing, developing other ways of teaching bears to stay away from where people live -- without taking the bears’ lives.
Please take time to figure out how we can exist safely with other living creatures, rather than eliminate them from Maryland. Thank you for considering my opinion. - A. A., Gaithersburg, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 08:36 AM - Subject: Bear Regulations and Hunting Rights
I am a 48 year old mother of 2 teenagers and an avid hunter. I enjoy it, love the outdoors and stress safety diligently. I have tried to pass this tradition down to my children in hopes they can pass it to their children as all Americans have thru the years. I don't understand our government trying to help "their constituents" on this issue by placing people who know absolutely NOTHING about hunting or animal wildlife and management into positions of regulations. It is so obvious that the real issue is abolishment of Americas finest past time and adventures. Hunting and being in the outdoors is so family oriented and a true bonding experience, I don't understand why our governments local and statewide are trying to endanger this privilege. When I am out experiencing nature I feel I am also helping the animal population by participating in the management of the species or as some call it "GAME." My only problem is that the laws and regulations in the state of Maryland prohibit me from participating on a level that I can have this feeling. All my hunting and traditional experiences I have had with my children are being accomplished in states that have the knowledge and history of acceptable and logical and non political regulations regarding game management - - namely our neighbor Pennsylvania. They have a great Game Commission with a history that has proven they know what they are doing without gouging the hunter's pocketbook or mandating stupid laws for the "feel good" sensation to the politicians.
Hey Maryland, lets get our act together and get the DNR cleaned up and out of the state house. Lets set up our own commission for responsible management of hunting, fishing, and yes TRAPPING of wildlife for a balance of animal to human coexistence. For once, lets be responsible and get a program on track for the sake of the animals as well as "constituents." Too many people are being hurt by the overgrowth of animal populations to satisfy the mentality of people who see wildlife thru the eyes of Disney. Rabies kill people, animals in the paths of vehicle's kill people and make OUR insurance rates go up! Something has to be done! Let's be at least more intelligent than the animals! - T. L. N., Hagerstown, MD
Date: Tuesday, December 10, 2002 08:36 AM - Subject: Comment on Gene Mueller Article "Is Bear Hunting Caught In a Trap ?"
Dear DNR: I applaud the Black Bear Task Force's recommendation for a "regulated bear hunting season to be initiated". Properly managed, this could provide much needed economic benefits to the Western Maryland region. I would also recommend that the Bear Population be managed based on the biological carrying capacity instead of some 'objective' number.
I am however troubled by the recommendation to conduct a public attitude survey on this issue. Recommendations on managing this animal resource should be made on scientific facts by trained Wildlife Biologists - NOT by the General Public who have little or no knowledge about the subject! To do otherwise is pure nonsense - and defies Common Sense - which evidently is not all that common!
It is time to get the "do-gooders", animal-rights activists, and Politicians OUT of the business of managing the Wildlife resources of Maryland! Thanks for your consideration. - D. F., Boonsboro, MD
Sent: 12/9/2002 8:42 PM - Subject: No bear hunt !!! - Black Bear Management Plan
DNR: There is absolutely no reason for a bear hunt in this MD !!!!!
It is biologically reckless! Problem bears are already dealt with!
Bear hunters are outnumbered 100,000s to 1....if this is a democracy you cannot justify trophy hunting!
Bear deserve the grow in population not be murdered by permission from DNR! - N. N., Catonsville MD
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 07:06 PM - Subject: MD Black Bear Task Force Management Recomendations
DNR Customer Service, I have read the Gene Mueller's article on the task force recommendations for black bear management in Maryland.
- I vehemently oppose the proposal to reclassify the MD. black bear population from a game species to a "NON" game species.
- Wildlife Scientist/Biologist for their sole management program please, not the political arena, and NOT A TASK FORCE.
Get rid of Glendennings task force.
- Management money from sporting goods,license sales, and the like as for all other managed game in the state.N OT from the lotto, general fund, or any other contrived source to pull black bear management away from scientific management.
- No questionnaires to any cities, individuals, groups, as to how they would like to see black bear numbers in MD. controlled. Just do it the way for them as all other game. Through hunting.
- NO crop damage permits either. I don't like it that Farmer/Landowner's can kill an unlimited amount of deer now without requiring licensed hunters on the property first. IF crop permits were issued for black bears it would wipe them out. I believe that, and would also believe a wildlife biologist would back me on that.
- I thank DNR customer service for allowing me to express an opinion (without a questionnaire) on sound black bear management in Maryland. I would hope and pray that your office would see that this opinion is carried to the proper level in the department.
Many thanks, J. R. T., Boonsboro,MD
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: Bear population control
I believe it is high time that the DNR stops playing politics with game management. This bear problem is a prime example of dirty politics at it's highest point. The over abundance of deer is another prime example with different regulations applying to every part of the State Of Maryland. It just ridiculous.
ALL THIS POINTS OUT WHY WE NEED TO GO BACK TO THE OLD RESPECTED MARYLAND GAME AND INLAND FISH COMMISSION.
When we had the Maryland Game and Inland Fish Commission we didn't have to be concerned about the mis-appropriation of the Pitman-Robinson Act funds as we do today. With the current DNR, this money is spent on a lot more than the propagation of GAME fish and animals. Which of course is illegal under the provisions of the Act. This is covered up by cutting back DNR funding from the general budget and using the P&R funds for day-to-day cost and expenses.
Again, It is High time to re-establish the Maryland Game and Inland Fish Commission and eliminate the politics in game management. Sincerely, Ed Grimes-Secretary, Tonoloway Rod and Gun Club, Inc.
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunting
...I am a registered (and I vote) voter in Montgomery County MD. I lived in Frederick County for four years and saw Black Bears while driving in and out of the mountains near or around Myersville/Wolfsville/Gambrill State Park, etc. It was a wonderful sight. Most people who reside near where the Bears hide know to avoid situations where they either may hurt a Bear -by hitting one, or cause a Bear to get into trouble -by leaving out trash or trying to entice one into view. The people who move to observe wildlife and live a "better home-life" away from the cities are naive in the duties we have to all of our wildlife and therefore do not take proper precautions to avoid problems with the wildlife. I believe DNR and other wildlife Organizations or Governmental Agencies should provide proper wildlife instructions to every Real Estate Agent/Agency registered to sell homes in the areas most Larger (and therefore more "scary") wildlife live, including "what not to do" to attract Bears/Fox/Snakes or anything that "scares people". Bears are the scariest to City Dwellers though unfounded, therefore proper "living with the Bears" literature is key. There are "check lists" of paperwork the agents are REQUIRED by Law to give to prospective Owners and a "Wildlife Lifestyles" pamphlet should be a requirement even if we have to go through some tedious amendments to State Laws for Real Estate Agents. If they want to sell and/or promote homes in the areas effected by these issues they shouldn't have a problem with teaching the unknowing or naive City commuters how to enjoy the life-style they think they want! I could elaborate more but I think you get the idea?
The solutions we have now with trash removal, electric fencing around crops, and aversive conditioning is quite enough! The funding necessary may not be adequate but THAT should be the issue to be resolved and not killing the Bears! We have very few now and they had enough life threatening issues to contend with a short time ago when they were endangered here in Maryland! People want to visit the Parks (and therefore increase monies necessary) to see Wildlife! If we kill it then they will not come!
Let the Hunters travel to over-populated areas if they need their ego stroked with killing something! My ex-husband is a Hunter and Trapper ( the leghold law failure is an extreme disappointment!) and traveled to Maine each season and that got him out of the house, let him travel for his pleasure and filled his need to kill animals (that can't escape man-kind and our killing weapons of choice) while reducing over-populations where it is NEEDED! WE are NOT OVER POPULATED WITH BEARS! On the contrary, they are just recovering!
I do not believe in Hunting anything for Sport or Trophy! Food, population control ( NOT elimination), clothing and shelter for poor people or for our American Indians way of life are the only things I believe warrant killing animals! Any Animal!
I want my e-mail provided to Governor Elect Erhlich please!
The One Public Meeting was a farce! The people who reside in "Bear Country" have an attititude from before there were laws protecting our Wildlife! They are of a "throw back to the stone age" MENTALality up there! We do not need to kill wildlife to survive anymore! The Farmers grow their Crops to eat and have cattle for meat and CAN go to the store! The Hunters, well I have too much to say about egos (lack of Manly inner strength and therefore promote their lack outwardly, by killing) and that is a whole "psychological defected" subject others more expertly need to help them with so I'll leave that one! The people in "Bear Country" say daily that, "we don't want the City dwellers who do not understand, dictating to us what we can or cannot do up here" and "they need to stay where they belong in there rear-end kissing and sissy lifestyles down in the Crappy Cities" etc. They of course say these things in a more uneducated and "mountain dwelling" way (to use THEIR mentality in phrasing). I lived amongst the Bears and never felt in danger and loved seeing them enough to stop and watch, regardless of when I had to drive into "Cement City", Rockville, MD and be on time for work. If my health allowed it, I would move back to the still beautiful parts of Maryland and leave the Oxygen Deprived Cement Filled County of Montgomery! I am disabled and cannot survive the tiny wilderness left in our once beautiful State without help, of which I do not have at the present time. So, I expect and demand that the little "wild area" we have left remain filled with Bears and all the other LIMITED WILDLIFE we still have!
The means we HAVE NOW work, with money provided and how do you expect to compensate the one/maybe two farmers who supposedly lose a chicken(maybe) to a Bear when you lose the support you have towards the Black Bear Compensation Stamp? Black Bears do not eat large animals unless starving and then it is hard for them to kill something as big as a Cow! The crops are not decimated by them I AM SURE! But the money is there for payment of lost crops. If the sport hunt is allowed, a funding source (and we lack funding with the economy the way it is now) for the Farmers will be lost!
Are you thinking "let the hunters DO OUR JOB for free" and we can then use the money- DNR would normally get for the workable and non-lethal ways we save our Black Bears with- now for the City Dwellers needs?
The mentality of the "larger populated" areas is where your votes come from and how you get elected, so are you trying to win the "Country people" who are mostly democrats over, by letting them have their kill? Thinking "how do we get more votes and/or support from Democratic Farmers and Hunters? Using the Black Bears for political gain is sickening and I am sure these political thoughts above have entered into possible support for the Hunt!
The bill died! The contingency has spoken! The "bleeding hearts" (as we are called "down county") are the majority and they got you elected Mr. Erhlich! Listen to what the MAJORITY has to say! - Sincerely, A. D., Gaithersburg, MD
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: Bear Hunting in Maryland
I know this is a very heated subject in the state of Maryland along with discussions on all aspects of hunting in the state. There are too many animal rights activists that live in the Metropolitan areas that effect the politics of this state. I believe the hunting laws should be set by people that work the field that see the number of animals and damage being done in the regions being discussed and not by someone sitting in Annapolis that never even goes into the woods or the agricultural areas.
The decisions being made in Annapolis for Garrett county are not taking into effect the real problem with bears in Garret county or bears that have moved out of the county and into other more populated counties. Trapping them and moving them back to Garret county isn't the solution. You need to get the answers from the people that work with these bears daily. The problem bears as well as the number of bears.
I have seen the Black Bear program put on by DNR at the BOW clinic several times. The people in the field recognize we have a problem and we need to thin out the herd. They have stated there are enough bears to have a season but as long as we have the attitudes in Annapolis of the current leaders there is no hope of a season. There is a lot of crop damage as well as property damage but also many bears being killed by automobiles. Bears will range and we have bears that come in from Pennsylvania and West Virginia also.
If it is only a controlled hunt put on by DNR with DNR park police then so be it but something needs to be done before the numbers are out of hand. There is no predator for the Black Bear. Or do we sit by until some child is killed and then want them all killed. They are not afraid of us. Thank you for our chance to express our opinions. - D. K. R.
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: Bear hunting in MD
Good Morning: I hope you will consider the thoughts of my family and I on the bear hunting issue.
We are outdoor people and hunters. We believe that there should be a bear hunting season.We do not believe in a bear damage fund. Let the hunters and biologists solve the problem.At the same time the western MD economy will be helped by the cash hunters will spend locally in pursuit of their sport.
Best Regards, R.E.M., S. M. M., S. L. M., & D.P.M.
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: Bear Management in Maryland
Recommend you get the DNR Trained Wildlife Biologists to discuss the bear problem in Western Maryland with the Western Maryland Coalition of Sportsmen. Let's get a season established for 2003 that's agreeable to all in Western Maryland. - Ira M. Click, President, Frederick County Sportsman Council
Date: Monday, December 09, 2002 05:38 PM - Subject: A VOTE FOR BEAR HUNTING
DEAR SIRS, I VOTE FOR A MANAGED BEAR HUNTING FOR HUNTERS.
THERE SHOULD BE OTHER WAYS OF COLLECTING FUNDS TO SUPPORT THE HUNT AND NOT TO INCREASE HUNTING LICENCE FEES. WE AS HUNTERS PAY PLEANTY NOW FOR HUNTING AND TRYING TO FIND PLACES TO HUNT. WE ARE LOSEING PRIVATE HUNTING GROUNDS DUE TO VANDLES, ECT..
THE GOVERNOR ALSO NEEDS TO GET DNR BACK ON TRACK WITH THE SPORTSMEN AND HUNTERS. SINCERELY, B. T.
Date: Friday, December 06, 2002 03:21 PM - Subject: Managed Bear Hunts
In the interest of all parties concerned it is my view that Bear Hunts
should be allowed on a limited basis based on population studies. Clearly
bears have rebounded to the point of harvest as methods are looked at to
control bear damage. A fund to cover bear damage is an out and out
invitation to lawyers and they would strip $50,000 in a heartbeat. Who pays
for that? The taxpayer of course. Let's not let the bear situation be
mismanaged into a problem the size and scope of the current deer
overpopulation issue. Furthermore the bear needs to kept on the game animal
list. Only by proper management can we serve all sides. Regards, G. W., Columbia, Md.
Date: Friday, December 06, 2002 09:06 AM - Subject: black bear
The state get tax money from hunter w/ lic. purchase Ammo sales and such With a limited hunt by lottery - ( more money to the state ) wouldn't that make sense ? ( does to me )
Classify as non- game lose money ( seems that way to me )
Explain the fact that - PA VA VWA and Ohio all have a bear season - now I'm
not a wildlife biologist But I know bears migrate - and that cubs are driven off to find their own
territories . also the fact that There have been more and MORE - bear sightings in Montgomery Co as well as
Baltimore.
When a couple of antis hit a few with their cars or their kids are carried off - maybe they'll change Their minds -
The state needs to look at this from an economical aspect - also environmental
THE OVER ALL WELL BEING OF THE STATE - Not some cry babies
that have no
Concept of reality - all the forest critters don't get
together for picnics in the meadows - THERE IS NO EASTER BUNNY - NO SANTA CLAUSE - AND NO FAIRYS THAT FLY AROUND THE WOODS AND SPREAD GOOD WISHES - a bear would you the same as he would berries or your Picnic lunch .
Political correctness needs to give way to common sense. - R. R.
Date: Friday, December 06, 2002 07:51 AM>
TO WHOM IT MAY CONCERN: CONTROL THE BLACK BEAR POPULATION BY ALLOWING A
BEAR HUNTING SEASON. THE SURROUNDING STATES DO IT THIS WAY AND IT WORKS
FOR THEM. WE ARE NOT AN EXCLUSIVE AREA WHERE ACCEPTABLE GAME MANAGEMENT
MUST BE TOTALLY RECONSIDERED AND APPLIED TO OUR AREA.
THE SETTING OF HUNTING SEAS0NS MUST BE DETERMINED BY TRAINED WILDLIFE
BIOLOGIST AND THE HUNTING PUBLIC. HUNTERS HAVE PROVEN FOR OVER 50 YEARS
THAT BECAUSE THEY LOVE THEIR SPORT, THEY ARE DEDICATED TO MAINTAINING IT
AND IMPROVING WILDLIFE POPULATIONS AND HABITAT. THEY WILL NOT DO THINGS
THAT WILL DESTROY THE GAME AND THE PURSUIT OF IT. ON THE OTHER HAND, THE
ANTI-GUN AND ANTI-HUNTING PEOPLE CONTRIBUTE NOTHING MONETARILY (their own
money that is) TO MAINTAIN AND OR IMPROVE GAME POPULATIONS.{HEALTHY ANIMALS
THAT THE LAND CAN SUSTAIN}.
THESE PEOPLE WILL DO EVERYTHING IN THEIR POWER (and they have too much of
it) TO STOP HUNTING. HUNTING IS A VALID PRACTICE FOR THE CONTROL OF
WILDLIFE POPULATIONS, A SOURCE OF REVENUE FOR THE STATE THROUGH THE SALE OF
HUNTING LICENSES, GEAR, LODGING, MEALS, ETC.
THE APPOINTED PANELS RESPONSIBLE FOR DETERMINING HUNTING SEASONS SHOULD NOT
HAVE ANY NON-HUNTING PEOPLE ON THEM. THIS WILL ONLY DEFEAT THE PURPOSE OF
SUCH COMMITTEES (to establish sound biological seasons)
PERSONS WITH THE ANTI-GUN/ANTI-HUNTING MENTALITY, LIKE GLENDENING AND THOSE
HE PLACED IN THE DNR, SHOULD BE REMOVED.
IMPLEMENT SOUND BIOLOGICAL SEASONS FOR THE CONTROL OF THE BLACK BEAR NOW,
BEFORE PROBLEMS OF ANIMAL/HUMAN CONTACT INCREASE. THANK YOU, R. B., ROSEMONT MD
Date: Thursday, December 05, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: no black bear hunting
Dear Task Force, I live in Silver Spring, MD and I am opposed to the black bear hunt. I want to protect the black bear population in Maryland and feel that the hunt would jeopardize their already small numbers. There are more effective solutions that already exist such as removing food and trash from areas and electric fences around crops. I would be very willing to support the bear stamp only if no hunting is permitted. Thank you for time. - J. W., Silver Spring, MD
Date: Thursday, December 05, 2002 08:51 AM - Subject: Bear Hunt
I am in favor of a bear hunt in Garrett County, there are too many bears and they are very destructive. They destroy farmer crops,chase and kill livestock, wreck garbage containers etc.
They have no fear of humans and it won't be long until someone gets hurt. - W. H.
Date: Wednesday, December 04, 2002 12:36 PM - Subject: Bear Hunting
To Whom This Concerns: I just returned last week from a very enjoyable bear hunt in Pa. I was not lucky enough to get a bear, but is was very enjoyable and challenging none-the-less.
The Pennsylvania Game Commission has a very successful bear management program which includes hunting. I don't understand why MD can't simply copy and implement that program.
I am in favor of hunting bear in MD. It is a successful and economical means to wildlife management. It also provides education and recreation to outdoor enthusiasts.
Wildlife management without hunting is an oxymoron. We already have enough zoos. Let's keep wildlife wild. Respectfully, J. R.
Date: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: Opposition to Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I want to voice my opposition to the Bear Hunt that is being considered in the Senate. There are currently only about 350 Black bears that populate this state.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts. A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago. Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective. Maryland's citizens want bear protection. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected.
Please consider these points before passing legislation to eliminate what few bears remain. Sincerely, N. W.
Date: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 04:51 PM - Subject: Bears
There is not reason to hunt bears at all. Please do not allow this to happen. Maryland does not have that many bears. LET them alone. - J. F.
Date: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 04:23 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force - Public Comment
To whom it may concern, I have been a life long resident of Washington County.I have been an avid hunter for the last 30 years and for the last 18 years I have done a lot of hunting on my Grandparents 200 acre farm in Garrett County.
I have seen over the last 8-10 years how the bear population, the bear to human contact and the bear vehicle collision has dramatically increased. I have seen how the apple trees and pine trees on our property has been damaged by the bears. Just this year I had a food plot of corn planted for the deer and when it started to sweeten up we had a very nice sized bear come in and claim it for his corn patch and completely wiped it out.There is not a day that I can't go to some part of the property and find some fresh sign of a bear being around.
Don't get me wrong, I do like the fact that I can go out on the property and be lucky enough to see a bear, not everyone has that opportunity. Also I have been on several bear hunts in Canada and enjoyed it very much. I agree very much that black bears are a valuable natural resource for the State of Maryland. I guess my main concern is that I hope that the State of Maryland doesn't wait until after we have a serious or fatal bear to human incident before the officials act on the recommendations.
After reading the Overview of Task Force Recommendations I would say that I agree with most of what the recommendations states and I would highly recommend a Regulated fairchase hunting season.
Keep up the good work to protect our natural resources in the great state of Maryland. - S. E., Hagerstown MD
Date: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 10:36 AM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
Dear DNR---I know this is a very heated issue and I'd like to bring some very important points up for your consideration.
Black Bears are part of Garrett County and they always have been. We are property owners in Garrett County and my mother and grandmother are natives of Garrett County. We want to remind you of the economic costs of starting a bear hunt. Can you imagine the reaction of the rest of Maryland and the surrounding Virginia communities when they hear of an approved bear hunt?? People come to Garrett County to be with the wildlife, not watch it be killed. Have you noticed that in recent years bears have become a symbol of Garrett County?? Have you been in the shops around Deep Creek Lake that sell to tourists?? Have you seen the bear shirts, bear sweatshirts, bear blankets, bear mugs, bear lamps, stuffed bears, wooden bears, bear postcards, bear hats, bear candles, bear paintings.......??? Can you even imagine the loss of retail revenue by the sudden killing of these wonderful native creatures? The publicity alone will hurt sales and tourism. Please don't kill the bears. We admire them. We treasure them.
Please share these important points with your committee. I am unfortunately unable to attend the public hearing. Thank you. - K. F. and Family
Date: Monday, December 02, 2002 10:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To whom it may concern: As a wildlife rehabilitator, much of what we do is to educate the public on conflicts between the wildlife and humans. We must read much about the natural history of the species in our areas. Many of us attend lectures, conferences and subscribe to professional journals dealing with wildlife.
The Black Bear population is around 400+. Black Bears are one of the least prolific breeders among North American’s mammals. Even with ideal conditions, the black bear reproduces slowly, making bear populations particularly vulnerable to any removal. Females do not breed for the first time until they are about four to eight years old and produce a small litter of two to three cubs every two to four year. The young stay with the mother for the first two years of life. She does not breed again until the young can survive on their own. Maryland’s small population of 400+ cannot sustain genetic viability and overall health of the population if hunters kill the healthiest, largest bears.
I am assuming that the rationale for a public hunt is on the perceived growth in bear/human conflicts in the state. Public hunts would not target a specific bear. It would not address any bear nuisance concern. In fact, by killing a bear that is not causing problems, hunters may allow another bear, potentially one more likely to cause problems, to move into the vacated territory. Hunters are going to target the largest bear for the trophy. Many times the largest bear has the best genes for breeding. Also when hunters take the largest the hunters skew the population in favor of younger sub-adult bears which will be able to disperse or expand their range and fill the vacancies left by the adults. These younger sub-adult males are more likely to cause conflicts with people. A ranger in Glacier Park once told me after a conflict in a campground, it is usually the sub-adult or teenager (as he put it) that get into the most trouble. One thing I have learned since I became involved in wildlife is that nature fills the voids. Wildlife does not like humans. We are predators. Therefore, they will not seek us out unless we are providing them food or endangering their young. Much like ourselves.
I do not mean to diminish the fear factor; however, many of the nuisance complaints received by DNR are simply sightings. The residents simply do not have experience in dealing with bears or most wildlife. Wildlife will come up to garbage as a source of food. So, unless the public is careful with their trash they will have problems.
I recently returned from 15 days in the Canadian bush where food had to be hoisted into a tree on a daily basis. Everything with a smell had to be eliminated from our tent space. Even though we sighted bear tracks within yards of our campsite, we had no problems because we were diligent in how we stored our foods.
As I said above, I see no scientific justification for a hunt as a solution for conflict. DNR already has the authority to deal with problem bears, we don’t need private citizens taking matters into their own hands.
I am very opposed to a bear hunt. I want to see the black bear protected in the State of Maryland. A hunt only serves to benefit a very small number of people in the state looking for a trophy; there is no scientific reasoning behind the recommendation of the Task Force (BBTF).
Please let your decision be based on good science and not hysteria and small interest groups. Sincerely, P. L. P., Rockville, MD. 20853
Date: Monday, December 02, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Proposed Bear Hunt
Hello, My name is R. B. and I live in western Allegany Co. I've grown up in Allegany Co. all of my life and have been an avid deer hunter for the last 8 years both on private and state land. I am writing you now to give my opinion and my vote on the proposed Bear hunt in the Western Maryland counties. I am 100% for a selective Bear hunt. I feel that a controlled lottery hunt could be completely beneficial to the western counties, State of Maryland, property owners and also the Black Bears. By having a selective Black Bear hunt in the form of a lottery it would be away of generating revenues to both the state and local levels. Not to mention the benefit to the local property owners with Bear problems. Most locals know as I'm sure DNR officials that Bear's are already being hunted illegally by property owners, local outlaw hunters and by neighboring West Virginian's crossing over to hunt but checking them in West Virginia where they do have a Black Bear season. I'm sure everyone can agree that there has been a steady increase in the Black Bear population which is completely unnecessary and could be very dangerous. I recently read a article in the Cumberland Times concerning the meeting held in Garrett Co. with the MBBTF and was so appalled that anyone from the Frederick Counties east should have any business voting on something that does not concern them. As far as I'm concerned even if they have bought vacation homes in Garrett Co. in most local eyes their still considered not much more than tourist. And to them seeing a wild Black Bear is an exciting and pleasant experience to their vacation. What they don't realize is how dangerous that experience could become. I know to date there have been no Bear maulings which is a good thing but that could change at any given moment unless something gets done. My sister was at little league game in the Frostburg area and witnessed 1 sow with 2 cubs run out on to the field which could've been a life threatening situation. More and more each year we hear of bear/human confrontations. I believe that this is due to the fact that the Black Bear do not feel threatened by us humans and their reproduction is left unchecked. By having a lottery system hunt the state has away to be selective on who gets to hunt and how many are killed. So what if a few trophy bears get taken out, how is that any different from deer hunting? And to the issue on getting rid of the nuisance bears, by hunting in a controlled setting we would be thinning out the population and eventually put the fear of humans back in the Bear species where it belongs.
I hope my vote is taken into consideration and makes a impact your decision. Sincerely, R. B., Frostburg, Maryland
Date: Monday, December 02, 2002 09:36 AM - Subject: Comments on Black Bear Task Force Report
Maryland Alliance for Greenway Improvement and Conservation (MAGIC) - Ref: Comments on the Black Bear Task Force Report
MAGIC supports the recommendations of the Black Bear Task Force to:
- Identify, protect, and conserve black bear habitat
- Monitor outdoor recreational demands that negatively impact black bear habitat
- Educate the public on black bear behavior and ways to reduce human-bear conflicts
- Maintain detailed records of complaints about and damage by black bears
- Conduct a carefully constructed, scientific survey of public attitudes on the black bear.
MAGIC does not support a hunting season on black bears for the following reasons:
- The Black Bear population may not be increasing. The 2000 study conducted by Maryland’s DNR generated an estimate of 227 bears for the 830 square miles west of Cumberland (27.3 bears per 100 square miles). This does not differ significantly from the 150-170 bears estimated for the 600 square miles of Garrett County (25.0-28.3 bears per 100 square miles) ten years earlier (January 1992 Maryland DNR Black Bear Management Plan).
- The number of sightings and bear-vehicle collisions is not a reliable figure to use in estimating and monitoring black bear populations. These numbers are heavily biased by human encroachment on bear habitat, increases in traffic, and increased availability of human garbage.
- A bear hunt would not be effective in reducing the majority of complaints concerning human-bear conflicts. A hunting season targeting all bears does nothing to eliminate specific problems or nuisance bears. The bear conflict problem could become even worse if adult bears are killed and young juvenile bears expand into their territories.
- A hunting season would likely lead to increased poaching of black bears to obtain the bear gall bladders and other valuable parts.
The argument that a hunting season would prevent black bear attacks on humans does not ring true. Black bears are not aggressive and such attacks are extraordinarily rare.
We support the concept of conflict resolution through aversive conditioning programs that are directed at bears at the time and place where problems are occurring. We understand that lethal control of black bears may be called for where human safety is immediately threatened or damage to agricultural areas warrants such an approach after other means have been tried and failed. Many reported conflicts with bears could be eliminated by the simple installation of bear-proof trash containers in bear country.
The concept of maintaining bear population levels at a point "compatible with land use and property concerns, and recreational opportunities" is ill conceived. Tolerance has a direct impact on the issue of “compatibility” and education, damage compensation programs, habitat protection incentives, and the simple continued association of people with bears can all lead to increased tolerance and understanding.
Bears are more than a resource to be utilized, or a nuisance to be controlled. They have dignity and status as members of a wildlife community and are associated with desirable environmental values. Bears can also be considered a “keystone” species. By protecting the bear populations and their habitats, we will also protect many lesser known, but equally important species, many which have been studied far less than bears. - Sincerely, Robert DeGroot, President
The following organizations have approved of this letter and asked that their names be attached to it:
Anacostia Watershed Society
Citizens for the Preservation of Wildlife, Inc.
Dickerson Community Association, Inc.
Earth Energy
Eyes of Paint Branch
Friends of Northwest Branch
Friends of Sligo Creek
Friends of Watts Branch
HAZTRAK Coalition
Montgomery Greens
Natural Pathfinders Association
Neighbors Water Watch
Potomac River Association
Progressive Southern Maryland
Protect Upper Rock Creek
Urban Forest Initiative
Walk Lightly in Peace
Wildlife Land Trust
Sent: 12/1/2002 5:36 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management
It has come to my attention that the MD Black Bear Task Force is recommending a black bear hunt as a means of managing black bears in MD. I do not think this is a good solution and am opposed to it. First of all, there are not that many black bears in MD to warrant a hunt and you are risking extinction if you do this. Secondly, there are already solutions to the problems people are having which don't include killing the bears. Most people do not want the bears killed and do want them protected. They want to live in harmony with the bears without jeopardizing their safety and the bears' safety. Please do not have a bear hunt. Sincerely, K. A. W., Damascus, MD.
Date: Tuesday, December 03, 2002 02:36 AM - Subject: Re: Please do not kill the Bears......
To whom it may concern: I would just like to add to my letter a solution that I personally think would work for the bears and the people. I don't know if you've tried this already but, Since lack of FOOD is what the bears are in search of, and of course they have to eat to survive just like we need to eat to live, why don't the people of Maryland plant fruit trees in the woods where the bears are supposed to be, a whole bunch of them from apple to cherry to plums to wildberries, strawberries, all kinds of berries, they'll grow every year and once the bears know that's where the food is, they won't have to come to town in search of food anymore. I beleive that it can work. Please don't kill the bears, let's help them. Thank-You again for listening ( Anna)
Date: Thursday, November 28, 2002 11:06 PM - Subject: maryland black bear
I now reside in timonium maryland soon to be moving to garrett county. I named my son, Hunter Garrett (for the county) because of my love for both hunting and for the county. I have been to garrett co. more times than I can remember, I have been going there for 23 years now, and it always seems new. It is a very beautiful place in this world that seems to have been able to hide from the rest of the world in a nice peaceful way. I personaly would hate for it to be overcome with a bunch of gun toting inexperienced wantabee hunters who want a bear skin for there living room. I believe that there should be a lottery to raise funds for the management part of it and limit the lottery to those who have hunted and held a license for at least seven years, and age limit to at least 21. The reason for this would be to eliminate those who are inexperinced with hunting and all skills involved included being able to find their way out of the woods! Also prioritize those who already live in the counties that the hunts would be held in. This may seem a little unfair, but due to the nature of the "beast" it is best left to individuals who are more knowledgeable with thier own back yard, and more woods wise having lived amongst the critters.
My neighbor, when I spend time in Garrett Co. has not only chased a bear trying to take it's picture, but has fed the critter on many occasion. I believe that I may also have fed this critter on a couple of occasions while trying to feed, "bait" the deer with several bushels of apples and a couple hundred pounds of corn. I would love to be able to go on a bear hunt that is humane and ethical. I don't think that it would be in the best interest of everyone concerned and not concerned that we allow anyone that can afford a license to hunt bear, to grab their pea shooter and head off into the wild green yonder!!!!! Thankyou, G. E. L.
Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 09:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
A recreational bear hunt is a horrible idea. It isn't a game. Yes, it is serious that we keep the bears away from people, but I am sure that you can think of other ways to solve this problem. Maybe you can try electric fencing or removal of the things that attract the bears. We as humans are going to go no where if we can't figure out ways to coexist with nature instead of just killing it off. The bear population is too small; it will risk them becoming extinct. I would be incredibly sad if I found out that a population of an animal as beautiful as a bear was killed off because people didn't consider alternatives. - B. L.
Date: Wednesday, November 27, 2002 08:53 PM - Subject: Black Bear Season
I am in favor of a limited bear season.It is also my opinion that if you do not have bears in your county of residence you should not have a vote in this.People who live outside town limits don't get to decide who the mayor is going to be.The "Anti" hunter population is a surprise to me,they are against hunting but how many of them go to the grocery store or restaurants to buy meat products,I wonder where the grocer gets the meat from.Hunters have a season on deer and they are not extinct,so why do the "anti" think that we are going to kill each and every bear? - J. F. (Friendsville, MD)
Date: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 08:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Please do not allow black bear hunting in Maryland. - G. N., New Market, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 06:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I have been a hunter in Maryland for 50 years or more and have seen many changes in hunting ,such as the increase in deer and turkey hunting,were scarce at times.But it is my opinion that there should be a limited bear hunt in MD.Bears are becoming more numerous in the surrounding states and just makes sense to have a season.If the DNR hadn't become so politicized over the years this issue would have been settled years ago. - J. G.
Date: Tuesday, November 26, 2002 01:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force recommendations
I am morally opposed to hunting and am very upset at the Black Bear Task Force recommendation to resume bear hunting in Maryland. Managing wildlife does not mean sending sporting hunters into the woods and mountains to get trophies. 200 bears is just starting to be a sustaining population. If 100 hunters get 1 or 2 bears each, the bears will be decimated and their survival put in jeopardy. The human/bear interactions can be reduced and mitigated through non-lethal means discussed in other letters, such as fencing and relocation of problem bears. So far there have been no attacks on humas from bears in Maryland. Meanwhile, many dozens of people are injured or killed by SUVs. Do we outlaw SUVs? No, because their value to society outweighs their danger. Well, I and many others, value wildlife in Maryland - not as a shooting gallery, but for its diversity and natural balance. While the selfish hunters may claim they are helping protect people by killing the dangerous bears, they will actually be quite upset after they kill off all the bears and can no longer enjoy killing them.
There is no place for sport hunting in a modern civilized society. Non-lethal means must be implemented for deterring human/bear interaction. - L. R.
Date: Monday, November 25, 2002 11:36 PM - Subject: please don't hunt the bear!!!!
I'm writing in response to the Black Bear Task Force. How can we justify ordering a massive bear hunt that probably won't even destroy the bears that are causing the problem. That's like punishing the whole class for one student. Surely we can be more creative than this in our problem solving. Your proposed BBTF will result in slaughtering a lot of bears and when the hunt is over, we'll still have a bear and human conflict because there is know way to determine which bear might be the correct bear to shoot. Using this kind of reasoning the next logical step would be to kill ALL THE BEARS!!! Just deal with each bear individually in a creative way. Its not the bears that are overpopulated - its humans. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago. Bear human conflicts can be avoided by simple solutions such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears to be protected. Please don't hunt the bears!!!!
- A. F., Marriottsville, MD
Date: Monday, November 25, 2002 10:06 PM - Subject: Comments re: Black Bear Management Plan
I write to you to URGE your Task Force to reconsider your position and to instead NOT recommed recreational bear hunts. I would NOT continue our traditional hikes and visits into western Maryland knowing such (hotel stays, gear bought nearby, food, etc) was supporting sport hunting. We need to preserve Maryland's already jeopardized bear population.
Human-bear conflict solutions already exist (being "traash smart", electric fences, aversive conditioning, etc). Recreational bear hunts do not target specific "problematic" bears - and where "offensive" bears do exist first aversive conditioning and relocation should be attempted.
Although a recent meeting may have been attended overwhelmingly by bear-hunt supporters, this is likely due to the location of the meeting (western Maryland). Had the meeting been in a variety of areas throughout Maryland I am certain the outcome would have been different.
If such hunting is allowed, the Black Bear compensation stamp will lose support - I assume that money would no longer be needed to compensate farmers for losses from bear damage since the bears would be hunted - and of course proceeds from the bear hunts would go the farmers thereby negating the necessity of pro-conservationists supporting the Bear stamp.
I suggest these hunters instead try to become more skillful at their hunting skills by "shooting to conserve" the bears via photography instead. Photography is more challenging than simply shooting/wounding a bear; it is also safer for families to partake in together; and generally it is more acceptable to see a prize winning photo hanging on the wall than a dead carcass - all together thereby making photography more "recreational" than hunting. In fact, a good photograph of a wild bear averages about $125-$200 per print (not including frame) for 10" x 14" (see World Wildlife Fund prices for example). Think how much could be raised by multiple prints of one "shoot" versus one "carcass" or "rug" - without the "ease of a kill." Thank You, S. S., Md resident
Date: Monday, November 25, 2002 08:06 AM - Subject: Comments to Black Bear Task Force Hunting Recommendation
First and foremost, I am in support of allowing bear hunting in Maryland. While I do not have the intention of hunting black bears, I am an avid hunter.
The revenue that the state can generate from bear hunting can help preserve the species. For those that do not feel hunting can preserve wildlife, all that you have to do is look at the white-tail deer and wild turkey cases within this country. At the turn of the 20th century, both populations were nearing endangered species numbers. With the efforts of true environmentalists, the hunters, populations of both species began to thrive. In many areas, the animals have returned after being missing for decades. Hunters provide more funding to conversation efforts than any other single group in the US. Hunter organizations, such as Duck Unlimited and Buckmasters, provide funding for the procurement and preservation of wildlife habitat. With the introduction of controlled hunting of black bears, be it lottery drawing or limited tag allowances, these animals may well be the next successful case in animal population growth.
Believe it or not, hunting is useful to the bear population as well. It teaches the animal to fear man, the most powerful tool against "problem" animals. An animal that fears humans is less likely to venture into areas of human population. While this will not curtail all incursions, it will reduce their number.
Unrestricted growth of the bear population will result in over population, fearlessness of humans, and more adverse bear-human contact. If a controlled hunt is not allowed, then I suggest that the State of Maryland in act laws of imminent domain and remove all human population from the counties of Western Maryland to prevent bear-human contact. - B. C., Lusby, MD
Date: Sunday, November 24, 2002 09:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
To whom it may concern, Some of the ideas brought forth at the meeting at Garrett College on the black bear issue were surprising. To suggest we trade bears for criminals, well I think we deal with our own criminals right here in Garrett county as well as the bears. When suburbia Maryland cry's out for white-tailed deer relief for eating shrubs and causing thousands of dollars in damage, I don't come to the defense of the deer. I don't care how they take care of the problem, but the problem is usually taken care of with help from the DNR.So why do so many people come crying at the mention of a black bear hunting season? We have a season to control the white tailed deer,rabbit,squrrial,and countless other species that the DNR says need to be controlled, so why not the bears too? Does Maryland's people need the blood of a child or some other unsuspecting tourist on there hands to realize that bears,like other wildlife need to be controlled in some manner? What about a playground full of children when a adult male black bear goes looking for an easy meal among children with candy and drinks.I don't think we can hide from that. I have seen for myself a bear walking and playing on the playground one Sunday afternoon at Yough Glades Elementry. So the threat is real and I don't want that threat for my son who attends Yough Glades School. I run a dairy farm here in southern Garrett county and I deal with the deer and bears all year round not just a few weeks a year. For every stalk of corn that the bears roll down it costs me money. I don't think the people who come from down state to cry for the bears would like me coming into their place of business and start costing them money,so who do they think they can tell me that I have to put up with the bears that cost me money?I don't think we need to send everybody with a gun into the woods after the bears, but we have to come to some kind of compromise. The bears that call Garrett county home are not Winne the Pooh,they are in fact as wild as they come and all other wildlife is controlled in Maryland by the Department of Natural Resources so lets give control to the DNR and stop tying it up in the red tape before one of our kids get hurt. Thank You - S. B., Oakland Maryland
Date: Sunday, November 24, 2002 08:36 PM - Subject: Comments on Black Bear Task Force Draft Report and Recommendations
Comments on Black Bear Task Force Draft Report and Recommendations: I'd like to start with a question for the BBTF - What is the biological carrying capacity for bears in Md?
I am opposed to hunting bears when the population is below its biological carrying capacity. I am also opposed to hunting bears because, as was pointed out at the Garrett County public meeting, hunters will get the bears that live out in the forest and not the ones that live near the farms and Deep Creek vacation homes.
I strongly agree with the BBTF recomendation to conserve black bear habitat. More resources should go to this. You should concentrate more on non-lethal control methods. Garrett County and its cities should require and pay for bear-proof trash containers. Provide solar powered electric fences for farmers. This will be the only effective way to coexist with bears in Garrett County.
Do not use bear dogs which are set free to chase the bears away, as I heard suggested at the Garrett Co public meeting. I would be more afraid of running into these dogs while out hiking or biking than I would into the bear.
Maybe allow kill permits for impacted farmers, which they would be allowed to sell.
I disagree with the BBTF recomendation of not using dogs to hunt. This is because [J. R.] told me how he hunted bear using dogs in West Virginia while working for West Virginia Wildlife Division.
Lastly, consider that hunting is not controling the deer population in Maryland; so it will not control the bear population to the extent that other coexistence strategies can be ignored. - Sincerely, L. B., Cumberland, MD 21502
Date: Sunday, November 24, 2002 07:21 PM - Subject: bear hunting
To whom it may concern: I am writing in response to the possibility of a limited black bear hunt. Considering the fact that the bear population is small,(approx. 250-450) I think that we as human beings, can do many things to prevent bear/human contact: to put our trash and food in a place that is not easily accessible, installing fences. Killing these bears is not the answer and is a sad statement to our humanity.
I hope that you consider these things before pulling the trigger. Thank you, S. R.
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2002 07:21 PM - Subject: bears
Greetings. I noted in the newspaper that one could comment via e-mail so I will do so.
I am in favor of a bear season. Many are killed on the highways now and as time goes by more will occupy areas that are developed for humans. A hunting season would reduce the population in human occupied areas and the bears would be sent back to the forests. It is time to get on with a bear hunt. - E. H. H.
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: black bear hunting in Maryland
I am against black bear hunting in the state of Maryland or any state for that matter. I believe it is unethical. I think that cities should be encouraged to enact local ordinances to pass laws to protect the black bear population. According to the Maryland Black Bear Task Force (BBTF) there are only an estimated 266-437 black bears remaining in the state of Maryland. Even a limited hunt would jepordize the black bear population tremendously. This could decimate the survival of the population, which was almost extinct 50 years ago. Solutions already exist. Easy, cost effective solutions are already being used. Some examples are to use electric fencing around bee hives and crops, removing trash cans and food that may attract black bears. Aversive conditioning has been proven to be an effective method in training bears to behave. DNR already has permission to euthanize repeat offenders if relocation and aversive conditioning are not successful.
Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting black bears. We do not use their meat nor their hides for anything anymore. It would only be trophy hunters looking for a new head to add to their collection. A recreational bear hunt would not focus on the problem bears. It would not address the bear/human conflicts either. There is no scientific data to support a bear hunt as a resolution to bear/human conflicts. I really wish that more money, energy,and thought could be put into black bear management, research, education, habitat protection,and conflict resolution. We all can make a difference if we want to. Please let your voice be heard. - K.W.
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2002 03:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunts
I strongly support your recommendations of "regulated hunting of black bears" in order to protect the public. I lived in Tucson, AZ in 1996, when Anna Knochel was attacked by the black bear on Mount Lemmon. She suffered severe injuries. What followed was a $15 million dollar lawsuit by Anna Knochel and her parents against the Arizona Game and Fish Department, and the Forest Service. The State of Arizona settled out of court with the knochels for $2.5 million. Thank you for your time. - C. L. R., D.V.M.
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2002 02:06 PM - Subject: bears
That is ridiculous. Make it illegal to hunt the bears. Keep the bears protected!!! it will throw nature in Maryland in a reck. Don't make it legal!!!
Date: Saturday, November 23, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: Black Bears
To Whom it may concern, I have read the draft proposal and would like to offer some comment.
I have hunted all over the contiguous United States and Alaska . I have, over the last forty years, spent significant time in remote areas of the country and have now (in the last two years) seen more black bears in and around Cumberland, Md. Than anywhere else . I am sure this is only an accident because I have hunted them in 5 states and do not even look for them in Maryland! This could be attributed to several sources; there are a lot of bears in and around Dan's mountain; pure coincidence; or just good luck on my part. I have to conclude that there are a lot of bears in that particular part of Maryland. I have no personal knowledge of other wild areas of the state, but in conversation with other sportsmen that do frequent other areas I appear to be behind the curve as they report to me that they see bears on the road while traveling both early and late in the day and they report to me that apple trees , gardens and trash can are frequently targets for the bears . Some report that they are now storing ther trash indoors to avoid the messy cleanup associated with bears and they fear a confrontation with a hungry bear at their home.
The point of this is that if we have not learned from the beaver and the whitetail deer and the snow goose the result of managing for maximum numbers , shame on us . I am not a wildlife biologist and I am not afraid of bears but I think that the general public knows significantly less about bears than do I ,and it is time for them to get out of the way and let the professionals do their job. Asking Jane Q. Public what she thinks about black bear management is like asking a kid what he thinks about candy, the answer will be they like them even if they are bad for them and themselves until something drastic happens. Let the professionals do their job . They know better how to handle this problem than the public ; the politicians the anti hunters and the hunters. This is a single faceted problem , we need to do what is best for a healthy bear population without regard to the "feelings" of the uneducated; uninformed and uncaring.
I wholeheartedly agree that if there is to be no bear season then hunters should not finance the unmanaged bear population with our hard earned management dollars . If John and Jane Q. Public are going to run the program thorough their uneducated efforts let them set up their own bear management program , hire the people , find space for them to work, pay them and suffer the inevitable failure of discovering what we all should know by now. We cannot stockpile wildlife.
The very thought of bears in Montgomery County running unchecked (an inevitable outcome of having no plan) should bring the problem a little closer in focus.
I also think that if a Maryland citizen buys a Maryland hunting license that act should exempt them from further taxation to fund the nonmagament of bears.
The time has come waiting until bear complaints force an answer because the media finally alerts the public is unconscionable. Manage the game of our state for its own good; scientifically. Many people have worked so hard to learn how to do this, let them do their job. The resultant failure of a non plan appears to be paid sharpshooters (as with the deer herds) or the fear of a cataclysmic disaster that we now face with the snow goose , I'll let the unending beaver complaints speak for themselves. Sincerely, T. L. G. III
Date: Friday, November 22, 2002 06:21 PM - Subject: Black bears
To whom it may concern: I would like to express my opinion about the proposed black bear hunt in your state, and to commend you for allowing for the possibility of reconsideration based upon the opinion of the public. I am against the hunt, based on the following reasons:
A recreational bear hunt would not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electic fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens (including my two dozen or so relatives who live in western Maryland) want bears to be protected.
Thank you for taking the time to read this. Sincerely, P. F. S.
Date: Friday, November 22, 2002 04:51 PM - Subject: Maryland Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I am emailing you in response to the recently proposed trophy bear hunt which supposedly will take care of "troublesome bears". The citizens of Maryland, for the most part, are against this hunt. They want protection for the bears. They only want something to be done about problematic bears. You can resolve this problem by simply letting the people know that most bears will leave them alone if they cover their trash or anything else that may attract the bears. Other bears that stick around can be relocated. This recreational hunt helps nothing, except to please the hunters who just want bigger, better game to kill. The population of bears in Maryland is between 266 and 437. The possibility of their extinction in the area is not acceptable. I beg you to please consider what you are doing before approving this. It helps nothing. There is no way to target the problematic bears. This hunt would not accomplish the basic task at hand. Thank you for your time, and I desperately hope you make the right decision about these bears. -D. G., highschool student
Date: Friday, November 22, 2002 03:06 PM - Subject: re: The Maryland Black Bear Task Force
Maryland Black Bear Task Force, As a Maryland resident and taxpayer, I strongly support the idea of a limited hunting season to manage black bears more effectively. It is obvious that the current management program is not working as desired and is underfunded. Seeing that the vast majority of DNR's budget comes from a tax on hunting and fishing equipment, hunting and fishing licenses and stamps, and matching funds from the federal government, it would make sense for DNR to manage black bears with the help of recreational hunters. This would help to reduce the amount of damage, educate bears in regards to living close to humans, decrease the potential for a deadly encounter, and provide a means for MD DNR to create monies to further the bear management program.
I have spent a great deal of time in Western MD, particularly in Garrett County in the Oakland area and the stories of black bear behavior has created a sense that it is only a matter of time before visitors to the area find themselves on a mountain path standing between a bear cub and its mother. Anyone who has visited the area and has witnessed the explosion of development around Deep Creek Lake will recognize the economic importance of the area to that region and will also recognize that as more people continue to vacation there, the chances for a serious accident are increased. The idea of a lottery draw that would allow DNR to offer a limited number of tags to hunters that can demonstrate their abilities seems reasonable to me. I know, being a hunter myself, that no one wants to see black bear numbers drop to unhealthy levels and one only has to look at the success of the Atlantic Population of Canada Geese in both Maryland and the entire Atlantic Flyway to recognize the importance of better management practices and the importance of that game to the local economy on the Eastern Shore. By allowing limited hunting on bears, DNR will be able to manage the bear populations more effectively and not stretch limited human and capital resources, while at the same time decreasing the number of incidents to local residents and the cost to repair damage from bears. In addition, it is rumored that changes throughout the entire DNR are envisioned by the new governor and those human and capital resources will be stretched even further. Hunters have always been great stewards for wildlife in this state and it is time that DNR recognized the need and the importance of a stronger relationship with recreational hunters. MD DNR only needs to look across the Potomac River to our neighbors in Virginia for a model of a more successful relationship between DNR and recreational hunters.
These kinds of debates will always come down to economics. As development increases in Garrett County, for example, the potential for bear incidents will increase as well. Clearly, the money that region is generating from tourism related activities and new home development will not stop the intrusion of humans on the bear habitat. As the available habitat decreases, the bears have little choice but to move into more populated areas which begs the question of whether there are too many bears for the area. If development continues like it has, the answer is clearly yes. As I am certain that many of the people who have responded to this forum are at heart, anti-hunters, while I disagree with you I respect your right to disagree with me. What many people do not realize is that over 75% of a state's DNR budget comes from revenues generated by hunting and fishing. Without hunting and fishing, there is no DNR and in the end, the game and wildlife suffer the most. As for bears, specifically, if it is an economic argument as it will no doubt become, the sensible thing to do is open a season on bears, cut down on the amount of damage, raise money through the sale of bear stamps, tags, licenses, equipment, etc., educate the animals,and bring the population back under control. Thresholds need to be set and if the forecast falls below the number for the area, put a moratorium on the next season. Either open a season or halt development in this area--which one do you think the state is going to support? One only has to look at the similar situation that has befallen the MD counties with serious deer population problems. The amount of damage deer cause from both an economic perspective (car accidents, rising auto insurance costs,landscaping costs, medical costs from deer ticks, crop damage, etc.), as well as, from an environmental perspective (loss of endangered plants, loss of cover for upland birds and small animals) is overwhelming. One only has to see a browse line on the forest's edge around a crop field or the denuded sides of a mountain to realize what kind of impact development has had on deer and what they are capable of. What has the state done to manage deer numbers? They have asked recreational hunters to help keep the numbers down. Well managed, limited hunting on bears is a suitable solution to a problem that is only going to get worse as development continues to drive wildlife from its normal habitat. If anyone wants to help MD's wildlife, take aim at the developers, because the hunters in this state are one of the best allies you have for conservation and effective management of wildlife. Regards, MGF, Bethesda, MD
Date: Friday, November 22, 2002 11:51 AM - Subject: bear hunt
Due to an error on my part I'm resending my opinion on the bear hunt on another email account. I apologize if you receive a duplicate.
Please do not allow the bear hunt to happen. The numbers will not support a hunt! Not so long ago we were drastically close to loosing the black bear. Once you make the decision to kill the black bear it will be too late to fix it. I have read the BBTF report, and I think there are some other really good solutions to this problem. PLEASE do not allow the black bear hunt to become our sad reality. Thank-you, H. W., Frostburg
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2002 01:51 PM - Subject: Maryland Bear Hunting
Sir, If the bear population is significant enough to warrant being controlled, then bear hunting should be allowed. Hunting is the best and most economic method for controlling the bear population. We should not wait until the bear population grows to a size so large as to pose a significant safety risk due to increased bear/human interaction. Obviously as the bear population grows more bears will be forced to search for food in areas that are more populated. Once this happens the bears will begin to lose their fear of humans and start to associate humans and houses with food. That is a situation we should not allow to happen. Even if the bears that are taken in a hunt are not near a populated area it will create a void that bears near populated areas will move to fill, resulting in fewer bears near peoples homes and children.
If the bear population is not at or near a size requiring management then they should be left alone for now. All I ask is that a sound management decision is made based on science, not emotion. J. H. B., Leonardtown, MD
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Bear hunt
The time is long past due for a bear season in Maryland. I support a bear season. Thank You, J. B., Chestertown, MD
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:51 AM - Subject: The Bears of Garrett County
I live in Baltimore but spend much time in Garrett County over the last 17 years and have had a lot of exposure to those who reside there full time. My wife and I are currently having a house built and will soon become full time residents ourselves.
Before a decision is made on a Bear hunt in Garrett County I would suggest that those who have the power to decide spend some time among the people in
Garrett County, unannounced and pay attention to the life styles and way of life there. The people of our largest County are most different from those in the rest of our state.
Most every male from 90 to 10 years of age seem to live for the hunt. In any small restaurant at any given time of year during breakfast lunch or dinner, where ever there are locals present. Much of there conversations are about hunting Turkey, or Dear, Bow season, Black Powder Season and lastly Rifle Season. When there are not any legal seasons open for game the talk of many locals turn to planed hunting trips to other parts of the country. These people ENJOY hunting, it is part of the way they have been brought up for generations. If there were a knife season for Bear, they would be in the woods hunting them with Bowie knifes.
If one has been around long enough to go un-noticed by locals in these same small restaurants one can hear of what are considered to be problem Bears, almost always described as "yearlings" being the problem and how they have there own solutions to the problem.
These however are the very same people who some years ago, when the idea of releasing Bears in to Garrett Country was introduced were all for it because having Bears in the County would help to increase tourism and help local business. The Bears did help local commerce in Garrett County and with the multiplication of the Bear population along with the increase in modern attractions to the area those very same people would now be satisfied if there were an open cull of the Bears they once said they needed.
If anything DNR should make a more effort in presence and enforce poaching laws on Bears that already exist in the region as well as the extremely rare Cougar that was mentioned in the article in the Cumberland Times Online. Concerned! J. & K.
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2002 10:21 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunting in Maryland
As a lifelong Maryland resident , avid sportsman and hunter, I'd like to see the Maryland DNR, not a Task Force made up of political appointees and people that are "anti-hunting", look at the "best way" to support the Black Bear population, in the State of Maryland. And if that decision is to have a limited hunting season , for Black Bears, then so be it.
If the "non-hunters" would take a serious look at how "managed hunting" has brought back the white-tail deer population, within Maryland's borders and by regulating the duck and goose hunting" bag limits" and length of the season has dramatically supported the increased waterfowl population, they could "take off the blinders" and see that not only do hunters support the conservation efforts of the state agencies, through their permits and purchases, but that hunters are the "front-line" when it comes to conservation and managing wildlife, in the State of Maryland.
Come on people, shake the stereotypes and take a real look into the issues. J. M. K., Germantown , MD
Date: Thursday, November 21, 2002 09:21 AM - Subject: Black Bear hunt in MD
To The Maryland Black Bear Task Force: My letter is to express disagreement with the proposing of a hunt as the
means to "manage" Maryland's small population of Black Bears. I am a Maryland citizen and I do not believe there is reasonable rationale to justify a bear hunt to control the Black Bear's population.
This proposed bear hunt will not target specific, problematic bears and would not address human-bear conflicts mainly due to its recreational
nature. Additionally, there has been no scientific evidence that justifies bear hunting as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
Due to the extremely small size of the population (estimated between 266 and 437 bears), this hunt could endanger the survival of the
entire population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
There are other solutions that could be implemented including removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around
crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. If these alternative methods are not
successful, the DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears.
The small number of people that might benefit from hunting bears for recreation or for trophies, does not outweigh the
livelihood of the
entire Black Bear population of Maryland. Unquestionably, it is the majority of Maryland citizens that want bears to be protected.
Thank you for taking the time to receive input from the public. It is very important that the values of the citizens of Maryland be taken into
consideration when these types of decisions are made. Sincerely, J. H.
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 08:36 PM - Subject: black bears
This is to comment on the possibility of a black bear hunt in Maryland. I moved to Oakland, Maryland in May of 2002. My property backs up to a
mountain. Before I bought the property, I was told that there were wild cats and bears in the area. I decided that I still wanted to move there,
BUT ... I do not expect the wild cats and bears to MOVE OUT just because I moved in. They were there first.
I take precautions. I fence in my pets and keep my trash contained. Should I have other problems, I would look for other peaceable solutions. I do not believe in killing.
I realize that for farmers, the bears have become a problem, but a recreational hunt is not going to kill those bears that are causing the
problem for the farmers. In Alaska, a program has been started where electric fencing plus sirens are installed. If a bear comes close to the
fence a siren goes off, if the bear continues, he is then zapped by a light charge. Eventually, the bear learns that the siren means that he
will be zapped. Even hunters and others in Alaska carry the sirens to prevent bear attacks and it works. Perhaps something like this needs to
be considered. Proceeds from other hunting licenses could be used to offset or even pay for these fences and sirens.
If and when hunting permits for black bears are issued, I believe ONLY farmers, whose livestock and crops are are in danger should be allowed
to have them.
I believe that the reason the other bears are causing problems is because of building in their natural habitat. To that I say-- check out
your neighbors, if you don't like your FOUR footed neighbors move somewhere else. JUST BECAUSE you have the MONEY to build,
doesn't mean you SHOULD! THEY were there FIRST!!!!! - L. T., Oakland, Md
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Please not our strong objection to the draft report of the Black Bear Task Force.
We have lived in Maryland all of our lives.
First, and most obvious, there is no rationale for a bear hunt, as a "recreational" hunt would target specific problem bears. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution bear/human conflicts.
Second, the bear population is already tiny! Only 437 bears by the highest estimate. A hunt would jeopardize the survival of the population.
Third, solutions already exist, such as removing food and trash, electric fences, etc. Besides, "repeat offender" bears can already be euthanized.
Fourth, bears are incredible animals, extremely intelligent, almost magical. They have deep social lives and form bonds for lifetimes. They have emotions and feelings and instincts to care for their young for long periods of time. They have interests in staying alive and living in the world. Who are we to kill them for sport?
Finally, most people want bears protected. Only a tiny number of hunters want the bears hunted. D. L. & S. L.
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 04:51 PM - Subject: Bear Hunting Season
Needed......
I live in Garrett County for only part of the year. Over the years the number of bear sightings have increased for me when I'm in the county. When hunting, I see plenty of bear droppings and evidence of their being around. My neighbors have seen a number of different bears this fall around their homes, and friends have seen them while hunting, so I know the bear population in the Asher glade area has increased over the last several years. I'm not a trophy hunter, and I'd kill a bear only for its meat or self protection. I do think a bear season for Garrett County is necessary to help control the bear population in the county. If there's a vote for a bear season or any other method to control the bear population, I think it should be up to the citizens of Garrett County to decide as they are directly involved. This should not be a state wide decision or one decided by a committee. Thank you...... E. B.
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 03:36 PM - Subject: support for bear hunt
I SUPPORT THE POSSIBILITY OF USING HUNTING AS A MANAGEMENT TOOL TO HELP MANAGE
MARYLAND'S BEAR POPULATION. THANK YOU, B. P.
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: Black Bears
Dear Decision Makers: After reviewing the information in the minutes of the Task Force meetings, I would like to comment as a citizen of Maryland.
On most occasions, the sighting of a black bear is a thrilling experience for young and old. The bears are generally illusive and noninvasive where humans are concerned. The odds of any given bear coming in contact with a human is extremely low. The thought of having a hunt that would kill bears that have no interest in interacting with humans seems ludicrous.
Only in the rare circumstance that a bear becomes a problem and human lives are in danger, should a decision to relocate or euthanise that bear be made. To turn loose hunters with guns on a random hunt for their sporting satisfaction in the name of controlling bears is not in the best interest of bears or humans.
Please do not approve a hunting season on bears in Maryland. Let the DNR do their job in ridding us of problem bears and saving the rest of the bears from human destruction.
Property damage from bears should be the responsibility of the property owners. There are certainly well known humane ways to deter bears from foraging on private property and coming close to homes and endangering humans. Please have the Task Force inform and educate.
Thank you for your efforts in finding a solution for problem bears and leaving the rest of them go about their natural business.
Sincerely, J. S.
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 07:36 AM - Subject: Bears
Please do not hunt the bears they have a right to live just as humans do America should be leading the world in animal conservation Save the bears do
not kill them - Yours Henrietta
Date: Wednesday, November 20, 2002 - Subject: Comments on Draft Black Bear Task Force Report
Dear Black Bear Task Force, I am writing to oppose the proposed bear hunt recommended in the Draft Report
produced by the Maryland Black Bear Task Force. There is no rationale for a bear
hunt in Maryland. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific "problem"
bears and would not address any bear/human conflicts. There is no scientific justification
for a bear hunt as a solution to bear/human conflicts. A bear hunt is biologically
reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated at only 266-437 animals. Even
a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly
extinct only 50 years ago.
Solutions already exist to resolve bear/human conflicts in a non-lethal manner.
Simple, effective solutions already exist, such as removing food and trash that
attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using
aversive conditioning to teach bears to behave. The DNR already has the authority
to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation
are ineffective.
I am one of the vast majority of Maryland citizens who want to see bears protected
in the state. Only a small number of people would benefit from hunting bears for
recreation or for trophies, while a majority of Maryland citizens want bears protected.
Please take the common-sense approach of removing the bear hunt recommendation
from the Black Bear Task Force Report.
The message above was sent by:
C. M., Abingdon, MD
K. M., Columbia, MD
A. S., Ellicott City, MD
M. H., Silver Spring, MD
C. H., Annapolis, MD
E. & S. B., Potomac, MD
J. H., Chesapeake City, MD
S. A., Parkville
A. G., Silver Spring, MD
I. F., Kensington, MD
J. K., Gaithersburg, MD
R. D., Fort Meade, MD
N. L., Bel Air, MD
M. W., Olney, MD
S. & W. C., Severn, MD
C. J., Cambridge, MD
S. M., Columbia, MD
C. P., Keedysville, MD
C. K., Silver Spring, MD
M. L. K., Bethesda, MD
L. M. H., Freeland, MD
E. G. H., Freeland, MD
V. J. N., Kensington, MD
S. W., Takoma Park, MD
J. B., Annapolis, MD
J. M., Glen Burnie, MD
R. M., Hyattsville, MD
K. G., Waldorf, MD
J. D., Derwood, MD
D. C., Bowie, MD
C. M., Annapolis, MD
J-M. C., Montgomery Village, MD
V. W., Annapolis, MD
B. C., Annapolis, MD
E. H., Ellicott City, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 08:53 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
To Whom It May Concern: I live on the Frostburg Road in Garrett Co., Maryland. I have lived here
for about 6 years. We have bears in the area. I have had a large bear on my patio looking for bird seed. I used to leave my bird feeders out over
night but I take them inside at night to prevent any bears from pulling them down. We also keep our trash and garbage inside away from the
bears. I am telling you this so that you know that I live in "bear country." I am also a hunter and a fisher. I hunt deer and squirrel
primarily. I am stating this so you realize that I am not opposed to hunting as a management tool.
I enjoy observing wildlife and having bears in my backyard. It tells me that there is still something wild about the region that enables the
black bear to prosper. It would also be great if there were still bison, elk,
wolves, and cougars; but, for now, I will settle for the bears. People living in bear country need to adapt to them,
just as the bears have to adapt to people. Most of the bears that I have come across in my
wanderings are "whimps" for the most part. During their evolution, they had to be whimps to survive as there were many larger and more ferocious
animals out there, for instance, the extinct short-faced bear. These larger animals went extinct as humans pushed out across the continent at
the end of the last glacial period; but, the black bear survived by running and climbing trees whenever danger threatened. We are now being asked
whether to have a bear hunt.
I am unclear as to the need for a hunt. According to estimates, we probably have a few hundred bears. I have not seen an estimate of the bear
population that can be supported by the available habitat. Are there too many bears? A few hundred sounds like a very low number to support any
kind of a hunt. I have not heard anyone say how many bears should be harvested in Maryland. I read that PA harvests about
20% of a much larger population of black bears. If we harvested 20% of our 300 bears, we would
be taking 60 bears. Does this small number justify a hunting season in Maryland? Maryland is not likely to support the populations of bears found
in PA or WV. We are just too small and bear habitat currently includes a tiny amount of land in western Maryland, primarily in Garrett Co.
I DO NOT support a bear hunt in Maryland. I DO NOT believe that it will serve any particular purpose as far as the bear population is
concerned. It will mainly placate some people who have a problem with bears on their property--at least for a short time. I do feel that most of
the bears shot will be those on public land and not the bears hanging around someone's private property. We already allow people to shoot bears
depredating livestock or out of fear. I believe that this is enough. For now at least, let's forego a hunting season. We can re-evaluate whether or
not one is needed in five years or so. Some people will not be happy living with bears. Shooting a few dozen bears may keep them happy for
awhile, but it will not be the answer that they are seeking.
For now, I am OPPOSED to hunting bears in Maryland. - J. E. G., Frostburg, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 05:51 PM - Subject: Problems and solutions
I understand a proposed "recreational" hunt against black bears is being advocated as a way to manage Maryland's black bear population. I strongly oppose this idea.
This is not a solution in my eyes, but an excuse for hunters to have a day of sport. There are other more workable solutions that I ask you consider implementing such as:
- installing electric fences around crops
- using adversive conditioning
- removal of food and trash
Thank you. M. N., Baltimore, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 02:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
I am writing to share with you my OPPOSITION to allowing humans to hunt members of the small population of black bears in Maryland.
Please consider my input when making a finalized decision. Sincerely, A. C., Phoenix, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 19, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Proposed Black Bear Hunt
I am a lifetime resident of Maryland and have hunted and fished since 1969.
I spend more time in the woods in a single year than many of the people responding to this invitation to comment will spend in their entire
lifetime. This time is spent because I love and respect animals. I recognize
them and the environment as a gift from God and we have a responsibility to
him with respect to the trust this gift represents. Those who oppose the management of this gift by
trained wildlife managers using scientific practices are making a mistake. Perhaps they are motivated by what they
believe to be compassion and righteous feelings, but those motives fail to
fulfill the responsibility we have to manage wildlife.
To those who disagree, I invite them to join me in a trip to the woods by twilight at 4 AM . They
can sit by me in the dark waiting for the sun to come up and contemplate the beauty of the night sounds. Perhaps we will even
hear the approach of a sow and her cubs foraging for the mast crop. We can
test the strength of their confidence in the arguments and theories of mutual compatibility posted at this site.
I respectfully submit this letter in support of the recommendation to manage
the Maryland Bear population with the tool of recreational hunting, and leave the matter of regulation in the hands of professional wildlife
managers, with the highest confidence. Regards, K. H., Valley Lee Maryland
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 04:51 PM - Subject: MD. Black Bear Task Force
I am writing today to add my comments to this task force.
I oppose the use of a trophy hunt on the bears in Maryland. To resolve the
issue of encounters with bears at peoples homes, campsites etc, I support the following:
Removing food and trash that attracts bears, install electric fencing around
crops and beehives and adverse conditioning. These solutions already exist
though people need to be educated and actually use these solutions.
Any hunt is biologically reckless and may jeopardize the survival of the tiny bear population. There is no scientific justification for a hunt as a
solution.
I appreciate your work in this area and am thankful for the chance to be heard. And hope you will be guided to the right decision.
- C. D., Frederick County resident
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 03:51 PM - Subject: the proposed bear hunt
Dear Sir or Madam: As a Maryland resident and taxpayer, I am very opposed to the proposed black bear hunt, for the following
reasons:
-
A recreational bear hunt would not target specific “problem” bears or address any
bear/human conflicts.
- A Hunt is Biologically Reckless: MD’s bear population is estimated to be between 266
and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of this tiny population –
they were nearly extinct only 50 years ago.
- Solutions Already Exist: Simple, effective practices, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using
aversive conditioning, reduces bear sightings and interaction.
Thank you very much, C. K., Rockville, MD
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 03:06 PM -
Subject: No Bear Hunt
I am writing to express my opposition to the idea of
having a bear hunt in Maryland.
I am sure others writing in have laid out all of the
arguments against bear hunting, but I wanted to add a
comment from a different perspective.
The DNR opened a mute swan hunt, and now seems poised
to open a bear hunt. This is always "justified" by
arguing that these animals are a nuisance of some
sort.
Yet, many species are currently hunted in this state
that harm no one. Otters, pheasants, mink and quail
come to mind.
I encourage the DNR to consider closing a season on
some species, or eliminating a particularly cruel
method of take (such as leghold traps) to compensate
for expanding hunting into currently protected
species.
This is the least you can do for the overwhelming
majority of us that don't hunt. Please remember that
while 2.8% of Maryland residents hunt, a far greater
number of us value wildlife alive rather than dead. - J. G.,
Silver Spring, MD
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 12:51 PM -
Subject: bear hunt
I hope that a conclusion can be reached to use non-lethal methods to deal with any bear problems in Maryland. There are so few bears left in Maryland that even limited hunt can to irreparable damage to the population as a whole. Hunts also are do not focus on a single "problem" bear but are used against all bears, problem or not, in Maryland. There are so many non-lethal methods that can be used, I feel it would be a shame to use bullets to solve a problem that can be solved in less violent ways.
Thank you, J. B.
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 12:51 PM -
Subject: Comments on Proposed Black Bear Hunt
To the Maryland Black Bear Task Force: As a resident of Maryland, I am writing to offer my comments on the proposed Black Bear hunt.
I strongly oppose permitting public hunting of black
bears in Maryland. I believe this is unwise for
Maryland's ecology and unnecessarily harmful to the
bears.
I understand there are currently less than 500 black
bears in Maryland. Thus, even a limited hunt will
jeopardize the survival of this population, which has
already managed to survive near extinction.
Moreover, a black bear hunt would benefit no one but
the hunters. There are better ways to deal with the
complaints of farmers and others members of the public
who are calling for a bear hunt. A recreational bear
hunt would not target specific problem bears or
address any bear/human conflicts. There is no
scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution
to bear/human conflicts. I understand that nonlethal
practices exist that have not yet been attempted. Such
measures should be attempted prior to killing any
bears. Moreover, if a particular bear does become a
problem, the DNR already has the authority to
euthanize problem bears if other methods are
ineffective. Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely, J. M., Takoma Park, MD
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM -
Subject: Black Bear Comments
According to published accounts the DNR responds to 220+ calls from April through December (or approximately 1 call per day) concerning bear conflicts with people, pets, crops, livestock or property damage. They (DNR) reported responding to 20 emergency(?) calls or less than 10% of these calls. Therefore, 90% of the calls concerning bear/human conflicts expose residents to the continued harassment and inevitable possibility of serious consequences.
This is not a shortcoming of the DNR; it is the "nature of the beast"! The geography does not lend itself to an easy response by limited personnel and the bears usually disappear before DNR personnel can arrive on the scene. Again, because of limited personnel and no mandate to track down and dispatch nuisance bears the conflicts are rarely resolved. Attempts to provide additional funding, through the Bear Stamp program, and resources to manage bears or provide compensation for crop or property damage have failed miserably.
Some say there are anywhere between 250-350 bears in the western part of the State, but it would not matter if there were 500 or more than 1000. Those against any form of lethal management of the bears would still not agree to the hunting of bears. Their logic is not based on proven wildlife management techniques but more on the philosophic belief that animals have rights. Animals do not have rights – people have responsibilities to manage animals. Pet owners, farmers, breeders, animal control and wildlife managers, and hunters are the primary caretakers of animals, be they domestic property or public wildlife. In the case of the bears, DNR has the responsibility to manage them and protect people, property and crops.
Methods of taking wildlife are regulated by the DNR. Seasons, weapons and limits are designed to assure the continued health and populations of wildlife. Killing an animal with the proper weapon is the only feasible humane means of dispatching an animal, whether is for food, profit, clothing, protection or hunting. Hunting has historically proven to be the most cost-effective means of preserving and controlling wildlife.
For the past 50+ years the DNR has done a commendable job providing preservation and protection of the bears. Without the revenues received from the sales of hunting and fishing licenses, stamps and fees and matching Federal funds, derived from outdoors sportsmen related products, neither the bears nor their habitat would have benefited. During those years neither hunters nor local residents have clamored for a reduction in the number of bears. However, the success of the management of bears has reached a point where their numbers now need to be managed.
Recent efforts at non-lethal wildlife management (aversion training specifically) are costly, experimental and only provide limited results in limited areas. Some bears still need to be dispatched. Sustainable funding sources for these efforts have not been identified. Again, the Bear Stamp program has not provided sufficient funds to provide non-lethal resources to manage the bears or limit their incursions into human populated areas. Nor will these non-lethal methods alone ever control the bear’s population. However, aversion training for bears will aid in shepherding bears from human populated areas to those of the farmers, beekeepers, and orchards, hiking and hunting areas. Once the bears leave the populated human areas the problems still remain. Only now they are more concentrated. Thereby increasing the damage to crops and the chances for conflicts with homeowners, hikers or hunters. Nothing is resolved!
Those opposing the hunting of bears believe they (bears) should be allowed to die a natural death. In western Maryland (and sometimes in not so western MD) bears are killed by vehicles while crossing highways. This is not a natural death but a dangerous situation for motorists. When bears die of old age the untold suffering from the ills of old age are far more cruel and inhumane than falling to the weapon of a hunter. Also, during the bear’s waning years they try to find easily attainable food sources; orchards, corn fields, well kept bee hives, or campsites used by hikers and hunters. This makes them more aggressive in defending their food stores and more dangerous to humans.
Bears are a natural resource and considered a game species. They are not endangered or even on the threatened species list here in Maryland or for that matter anywhere in the United States.
Modern wildlife management does not, as some say, exist only to provide animals for hunter’s enjoyment. Hunters, many years ago, decided to provide revenues that assist in wildlife conservation - conservation of not just game species but all wildlife. In more recent times hunters have been active in helping to restore endangered or threatened species, habitat and home ranges. They have also assisted in the long range planning for healthy wildlife populations and habitats for future generations of Marylanders. Most recently, hunters asked for an increase in license and stamp fees to provide lost funding from over-extended State spending and hiring freezes within the DNR. Without such additional funding the DNR would have lost the means to continue the protection, preservation and restoration of many programs and areas that benefit all wildlife and citizens.
For all of the reasons and examples stated above, I believe the DNR should not only be given the opportunity but must implement a limited bear season, crop damage permit and reimbursement program and continue the bear response activities they require to provide reasonable, cost-effective wildlife management and for public safety.
If any of these 3 recommendations are not implemented then I believe specific sources of
funding should be identified, instead of the use of any hunter related revenues, and black bears should be removed from the list of game species in Maryland and treated as a nuisance predator.
- S. C., MD Hunter Alert, Elkton, MD
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM -
Subject: Black Bear Comments
Hello.....as a Garrett County full-time resident, property owner, and hunter I am in favor of a
limited or lottery bear season I also believe a bear season would also educate bears with human
scent; bears would then maybe steer clear of higher human traffic areas. I have a bear that checks my front porch on a regular
basis, because he/she found an easy meal from a trash can several months ago there.
I would also like to be able to carry a pistol or handgun for protection walking out of the woods after dark with a flashlight during
bow-season. My opinion this would be the most dangerous time for a bear to attack, you could easily get between mother and a cub without realizing. - J.
F.
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 10:08 AM - Subject: bear hunt
Dear task force, While the concerns of local farmers and land owners should
receive detailed attention I would like to express my opinion against bear
hunting. My feeling is that any expenses or inconveniences experienced by fellow citizens by bear destruction should be shared by all the public. Monies should be set aside by the state and animal rights groups for this purpose. Most hunters with whom I am
acquainted with are concerned about preserving their way of life and the land they live on for their families and future generations. The
maintenance of a healthy bear population and land for them to live on surely warrants the efforts of everyone , hunters and nonhunters. Preservation of open spaces for wildlife in our counties should be maintained through careful development otherwise our communities will look similar to the ugly urban sprawl seen outside surrounding cities with no bears to be seen.
- C. M.
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: Bear hunt
To the Maryland Black Bear Task Force: Please reconsider your proposed bear hunt. Our
black bears should be considered one of our state's treasures.
A hunt would hardly remove the offending bears which you already have the authority to relocate. People
who live in areas of natural bear habitat should be educated on coexisting with them, such as removing
food and trash which attract them. They are simply responding to their most basic of instincts. Please
don't take their lives for this. I urge you to not jeopardize the survival of the tiny population we
have. Sincerely, S.M.D.
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: bear hunt
I was reading with great interest on "Cumberland Times-News" website about a meeting the " Black Bear Task Force" had at Garrett College
in Mchenry, Md. Twenty-seven citizens spoke, most of who were strongly in support of some kind of hunt. It seemed to me that a majority of the few who voiced opposition to a hunt did not even live anywhere near Garrett County. I have never attended a meeting in another part of the state and tried to influence local policy. I wish they would give us the same respect. Most of these people are not concerned about our safety, crop damage, and other issues. They seem to be more concerned about the feelings and the rights of bears. It seems to me that the DNR and the Maryland state government need to serve the people of Maryland. The day they get the bears in the voting booth to elect them is the day they can defend the rights of the bears over the rights of the people.
- T.E.T.
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: Bear Hunt
I personally think we need a bear season in western Maryland. I live in Garrett county in the Swanton area.
I own about 120 acres of old farm land. and 7 1/2 acres where my house is located. My Old Farm Has About
50 Apple trees on it. The bears have destroyed the trees that have been their for years. How can i put a price
that? I also have a cabin on this property. The bears have tried to get in by tearing at the
siding and brick molding.
My home is located five miles from the old farm the way the bird flies have a small garden 30'+50' in size And 50' from my home and 10' from
RT 495. Some bears came in and eat my sweet corn and destroyed most of the rest of it.
I lease two different pieces of property in the Swanton area. One of which is almost seven hundred acres.
We see a lot of bears on this property. The other property is 340 acres and is located four miles from the
other. There is also a large number of bears on this property.
If you talk to the people of Swanton and ask if they ever had a bear problem. The answer would be YES.
I do not under stand why Western Maryland Does not have a bear season.
I also think the people of western Maryland should have first chance for a bear permit if and when
they do have a season.
I also think people should only have a say. If they have bears in the county of residence.
YES I THINK WE NEED A BEAR SEASON IN WESTERN MARYLAND. Thank You
- C.L., Swanton
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: Black bear hunt in Garrett Co.
YES!!!!!!! You need a way to control the bear population. GARRET COUNTY IS LOSING TOURIST DOLLARS $$$$$$$$$. My family lives all
over the country. In August, 2000, we rented cabins again at New Germany for our
yearly reunion . Previously, this was the highlight of the year. But, in August 2000, we had a regular visitor, a 350 pound
black bear which terrified everyone. Since our group is from San Diego,
Washington, D.C. Dallas, Texas, and York, Pa., needless to say, they are not used to the idea of bears in
the backyard and were afraid to go out of their cabins. The years that we did go to New Germany, the 14 of us ate out at local restaurants and
shopped in the region extending into the Deep Creek area.
Conservantly speaking, I would say that in all we spent between $7,000-$10,000 that
week in Garrett County. Last summer we went to the beach for our reunion.
Although new Germany is everyone's first choice, we have already rented a beach house for the summer of 2003. No one wants to go back to
New Germany until the bear population is controlled. - E. N., Cumberland,Md.
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: Black Bear Hunt
To whom it may concern, I have lived and hunted in Western Maryland all my life and I'm convinced that a bear hunt is
needed. The 300 bears they say is in Md. is way low. Personally, I have seen at least 9 different bears the first 11 times I
bow hunted this year. Also one evening my friend tried to scare a mother with two cubs away so he could leave but the cubs treed and the mother was mad standing at the bottom of his
tree. I too have had this happen as have a lot of people I know hunt around here. The
bears here are not scared of people like they are in Wva and Pa. I firmly believe as do most other hunters that unless a season is brought in someone be it a hunter or maybe a young kid is going to
get attacked. Now maybe the anti-hunters could care less about a hunter getting mauled but I bet they would think twice if there kid got
mauled. Believe it or not I have even had my 4 wheeler seat chewed on while parked in the woods but I guess better my 4 wheeler than my
butt. Sincerely,
C.C., Lonaconing
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: Black bear hunting in W. Md.
Dear Sir or Madam, I am in favor of the hunting of black bears in Western Maryland as a means to reduce the large population of bears in the
western part of the state. My relatives in Allegany County have had several serious problems with black bears in recent years as a result of
the huge number of bears. Thank you. - J.P., Galena, MD
Date: Monday, November 18, 2002 09:53 AM - Subject: Bears in Western Maryland
Although I don't live in Western Maryland, I do live in neighboring West Virginia. I think if you look at the sightings and traffic accidents in
Western Maryland in particular, Garrett County, there is evidence that perhaps a controlled hunt will be
necessary in the near future. I personally don't think anyone who lives outside of this area can offer and
objective opinion as they have never encountered a bear in wild. As someone who has I can tell you it is right up there with being chased by coyotes.
Not a real comfortable situation when all you have is a bow and two arrows or nothing at all. Just some thoughts from a neighbor.
Sincerely, W.M.
Date: Friday, November 15, 2002 01:51 PM - Subject: Black Bear
Having recently learned that there is a proposal for a black bear season in Maryland I am sending this missive in response.
I do not believe there should be a hunting season for black bear. There is no overpopulation of this animal that warrants culling the population.
The hills of western Maryland are not alive with the sound of black bears. If people would not put out trash and garbage that attracts the bears
interaction with the bears would be kept to a minimum. If people would use bear proof containers to house trash and garbage bears would not
set up house near people's homes. It is not the bears who are acting in ignorance
it is the people who do not take the effort to coexist with the bears. If a bear causes serious problems it should be moved and if that is not possible
then humanely destroyed. What we do not need is more hunters wandering around in the hills with firearms it is bad enough in deer season and that
is an overpopulation problem.
I hope you listen to this voice from the hinterland. - P.J.S.
Sent: Thursday, November 14, 2002 2:45 PM - Subject: black bear hunt
I can't attend the public meeting about black bears in Maryland tonight, but just wanted to say I'm against a hunt since peaceful coexistent
methods already exist. I'm glad there are finally bears in Maryland, and I'd like to see them valued instead of destroyed.
- M.B.M
Date: Thursday, November 14, 2002 02:38 PM - Subject: NO to Bear Hunt
I am unable to make the meeting this evening in McHenry, but I am writing to voice my strong opposition to the Bear Hunt in
Maryland. Hunting bears would be an extremely biologically reckless and cruel decision.
Simple solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric
fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live. The
DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are
ineffective.
Please DO NOT authorize a bear hunt in the state of Maryland. Sincerely, T.
K., Annapolis, MD
Date: Thursday, November 14, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I, as a professional natural resource manager, support a limited black bear hunt in Maryland. I support hunting in areas where there is an
adequate population coupled with bear depredation to justify a hunt. Also, all persons wishing to hunt back bears in Maryland should have
the opportunity to apply for hunting tags in a lottery type drawing. The number of hunters participating and targeted areas could be
managed in a very controlled manner. This can also be a means of obtaining revenue for a modest black
bear program by charging an application fee just to enter the hunting tag lottery.
If there is no bear hunting I strongly agree that no fees derived from hunters be used to fund a black bear program.
- B.B.
Date: Thursday, November 14, 2002 09:21 AM - Subject: (no subject)
Where is the need to manage the small population of black bears in Maryland? I am a former resident of Cumberland. I have always returned
to western Maryland for the joy of the outdoors and the wild life that abounded at one time.
There is no rationale for a bear hunt. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to bear/human conflicts. Simple, effective
practices, such as removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using aversive
conditioning, reduces bear sightings and interaction.
MD's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 bears. Even a limited hunt may jeopardize the survival of this tiny population --
they were nearly extinct 50 years ago. Please do not this to happen again.
Does it always have to be KILL, KILL, KILL! Must the animal population of this world suffer because of mans failure to compromise?
I am aware that a that repeat offenders at some point must be relocated, and if not successful are euthanized. This should be a the last
solution.
Please take this into consideration for the preservation of the Black Bear. -
C. G., Baltimore, MD
Date: Thursday, November 14, 2002 03:06 AM - Subject: No bear hunt
I and my family are vehemently opposed to a "recreational" bear hunt in Maryland as a means to control your bear "problem".
The hunters will not know which of the bears are causing human-bear conflicts. A recreational bear hunt would not target specific,
problematic bears. The killing will simply be taking out whichever bears happen to be at the wrong place, at the wrong time.
A hunt is not a first step in managing a bear population, it is a must never happen step. A hunt will not address the bear-human conflicts,
which are often the result of human stupidity. The same people who leave ice cream on their front porch for the cute bears, will live down the
road from the people wanting a bear rug on their floor. There is no scientific justification for a bear hunt as a solution to human-bear conflicts.
A hunt would be biologically reckless. Maryland's bear population is estimated to be between 266 and 437 animals. Even a limited hunt may
jeopardize the survival of the population, which was nearly extinct only 50 years ago. You must be aware that nature self limits through loss
of habitat, food, space, drought, illness. There is no way to predict that your hunt won't occur at the same time as another unpredictable,
cataclysmic event and result in total loss of your bear population.
Solutions already exist. Simple, effective solutions to human-bear conflicts already exist; educating the public concerning proper bear
relations, removing food and trash that attracts bears, installing bear proof dumpsters, electric fencing around crops and beehives, and using
aversive conditioning to teach bears to avoid areas where people live or recreate. The DNR already has the authority to euthanize "repeat
offender" problem bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
Maryland's citizens want bear protection, not eradication. No one can truly benefit from the loss of these wonderful mammals. Witnessing the
careful attention a mother bear pays to her cub puts some people to shame. The truth is that the majority of Maryland citizens want bears to
continue to live in their environment. Thank You, D. E. S. and Family
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: bears
Please reconsider the proposed recommendations of public bear hunts. This is an obtrusive idea that goes against any compassion and justification for a solution.
God gave us life----animal and human. At least the animals give us humans a chance. Whereas, the humans don't seem to use their
God-given common-sense when it comes to living with the animals......just build where you want, go out into the wild as you please (and why is it called "wild"?)
What if the animals thought of us as a "sport"? Thank you, Baltimore, Maryland
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 07:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I would like to submit comments into the public record associated with the Black Bear Management Task Force meeting. I
support the establishment of a Black Bear hunting season with permit numbers established by scientific opinion of the Maryland
Department of Natural resources. A hunting season is the most efficient and economical way to bring the Bear population in
line with the cultural and biological carrying capacity of the land. In addition, a trap and release program to place surplus
bears in areas of the state where they are currently lacking or minimal in numbers would allow the population of Bears to be
spread out over a larger area and would require fewer hunting permits to control the population in Western Maryland. Perhaps
this could be a compromise position between those that support a hunt and those
that are opposed. - C. A., Beltsville, Maryland
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 07:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
Sirs: This email is being sent to you to address the recommendation for a hunt as
the way to manage Maryland's black bear population.
Why I am AGAINST the hunt as not being an effective nor efficient way to handle the problem:
A recreational bear hunt would not rid us of the bears that have been moving too close to citizens and homes. It would target ALL bears,
thereby killing unnecessarily bears who have done no harm, and probably/possibly NOT getting
those causing the problem.
We have too small a population of bears to decimate them with a hunt. Remember, in the mid-1900's (about 1950), they were almost extinct
in this state.
There are already solutions available: remove food and trash that attracts bears; install electric fences around crops and beehives; use
aversive conditioning so that sightings and interactions would be reduced. Thank you for voting to NOT have a bear hunt!
- S. B., Columbia MD
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 03:06 PM - Subject: Bear Hunt
To Whom It May Concern: I think before any bear hunt is considered in Maryland it would be wise to look at the bear population in Allegany
and Garrett counties and realize how hard the state has worked to bring this population back from almost extinction in the '50's to where it is
now.....And NOT buckle down to SOME who want to endorse a bear hunt....I've researched the Maryland DNR site and I can't find any
existing laws or regulations covering a bear hunt. Wouldn't it be prudent to have laws in place before a hunt is sanctioned?
You also have to consider the fact that Pennsylvania Brags about their bear hunting season as "Any age, Any size"....That includes the killing of SOWS AND CUBS because the hunters went to the
legislators and told them that they couldn't tell the size of a bear in the
woods.... But a new hunting law for the 2002 Deer Season requires a deer to have 4 tines on 1 antler...They can't tell the size of a bear in the woods but they can see 4 tines.....Wonderful!
Before any bear hunt is considered, a realistic count of bears that generally live within the 2
Maryland counties of Allegany and Garrett should be looked into....And realizing that these animals travel up to 25 miles a day....It would also be wise to look at the surrounding counties in Pennsylvania and West Virginia to see what their bear harvest has been recently....The bear population just may not be as big as those who want a hunt are leading you to
believe....Crop damage?...Deer do much more than a bear ever will.....Why not publicly
advertise the Bear Stamps....A lot of people don't know about them and I'm sure they would sell....Hence help to offset any crop damage...just my thoughts on the subject....I'm not anti hunt.....But I'm against a bear hunt!...West Virginia has some of the best bear hunting laws in
existence.....Go to their DNR site and look them over. Thank you. T. M.
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 11:06 AM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force Recommendations
I have been following for some time the minutes of meetings of the Black Bear Task Force. I think that the Task Force has brought to the table the issues and solutions in a responsible and intelligent manner. I totally agree with most of the recommendations approved by the Task Force. A limited hunt would be an effect means of managing the Black Bear populations in Maryland. I also agree with the Task Force that fairchase methods should be used and that baiting, use of dogs, and spring hunting should be banned. It is important to use fair and sportsmanlike methods to continue and enhance the public perception of hunting and to maintain the integrity of all hunting programs within Maryland. Also a hunter limit on the annual per capita harvest of bear should be installed and closely regulated and monitored by the DNR. The money generated through special bear hunting permits or stamps would help generate revenue to be used towards responsible and effect future bear management, including but not limited to public damage compensation efforts. In the event special permits or stamps are not deemed an effect means of generating revenue perhaps a nominal increase in "across the board" hunting license fees would be in order. I also think that a regulated hunt should at first be a one year test pilot program and that after one year it should be reviewed to reevaluate the effectiveness of this management plan and either revised, discontinued or maintained as the findings of that reevaluation warrant. I further feel that public education and awareness are pertinent endeavors that should be undertaken, especially in areas with Black Bear populations and human-bear interaction histories. Furthermore it is vital that the DNR establish procedures to effectively deal with individual problem bears, such as relocation or termination guidelines. I do feel that a public attitude survey could be useful, but based on the geographical location, personal interest and knowledge of the issues of the people surveyed it may be weighted one way or another depending on the area and/or people surveyed and therefore may not be as accurate address the concerns of the growing Black Bear population and institute effective remedies such as this Task Force has recommended. -
R.A.
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 08:36 AM - Subject: Black Bear Task Force
I agree with the following task force draft recommendations:
- Maintain black bear populations at levels compatible with land use and property concerns;
- Use “Regulated Hunting” as a tool to achieve a targeted population objective;
- Aggressively teach residents and tourists what they can do to minimize conflicts with bears;
- Allow individuals to kill problem bears under certain circumstances;
- Conduct a public attitude survey to determine the perceptions and desires of people concerning bears and to enable the public to provide input on the bear management program;
- Discontinue the sale of Black Bear Conservation Stamps as a revenue-generating program for the bear damage compensation program;
- Develop an emergency plan to be implemented in the event of a black bear attack on a human;
- Provide 100-percent compensation for eligible bear damage claims via Maryland’s General Fund; and
- In the event that regulated hunting is not initiated, hunting license revenues should no longer be used as the primary funding source for bear management. - R. S. ,
Abingdon, MD
Date: Wednesday, November 13, 2002 01:06 AM - Subject: BBTF
Dear Black Bear Task Force, My name is Rebecca A. DeWitt (Becky). I was an avid hunter and fisherman as a teen-ager. I began hunting again to assist the hunting and fishing education of my two nephews, who have been hunting since they were able to walk - they are four and seven now. The seven-year-old has successfully passed hunter’s safety. The DeWitts are descendants of many hunters including Meshack Browning, I being one of Meshack Browning’s great-great-great-great granddaughters.
I am opposed to a black bear hunt. I have not seen the bears like we used to. For some reason there are not as many as there used to be on top of Backbone Mountain in the Kitzmiller area. I am glad we have people in Maryland who have produced the Black Bear Management Report and Recommendation and want to listen to public comment and input.
I am a beekeeper, and the bears have never damaged my bees. We had one incident where a first year bear was jumping our fence and eating the dead honeybee colonies that did not survive the winter. I had a face to face meeting with this bear, and we both ran opposite directions. He did not damage my beehives because I think he knew how to open them. He would push them over and the frames fell out cascading, so it was easy for him to pull the fames out. I had a hard time to get him to go away. He looked in the barn at the horse, and I yelled and threw a brick at him. He would came a dusk and in the morning. I had to stay home to monitor my bees; therefore, I was late delivering the Cumberland Times-News. I should have not told people on my paper route because then everyone was bear hunt happy. Eventually, the DNR suggested we call in the men who handle the “bear chasing program”. The bear was treed, and I imagine the dogs and men bit and beat him based on what it sounded like. I expended my electric fence to the part where he was jumping over. He never returned; however, I saw him later in the summer, and I was glad to see that he was all right and had gained weight to make the winter. I think if you keep calm you probably could wrestle a bear like Meshack Browning, or growl and make noises to scare the bear off.
We have seen evidence of one bear where I live, and the tracts of a sow and cubs. Bears usually eat bait piles of deer hunters - most hunters bait deer; therefore, they will attract other wildlife to their tree stands or where they hunt on the ground. Hunters can purchase special arrow tips and bullets that do not hurt bears who eat deer bait piles - throwing rocks or apples also works. Bears will also eat trash or other things if you leave them in the yard. Our problem with bears is our neighbors leaving deer carcasses near our property and home in the woods, which attracts the bears. I think farmers cry foul about crop damage caused by black bears. You would be surprised what other wildlife do to crops. If farmers are reimbursed, then they should prove the bear did the damage and to what extent. So far, Judge Lisa Thayer Welch (Garrett County) has not fined or put anybody in jail for protecting life and or property with out a doubt. Many times, our bears are killed out-of-state; the evidence is in the tagging and surveying the DNR does with black bears. It proves the wide range bears travel. The wildlife habitat is shrinking in Western Maryland; therefore, our wildlife will cross boundaries and the Potomac River; not to mention the trials of survival bears and other animals face and endure.
Even members of the local beekeepers association have used the bear hunt to look more important, when in fact no bear has ever touched their hives - I have to correct them. Bears are not the major threat to honey bees. People get out of raising the honey bees for other reasons, such as the difficult job and bee diseases. The DNR gave a lecture and slide show about bears for the local beekeeping association. The DNR learned about tourists and residents feeding bears and the baiting of deer. I got the impression that they didn’t know about deer baiting under a tree stands and how it attracts bears.
The bear hunt is a push from farmers and hunters. I often think about the past, and these people would not survive like they did in the old days. The other issue to address is that I think poaching is a problem - nothing new in Garrett County. Black bears are shot, and the meat is not eaten. I’ve talked to some people who said they would shoot a bear and give the meat away if there is a bear hunting season. I’ve heard tell of my Grandmother from Pennsylvania having a bear stew recipe in the mid 50s. I’m not sure if hunting is what it used to be.
I liked what Ronald Barry had to say in the report and recommendations. However, not all members issued a statement. I think the BBTF needs to address the problem with the media. The Cumberland Times-News needs to be put under scrutiny concerning their outdoors editor, and what I call the worst of reporting the “bear watch” column. I’m still waiting to see if they publish my letters to the editor and to the outdoor column.
Please keep black bears a non-game species for at least next three to five years. Maybe some education and training programs to counter act farmers, hunters, and the media. I handed out “living with black bears” brochure as part of a fire prevention program with safety & first aid years ago, and I did purchase the black bear stamps. It’s also up to the DNR to do their jobs and handle calls for wildlife.
Some hunters in my family disagree with my statement above. It’s usually a heated debate because my Dad and brother are better hunters than I am. It’s not uncommon for them to hold my record over my head. My dad said it’s not reasonable that Maryland tax dollars goes toward bear management, and they are killed out-of-state. My Dad is not interested in bear hunting. However, my brother would be interested in a bear hunt; he feels people like me cause trouble. I feel it would be likely that baiting would be involved in a bear hunting season, and that should be illegal
....
People need to know that there will someday be a bear hunting season. To determine when that time comes is what this letter is about. I remember enjoying hunting, and I enjoy wildlife watching. Helping to raise my nephews, and their hunting and fishing education is what I am concerned about. Please hold off on a bear season!
Sincerely, R. A. D., Kitzmiller, Maryland
Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 05:21 PM - Subject: bears in Maryland
Dear Maryland Black Bear Task Force: I can not believe that any right thinking people can feel justified in killing the very thing God gave man dominion over. What can you be thinking? We are to protect and care for God's gift, not destroy it. Have we become less than the animals? We are the animal that reason and is killing the best reasoning we can do? I believe God must be wondering where he went wrong. Shame on you for being so thoughtless that you could even consider a Black Bear Hunt in Maryland.
Sent: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 7:56 PM - Subject: (no subject)
Since there is no scientific justification for a bear hunt, I strongly oppose the idea. There are only a few hundred bears left. Effective
solutions already exist to control any problems such as removing food and trash, installing electric fencing, and aversive conditioning.
Please don't let hunters slaughter these beautiful animals. Killing
sentient beings for sport does not belong in a civilized society. - C. B. H.
Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan: comments
Dear Sir or Madam: I wish to comment on the proposed bear hunt. This letter is to urge against allowing the hunt of these animals.
Maryland's bear population is small. There are less than 350 bears in the state. The proposed hunt would not target problem bears, and
therefore there is no scientific rationale for the hunt. Furthermore, given such a small population of these animals, the hunt may jeopardize their survival. Please enforce existing non-lethal measures to reduce human bear interactions, and in worst cases use your existing authority to destroy problem bears only if all other measures fail.
Sincerely, E. B.
Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 02:21 PM - Subject: BBTF Comments
Dear DNR; Please register my comments re the BBTF draft:
- 99% of the time, "dealing with" and "experiencing" black bears is a uniquely western Maryland problem and experience. The folks in
Baltimore and Annapolis don't have to worry about the possibility of bear attack when they visit their local parks and wooded areas (imagine
how public bear sentiment would change if the Metro evening news reported a young Chevy Chase mother and her baby buggy harassed by a
bear while strolling in Rock Creek Park!). So please be more sensitive to the needs of those of us living in bear country, as opposed to those
who just need to feel good about "something" while knowing that the nearest bear is safely caged at the zoo.
- Relocate a few bears to Centennial Park in Columbia, MD. And then do the same in Potomac, and other populated Eastern/Central Maryland suburban locations. They've already got deer. Wait a few months, and then reassess public sentiment about black bears.
- Funding bear management via hunting licenses - only if there is an OPEN season.
- If the State intends to provide a limited harvest, lottery or other program that results in a limited number of harvests for a small number of participants - than that program should shoulder the full burden.
- I would also suggest, in the absence of an open season:
- Bear should no longer be classified as game, and
- That those who are so much in favor of no bear hunting should fund the poor beasts. Let it become a general taxpayer problem.
My compliments to the BBTF for issuing a well prepared report under less than ideal circumstances.
Best regards, S.S., Cumberland, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 12, 2002 10:06 PM - Subject: Black Bears in Md.
I am appalled that the State of Maryland is even considering a public hunt on such a majestic wild animal as the black bear. Doesn't Maryland accept America as the land of the free? Or does that only apply to humans?
There are going to be bear/human conflicts as long as human citizens wish to remain ignorant of the fact that America has a variety of wild animals and WE need to learn how to live with them. Maybe we need to take a different approach. Instead of killing everything that gets in our way of where we wish to live without considering the consequences of Mother Nature, maybe we ought to have humans (who wish to live in the countryside with the wilderness) sign a contract stating that they are aware of the many wild animals living on the land and agree to abide by certain commonsense strategies to prevent, in this case, the Black Bear, from intruding in our own little private space?
The comment about increase in bear population and the increase in human/bear conflicts, and the decrease in bear population decreases human/bear conflicts is a selfish, ignorant statement. If people do not want to live with the bears and other wild animals in Maryland, then they should move to the many cities available to them. There are only several hundred Black Bears in Maryland: Who is overpopulating?
- M. P. Conowingo, MD
Sent: 11/12/2002 4:56 PM - Subject: Black Bear Management Plan
I am not one to get that much involved when it comes to petitions but I am sorry. I must speak up in the bear's defense. These animals can not speak up for themselves and have the same rights we do to be in this area.
This is their land too. No rationale for a bear hunt. It will not solve any issues that people have with bears vs. humans. There are a limited amount of bears now and hunting them will make fewer bears. I do not want my children to grow up and only be able to read about bears in the books and not be able to see them on national geographic or some other nature channel.
They are beautiful animals that have been here for hundreds of years. Who says we have the right to go hunt them cause we can't fully understand them?? No one........ They have been on the brink of extinction for some years now and if we allow people to hunt them for spite for because we say we can't live together then we are the bad ones here, and we should be punished. You don't see humans hunting other humans because we can't get along do you?
Safest solution, LEAVE THEM ALONE AND THEY WILL LEAVE YOU ALONE. Just like what society does now with those who we can't get along with. There are people that annoy me but do I go around hunting them and saying we should get rid of them? NO, we accept them for who they are and leave them alone and let them go about doing what they do in their own manner. All these people want are trophy's on the wall for themselves. Sorry but I am not the only concerned citizen that feels that hunting will not solve anything, just make the matter worse for us and our future children and environment. Without bears the population of other pests animals will rise and thus our crops and fields will fall and then so shall we.
Who is really wrong here? We are!!! Thank you, J. S. Mount Airy, MD
Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 02:21 PM - Subject: blackbears
To Black Bear Management Plan:-- You have not made the case for a public bear hunt. Such a hunt will not solve "the bear problem." I do not see a "bear problem" and I do not see DNR establishing the methods and actions which would further keep bears from interacting with humans.
- S. C., Woodstock, MD
Date: Monday, November 11, 2002 08:51 AM - Subject: Against Bear Hunt
I am a resident of Garrett County and am writing this letter to express my opposition to the proposed bear hunt currently being considered. I
don’t believe our “bear problem” is the result of too many bears in our area but stems from other problems.
During the last few years there has been an explosion of growth in the Deep Creek Lake area. Acres of wooded areas are being destroyed so that developers can build condominiums, townhouses, and vacation homes. These areas are/were part of the bears’ habitat. Why is it that we infringe on their habitat and become outraged and want to destroy them when they
continue living here!
A bigger problem is the increase in the number of rental houses around the lake. Most of these “monster” homes have at least eight or nine bedrooms and appeal to multiple couples and families wishing to escape the urban life and commune with nature. These people go home and leave garbage piled around and on top of the garbage cans. Unfortunately, the renters leave on Saturday or Sunday and garbage pickup may not occur until later in the week. Bears are very intelligent and have learned to hunt for these free meals. Bears will continue to visit these garbage cans as long as food is there attracting them.
My family and I have the “pleasure” of having one of these investment properties built next door to us. I can’t tell you the number of times we are awakened to the sound of bears trying to get into the garbage cans. I don’t blame the bears, I blame the renters and the rental agencies who don’t tell the renters what they should do with their garbage. I believe the rental property owners and the rental agencies should be held responsible. Not the bears!
These bears are one of the wonderful things I love about living in the country. I enjoy seeing the deer and bears visit our yard. Yes, my family has learned to live with our bears and we have made adjustments in order to coexist peacefully with them. Our bird feeders are hung about 20 feet off the ground by a system of ropes and pulleys. Our dog is brought in at dark and we keep our garage door closed in the evenings. I believe this is a small price to pay in order to live with these beautiful creatures.
A bear hunt will not target specific “problem bears”. I believe the DNR already has a plan in place to trap and relocate such bears. Are we going to propose a hunt to eradicate all animals that conflict with humans? During my lifetime I have seen the bear population go from near extinction only 50 years ago to the small population we have today.
Please don’t pass a bill meant to protect us against the bears. We need protection against inconsiderate renters and greedy developers more! - Sincerely, L. S.
Date: Sunday, November 10, 2002 06:06 PM - Subject: Maryland's black bears
I moved to Maryland seven years ago, and I love living here. I have traveled extensively over the state, and found it to be varied and beautiful throughout. I've enjoyed the natural wildlife, the wonderful parks, the shoreline, the mountains -- all the amazing scenery. When I travel to other states and other countries and talk to the people there, it is a source of pride to me to be able to tell them where I live. Those I meet who have ever visited Maryland exclaim over my good fortune at living in such a beautiful place, and many express the wish to return. I would be ashamed to have to tell them that the lovely people of Maryland, or rather the state government, has decided it can no longer share this beautiful land with a few native black bears.
It is my understanding that there are only about 350 of these creatures living within Maryland, and that they were nearly extinct only half a century ago. Why should we risk depleting the population further? I can think of no good reason at all, and fear that future generations will hold us accountable for unconscionable actions that will affect their opportunity to enjoy what we now take so lightly.
I can't recall of reading any report of depredations by local bears -- how can this be a problem so severe that we must indiscriminately hunt them all? Shall we limit the hunt to a trophy few? If so, hunters will seek after the largest and most beautiful specimens, disregarding the weakest who seek their livelihood near man's domain. Bears naturally avoid man, so those who cross the line and the fence and the city limit to scavenge are likely ill or otherwise susceptible to the lure of garbage cans and crops. Measures already exist authorizing these creatures' removal, and if incorrigible, their destruction. So am I to understand that the healthy, natural bears who have successfully avoided human settlement and ceded their extensive territory to human need, are now to be hunted until they are all destroyed or driven away? Whose bragging rights about hunting ability supersede my bragging rights about my adopted state?
I grew up in the West, and visited Yellowstone National Park as a child more times than I can remember. The bear were plentiful then, moving into campsites and begging along the roadside. Human beings, as visitors to the Park, were foolish and effectually trained the bears to come looking for handouts. One time, I recall watching at our campsite as bears demolished a nearby campsite, whose temporary human inhabitants had cooked a huge breakfast including bacon and hot cocoa, and then left the dishes out, unwashed, while they went for a walk. Though but a youngster, it was absurdly obvious to me which species was responsible for this inevitable clash. It wasn't the bears!
Yellowstone Park is different now; bear sightings are rare and usually require high-powered binoculars. Wise management made rules for the foolish humans, relocated bears with a taste for bacon grease and Twinkies, and eliminated those few bears whose tastes for garbage were incurable. No one there proposed hunting bears indiscriminately, and as a result, both species can still enjoy that beautiful land. People are safe from bears in Yellowstone National Park now, and the bears are safe from humans.
Please, let us learn wisdom from those with wise solutions. Protect Maryland's bears and Maryland's people with sensible rules. I personally am more afraid of hunters than I am of bears. If I knew that it was open season on a very few shy bears in the beautiful Maryland countryside, I would either stay home or go someplace else more sensible to spend my tourist dollars. I would encourage others to avoid the hazards of being mistaken for bear, and head for downtown D.C. On the other hand, if I learn that bear have been sighted in one area of Maryland, I wouldn't change my travel plans to visit there-- I'd just use a little extra caution and common sense. I repeat, I'm more afraid of hunters eager for a trophy than I am of bears.
Lastly, has anyone come up with a good solution to replace the value that a few black bears in Maryland add to the ecological balance? What should I fear from sick, old, or diseased animals normally eliminated by a foraging bear? When the Maryland black bears are gone, I fear we will understand how much more has been lost.
- B. B., Bethesda, MD
Date: Sunday, November 10, 2002 03:36 PM - Subject: Black Bear Study
Dear sir/maam; My family has owned 20 acres adjoining New Germany State Park for 23
years, and we can attest to the rise in the bear population. I personally have
seen as many as 7 bears on a single day. Our dog has fought one ( and almost lost his life) , and our 3 young children are restricted to the yard . I
don't want to be taken wrong, for I do not want the bears eliminated, as they have a place in the wild. I feel that a limited hunt would assure a
controlled population, and additionally instill a greater fear of humans into the local bear populace that would go a long way towards limiting any
possible conflicts.
Also, I'm sure the rising bear population will have an adverse effect on those wishing to visit, camp, hike, and even deer hunt in the county.
Date: Sunday, November 10, 2002 12:21 PM - Subject: md black bears
Dear Black Bear Management Plan: This message serves as a plea to protect the Maryland black bear from the Task Force recommendation: I am writing to ask that the Maryland black bear not be hunted.
The Maryland black bear population is very small and their future existence precarious. Not long ago, they were near extinction. Just as important, the bears do not trouble area residents. If aversion conditioning does not work for specific bears, then those specific bears might be relocated - or targeted, if necessary. Just as any other life form, they are an important part of the Earth's delicate ecosystem, and humans need to learn to live with them.
Other pests, such as the deer and crows which over-populate the area, need to be controlled.
Leave the bears alone. Sincerely, C. G. S.
Date: Sunday, November 10, 2002 11:51 AM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
Gentlemen: I'm writing to express concern over the proposed bear hunt, not as an anti-hunting advocate--I have hunted deer and small game in the past and will undoubtedly do so in the future
--but as a member of one group that I fear has been portrayed inaccurately in your meetings as universally in favor of the hunt: Garrett County landowners.
While I have no strong predisposition as to whether there should or should not be a bear hunt, I am deeply concerned that the reasons being put forth by the pro-hunt faction are not logically connected in any way with the need for a hunt. I think we should have a hunt, for example, if studies by wildlife management professionals show that the bear population has moved beyond the sustainable level and is in danger of overpopulating its range (like the deer herd). A hunt may also be justified for purely recreational purposes, or for the economic stimulus that an additional hunting season may give to Western Maryland economies--again, though, only if the bear population would remain at a sustainable level after the hunt. I would have no trouble siding with the pro-hunt people if they could clearly and honestly argue these points.
But to recommend a general hunt because of isolated crop damage or sporadic encounters with "problem bears" is an exercise in faulty logic. It goes without saying that farmers should be compensated for bear damage and that individuals who feel that their families, crops, or livestock are truly threatened by individual bears should be allowed to shoot the animals in question without fear of being red-taped to death. But these issues--while they do indeed suggest a need for prompt and specific regulatory action--have nothing whatsoever to do with a general hunt, limited or otherwise.
The worst example of pro-hunt illogic I have run across, and the stimulus for writing this letter, was the column in this morning's Cumberland Times-News by outdoors editor Mike Sawyers. There should be a hunt, Sawyers writes, because he has SEEN bears when he's been out in the woods, and some of them were BIG. To my way of thinking, defining any creature as a threat because it occupies its natural habitat and grows to a size appropriate for its species is absurd. To argue that we should kill bears because they live in the woods and are not invisible is beyond ludicrous.
But these are the kinds of arguments that the pro-hunt people are advancing; I hope that you folks who ultimately decide this matter will see such arguments for the nonsense they are and reject them.
Sincerely, C. E.
Date: Saturday, November 09, 2002 08:06 AM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I, believe some folks have never seen what bears can do to people and crops.
Although I, feel for the bear and all wildlife when man is destroying their habitat!!
But, when there is an over population, then certain steps must be taken. However, hunting
these animals should be done by Qualified hunters, and not an open sport for idiots to shoot and injury
them, which will only anger the bear, and get them hurt or worse. I, have a man here interested in
hunting, bear. But is waiting your outcome. He's very Qualified. - Mrs.E.
Date: Saturday, November 09, 2002 12:51 AM - Subject: Comments on "bear hunt"
I strongly disagree with the Maryland Black Bear Task Force's draft recommendation that proposes a hunt to "manage" Maryland's black
bears. Such a bear hunt would surely not target specific bears who have come into contact with humans or have otherwise caused problems. Many bears would die needlessly and the population is so small that the species could become endangered. If people could be educated not to leave food or trash out that would attract bears, the problem would be greatly decreased. Can't the problem bears simply be relocated? As a last resort, if relocation doesn't work, then the euthanization of such a bear might be considered. Please do not allow a hunt on these magnificent animals.
- M. G., Frederick, Maryland
Date: Friday, November 08, 2002 12:51 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I have a home at 2821 Stockslager Rd. Oakland, Md. @ Deep Creek Lake. I have 6 douglas fir trees that I planted,(9' tall ) that the Bear has
destroyed by topping, ( swatting off the top 3-4'), or pushing over. The bear or bears have also ripped off the 6" plastic drain connected to my
down spout, ( looking for chipmunks), and chewed it thoroughly. The bear or bears have also destroyed two bird feeders, one hummingbird
and one free standing pole type. On Stockslager road there are several areas with garbage that has not been cleaned up across from
.... rental properties Can I get compensation for some of these items ? Can
Realtors be forced to clean up the trash because they don't have bear proof cans ? My neighbors are also experiencing some of the same
problems. - S. M., Oakland
Sent: Friday, November 08, 2002 9:48 AM - Subject: Bear management plan comments
I would like to respectfully submit my comments to the Maryland Black Bear Management Task Force. I oppose allowing bear huntiing. A hunt would not
target specific bears that are ill or are creating problems with human interaction, it would only serve hunters who wish to obtain trophies, which in
my view is selfish and serves only to support those who enjoy killing to feel powerful. A more effective and
responsible management plan would continue to educate the public about appropriate bear interactions, removing food and
trash, and using electric fences around areas that need protection. My understanding is that there are a relatively small number of bears in
Maryland, and at one time they were nearly extinct in our area. We make so many environmental concessions to support the additions of thousands and
thousands of people in Maryland, it's not asking much to make a few concessions to support a few hundred bears, which do much less environmental
damage and are a unique and rare part of our environment. Please do not allow
bear hunting. Thank you. - J. R., Rockville, MD
Sent: 11/7/2002 7:49 PM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear Task Force
I hope I am one of many Maryland citizens concerned about the DNR's plans for black bear
management and its plans for a public bear hunt.
There is NO NEED for this type of extreme recommendation since this would be biologically reckless. The Maryland bear population is only around
300-400 animals and even a limited hunt could jeopardize the survival of the population. May I
remind you that the black bear population was nearly extinct just 50 years ago.
Besides, the hunt would not target the "problem" bears producing the bear-human conflicts.
Many counties have begun effective solutions to help ease bear/human problems such as "bear-proof" trash
receptacles, electric fencing, aversive conditioning and the DNR has the authority to euthanize repeat offender
bears if aversive conditioning and relocation are ineffective.
A majority of people in Maryland want our black bears protected and the only people who would benefit are hunters eager for a new trophy for their
mantle.
Please reconsider the recommendation for an open bear hunt. These animals are a part of our heritage and should be revered by us; not killed off
because they are in our way as we encroach on their habitat.
Date: Thursday, November 07, 2002 01:36 PM - Subject: Black Bear Comments
I have several general comments about the BBTF along with several specific comments about the statements made by the individuals on the task force.
GENERAL COMMENTS
- There appears to be a heavy emphasis on managing by "public opinion". While the reasons for securing public opinion were stated and appear logical, the black bear is a biological resource. Accordingly, it should be predominantly managed in a such a manner, not based upon the opinions of the already acknowledged, uninformed, mostly un-involved public. Such public opinion also shouldn't be a "heat shield" to perpetuate bureaucratic maneuvering or inaction.
- I saw nowhere the mention of the possibility of bears contracting rabies or other diseases. With the incident rate of rabies as it is in raccoons and the like, what would happen if there were a rabid bear? Imagine that. Biologically speaking, there's not a whole lot of difference between a bear and a raccoon, other than size and the fact that one hibernates. Also, if one will recall several years back when
Lyme, Connecticut substantially eliminated deer hunting in the area. Not coincidentally, that's the place that Lyme disease is named for. Once they had that problem, they went the opposite direction and pursued elimination of all deer. That's what happens when you manage by public opinion and don't address fundamental issues, such as potential over-population and other biological issues.
- Hunters shouldn't be paying for these activities if they aren't managed as game animals, period. You hear a lot of opinions and lip service, but nothing to back it up. It's easy to spend someone else's money or shoot off one's mouth when they don't have any skin in the game. People need to put their money where their mouth is. Take a look at what has been done to restore wildlife, not just game animals, with sportsmen's dollars over the last 80 years. It's remarkable. That is a standard to recognize. Recognizing that this topic has always been "un-funded" by any means, let those who are willing to pony up the resources (i.e. money) make the call on how to best handle the resource.
OBSERVATIONS ON MEMBER STATEMENTS
Regarding Mr. Barry's statement:
- In item (1) Mr. Barry calculates that based upon some calculation that he has, it "suggests that the number of bears…may not be increasing as generally assumed". Baloney, anyone who has been outside knows there are a lot more bears than there were 10 years ago. I've owned timbered property adjoining state forest for 12 years now. When I first got the place, I might see one bear all hunting season. Now, I see one on nearly every outing. And, this isn't the same bear. Last year, on one day, I saw 7 different bear. How do I know? There were 5 in one group. One was a big sow, another 2 who were young of this year, and 2 who looked the size of last year's cubs. I also saw 2 big singles not far apart in time from each other. A statement such as this from Mr. Barry defies empirical evidence and is being made to serve his "agenda".
- In item 4 Mr. Barry makes the comment that "Western Maryland has a low density of black bears compared to other eastern states with a hunt or considering a hunt". He then refers to New Jersey. Why go all the way to New Jersey, which is several hundred miles away, instead of the neighboring counties in PA and WV, which is entirely more relevant? Once again, Mr. Barry is shopping for statistics to support his agenda.
- In item 6 Mr. Barry states that "property damage done by bears is inconsequential". If he believes this, he can write the checks to pay for it. He also should move right in the middle of the action where it is happening and out of his "lab coat".
Regarding Mr. Falter's statements:
- He is mostly boo-hooing about how the meetings were handled. For heavens sake, this is a citizens task force. What did he expect, Jack Welch running a GE board meeting? If he is such a credentialed leader, why didn't he step forward and influence, in what his opinion should have been, more professionally run deliberations. Accordingly, many of his comments lack any sort of credibility.
- Mr. Falter also alleges that "…a bear hunt will result in a reduction in safety. This problem was never discussed in depth." Come on! Hunting has statistically been proven to have less injuries than ping pong. You were in more danger going to the BBTF meetings. This is a sham just to create more noise and burden down the process.
- Mr. Falter also provides "General Thoughts" that are "random thoughts and ideas" and simply "food for thought"." Why did we waste everyone's time with this kind of noise?
- I will grant Mr. Falter this, based upon a number of the "buffoonery" comments made by some of the BBTF members, it is a wonder that anything at all came from these sessions.
Regarding Mr. Hadidian's statements:
- He equates "indiscriminate killing" of bears to a "general hunting season". What agenda are you working? How do you equate "indiscriminate killing" to a regulated hunting season? Do you know what goes into the game laws and how complicated they are? I don't see anything indiscriminate in there. If it is, we can fire better then half of DNR. You also lose credibility and objectivity when you state the HSUS' blanket position that it opposes all hunting of animals; as you state that this fact, "…constitutes the basis for our rejecting this recommendation…." Then why was time wasted at the meetings if they could have read your position of the web site, and further, by your own statement, the organization's philosophy formed the basis for your "vote"? That's like being on a jury and having your mind made up based upon the nature of the issue and ignoring the facts of the case. What's the difference?
Regarding Mr. Markarian's statements:
- In comment 2. he states that "…Comparing a state like PA that has 15,000 bears to a state like MD that has a few hundred bears is scientifically flawed at best and intentionally misleading at worst." I ask, who is being misleading here. The BBTF task force report reports that the bear density in Western Maryland is entirely consistent to neighboring states/counties who do have a hunting season. Their own report says that. What is "scientifically flawed, and at worst, intentionally misleading, is Mr. Markarian. No one is comparing the whole state of PA to the whole state of MD. To allege such, as this statement does, is what is misleading.
- In item 5, how do you compare hunting to "reducing crime by shooting into a crowded room…" What the heck are you talking about?
- In item 6 he states that hunting could actually make bear problems worse and that in states where bears are hunted, hunters tend to take large, adult male bears from the population, leaving the juvenile males more room to expand their range. This statement is totally illogical and almost humorous. For one, look at harvest rates from other states. How many of what size get harvested? How is this any different from any other big game animal that is harvested? In deer, the youngest bucks make up 80% or better of the harvest. Are you saying that with bear it is different or that the bigger ones are easier and more plentiful? Also, since you acknowledge that it is mostly males being harvested, what's would be wrong with a Spring season? And the really dumb statement is that if you harvest the adult males, that will leave juvenile males more room to expand their range. That's right, they're going to move into the more secure habitat the big ones came out of, not into the marginal fringe areas next to people! Duh on that one. Also, in item 6, you make the general statement "Hunting is not a solution to a problem, but a commitment to a permanent problem". What do you mean by that? Are you saying that hunting, and the people who hunt, are immoral or problem people? I personally take offense to that. If you want to take this "superior being" route, I'll put my personal and professional credentials, as well as net worth, up against yours any day.
- In item 7 you mention that hunting "...may likely lead to increased poaching of black bears…" There's no logic or basis for that statement. In fact, the opposite is more likely. Sportsmen are going to protect the resource more if it is classified as a huntable game population. Right now, the view of many people is - "what good are these things?" History proves you wrong in this remark.
- In item 11, you make a very intelligent observation. That is that what we are discussing today is a testament to the successful environmental and habitat conservation programs in Maryland. I couldn't agree more. The question is, who paid for and made all of this happen? The Fund for Animals is pretty far down that list. Guess what group stands out way on top? Then again, everyone knows that answer by now.
In general, about this whole citizen task force concept:
- DNR, you had your heart in the right place, but maybe you were trying to be a bit too political here. Just about anyone who saw this thing coming (with the participants background known) could have told you the outcome here. We wasted a year and some money to get what you basically have known all along. This effort is predominantly a heat-shield for some bureaucrat to stand behind. What we need is some leadership that's not worried about someone boo-hooing. Maybe under the new leadership soon to be running the State of Maryland we can get some people with some spine to step up. The prior administration fired anyone who did before. As always, I will steadfastly support the DNR as an organization, both intellectually, and with my wallet. Let's just do your job and quit worrying about the PC stuff.
Thanks for the opportunity to contribute in the dialogue. - B.M.
Date: Thursday, November 07, 2002 12:06 PM - Subject: Bears in Maryland
To the Maryland Black Bear Task Force, As a resident of Northern Garrett County who resides in the woods of Hemlock Acres, and
who is often visited by one or two members of our bear community, I would like to voice my
opinion on the "hunt to manage Maryland's bear population."
I would like to start by asking a question. Why did we feel it was necessary to repopulate
our county with black bear if the only solution we can come up with for management is
killing them? Why even bring them back? Did the powers that be forget to consider that
a bear will act like a bear no matter where it lives. Should we destroy such a creature
because it is conducting itself just as nature intended. I think not. MAN, the creature
with all knowledge, surely knew that any adjustments that had to be made that would
enable our two species to co exist, SHOULD be made by man himself.
Fifteen years ago when the first bears were sighted in Hemlock Acres it was a novelty
to see them. The few permanent residents here at that time would put out food and
grain just to have them visit their yards so pictures could be taken. Then we learned
that they would return for another handout and if they didn't get it would take down
bird feeders or tare into trash for their handouts. It didn't take long for us to realize that
we had bitten off more than we expected by our actions. We stopped feeding them.
We took in our bird feeders at night, we left no trash out where it could be broken into.
After that bear sightings were rather rare.
We still see a few in the early spring, waking up hungry and looking for a handout. However
when one is not forthcoming they don't stay long. Three springs ago we had as residents
a mother and three cubs. They stayed throughout the spring and summer and were sighted
off and on for quite a while. Then they moved on only to return the next spring. This time
it was mom and only two cubs. Everyone was saddened to think one of the cubs was lost
over the winter. It is such a thrill to see them walk through your yard or down to the pond to
drink. But the folks living here respect the danger attached to them. We watch in awe and
take pictures or videos when we could, but feed them or leave trash about, no we don't do that.
As a result they leave us alone. We live together with respect for each others space.
If we knew for certain that there are at the most 437 bear living in Garrett County loosing just
one would be a tragedy. When all we really have to do is LEAVE THEM ALONE. Clean up
out surroundings, put the trash away, bring in the bird feeders at night and be thankful that
we have the opportunity to see these beautiful creatures alive, in the wild. Most people will
never have that opportunity.
With so little effort on OUR part, we can peacefully co exist. Why is it then, that the best
solution the "Black Bear Task Force" can come up with is "kill the bears", instead of
educate the people. There will always be "problem bears" as there are always "problem"
something's. Let's deal with them as they present themselves and leave the rest alone.
I read in the "Republican" where two problem bears were shot this year by people who
couldn't get them to leave their property. How sad for the bears and the folks that had to
do the killing. But please let's make the destroying of Black Bears our last resort,
not our first. Respectfully Submitted, L. M., Grantsville, MD.
Date: Thursday, November 07, 2002 10:36 AM - Subject: Black Bear Mgmt Plan
I would like to express my opinion that authorizing a hunt of the black bear is NOT the solution to keeping the few bears that venture too
close people's homes away from those homes. We have seen bear near our home on Sandy Shores
Road at Deep Creek Lake. While this seems a little frightening, I feel confident that if we do what we can to keep those bear from coming too close,
they will leave us alone. They don't want any trouble with us. We do not leave trash out or food for other animals, such as birds. While walking
around, we try to not be too quiet so as not to surprise a bear. I truly feel these beautiful animals have every right to share the lands with us.
As you are aware, the bear population is not great and any hunt could jeopardize their future. This would be an awful tragedy. Please do not
authorize this hunt. Instead, help to better educate the public on co-existing with the bear. That would be the right thing to do.
Thank you for your consideration. - P.O.
Date: Wednesday, November 06, 2002 04:21 PM - Subject: Maryland's Black Bears
As a member of the Humane Society of the U.S. and as a contributor to the Black Bear fund I implore you to reconsider the value of hunting
Bear in Maryland. It serves no purpose whatsoever.
What will happen to the meat of the Bears killed?
Also, are bear hunters going to do what they do in Pennsylvania? Which is hang out at garbage dumps and shoot bears coming in for their evening or
morning snack. Or worse, bait them with food which goes against your departments advice against feeding them in the first place.
I am not anti-hunting, but bear hunting the way it is done by modern hunters is not sport!
- J. J., Hagerstown, MD
Date: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 11:36 PM - Subject: Bear hunting
Dear Friends, I write to protest the establishment of a bear hunting season in the state of Maryland. The total number of bears in the state does not seem to justify hunting, especially when they are so recently saved from extinction. Also, the probability that "problem bears" would be the ones killed is not high since those would seem to be the ones who stay closer to human habitation - just the place where hunters would not be allowed to hunt.
Surely there are better ways to control the situation and keep the bears in the woods and away from communities than going out in the woods to hunt indiscriminately.
I cannot attend the public hearing due to work commitments, but I hope you will consider these arguments before making a final decision.
Sincerely, The Rev. J. E. S.
Date: Tuesday, November 05, 2002 07:36 PM - Subject: Do not allow Bear Hunt
Hello: I am submitting this letter to express my disapproval of allowing black
bear hunt in Maryland as means to manage the state's bear population.
There is no rationale for bear hunt - this is not a way to resolve bear-human
conflicts and a hunt does not target any problem bears.
Hunt is biologically reckless and cruel. Even a limited hunt will jeopardize
the small population of bears we have.
There are other, better solutions - such as removing food and trash after
camping, as well as installing electric fencings.
Please do not allow the bears to become target of hunters. Sincerely,
S.U., Frederick, MD
Sent: Sunday, November 03, 2002 3:51 PM - Subject: Please stop plans to kill off state's small bear population!
I implore you to withdraw your ill-conceived plan to allow Maryland's bears to be indiscriminately destroyed in a state-sponsored hunt -- no matter how "limited" the hunt is intended to be. Maryland's small population of these magnificent creatures should be getting enthusiastic support and protection from the state agencies. I grew up in Martinsburg, WVA and my parents, sister, brother and I have spent nearly all of our vacations together in Maryland for nearly 40 years and we consider it be our second home. So we remember when bears were nearly extinct in Maryland and we'd be very sad to see that happen again. Though their extinction would be heartbreaking under any circumstances, it would be a particularly bitter pill to swallow if the state has a hand in their demise.
Most sincerely, S.C.
Sent: Saturday, November 02, 2002 5:32 AM -
You could get rid of your bear problem if you got rid of your people. Your people are the problem. If they want to live in bear territory they should clean up their act-instead of killing the bears. As long as you have problem people you will have problem bears. Sounds like you got a lot of blood thirsty hunters on your board to me. Thanks,
F. M.
Sent: Friday, November 01, 2002 8:50 PM - Subject: Maryland Black Bear Hunt
As a resident of Maryland I would like to inform you that I am adamantly opposed to a legalized hunt of black bears. This would not target the most problematic animals and would significantly jeopardize the current small bear population. There are ways to discourage bears such as eliminating food and trash and the judicious placement of fences. If there are particularly resistant animals, then these should be dealt with by members of the DNR. A legalized trophy hunt is an unacceptable solution.
Thank you for your consideration. - M.K., Ruxton, MD
This page was last up-dated on January 03, 2003
How To Submit Comments
Draft Black Bear Task Force Report and Recommendations
Maryland Black Bear Task Force