Canadian Study Suggests Bear Hunting Benefits Cubs

[Smilingg]

This won't come as a lightning bolt to most of us, but it is new information:  http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20060726.wbearz0726/BNStory/Science/home

[Ray Lyon]

Thanks for the link. That's an interesting finding.

[Brian Krebs]

its an interesting read. I am cautious at this point; as the scientist was with defenders of wildlife at one point.

 Bears are hard to study. Here in Idaho our bear biologist John Beecham did some studies that did little but to point out that no matter how much trapping ( bear in a can type) you do- there can be really a lot more bears than are trapped in an area.

 So- where to study a bear population ? It has to be a known population; and the links study was a comparison of an overpopulated non hunted area compared to a hunted area. I would prefer all things being equal at the start of the study. It was not.

 What should be done is the removal of excess bears in the area that was over populated ( a perfect job for bowhunters and we can prove it with the camp Riley study).
 
 Then if things can be made equal another study would suggest a more accurate finding.

 Thing is; the study makes sense in that we agree with it; but .. the scientist insists that bear managment should be left to the scientists. Now that does make sense on the surface- but only works if the scientist does not have an agenda.

 With our ( Idaho ) bear biologist- he 'proved conclusively' that 'black bears do not kill deer fawn and elk calves'. His opinion on bear baiting was used to close down the Ontario Canada spring hunt.

 And trust me it was not science he put on the table: but pure opinion.

 I do believe that wildlife should be managed; and that game departments should have the capacity to make logical unbiased opinions and decisions about game management.

 I have seen though how this can backfire with a bad biologist.

 I just smell a skunk here......