Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 05-04-2012, 02:27 PM
 
76 posts, read 174,447 times
Reputation: 24

Advertisements

In my neighborhood, there is one house where bear visits semi-regularly - the one with a birdfeeder which is easily accessible. Bears venture into residential areas since they know food is readily available in the form of unsecured garbage cans and birdfeeders. The extra nutrition allows females to have larger litters and increases the bear population.

One only needs to drive around neighborhoods surrounding bear habitat on garbage pick up day to see why bears are venturing into these areas. Overflowing open or flimsy covered garbage cans are the norm and are huge bear attractants. This food source offers many more calories than natural foods for bears. Honestly, I was shocked when I first moved to this area as one of my first purchases were two certified bear proof garbage cans. Simply requiring these bear proof garbage containers and enforcing this rule would alleviate almost all bear incidents.

Individual problem bears are usually the issue and are less likely to be hunted since they are close to residences where hunting is prohibited. These bears can be "rehabiliated" through aversive conditioning with Krelian Bear dogs and rubber bullets and if this fails by lethal removal.

Also, it seems counterproductive to have bear and coyote hunts when deer are so overpopulated and lyme disease is at epidemic levels. Nearly everyone on my block has had lyme disease at some point in time. Why we would hunt the animals that may reduce deer and white footed mice (animals which spread the lyme disease carrying deer tick) is beyond me.

Finally, IMHO hunting black bears is morally wrong since healthy adult black bears have no natural predators. Hunting nearly 20% of the population disrupts the social and age structure and generally results in more younger and adolescent bears who tend to get in trouble.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-04-2012, 02:34 PM
 
2,535 posts, read 6,676,219 times
Reputation: 1603
Quote:
Originally Posted by chennai01 View Post

Finally, IMHO hunting black bears is morally wrong since healthy adult black bears have no natural predators. Hunting nearly 20% of the population disrupts the social and age structure and generally results in more younger and adolescent bears who tend to get in trouble.
This is exactly why they need to be hunted. Population control. Personally I would like the population of any animal that has the ability to very easily kill a human to be as low as possible.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2012, 02:44 PM
 
76 posts, read 174,447 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by tdstyles View Post
This is exactly why they need to be hunted. Population control. Personally I would like the population of any animal that has the ability to very easily kill a human to be as low as possible.
That's not the point. Killing more bears without addressing the garbage issue doesn't solve the problem. Bears will simply flock to areas with people since this is where the most calorie rich food is. Mandating and enforcing bear proof containers rules would solve the issue and addressing (aversive conditioning or lethal removal) individual problem bears is the issue.

Yellowstone National Park had tons of problems with grizzly and black bears decades ago due to open garbage dumps and containers. The summer human population was quite large and many incidents occurred. Since instituting severe control over garbage, bear problems were nearly eradicated (except for the rare grizzly attack - grizzly bears are far more dangeorus than black bears).

The liklihood of a black bear killing someone is tiny. You are far more likely to be killed by crashing into a deer or being crippled by lyme disease (both risks increased by removing deer and mice predators).
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-04-2012, 05:21 PM
 
323 posts, read 576,314 times
Reputation: 333
many here have no idea that without hunters and fisherman ,many of our species that we enjoy looking at ,are due to hunters and fisherman

thier license fees go to protecting land that will never be developed ,which in turn supports ecosystems for many wild animals that are now thriving becouase of hunters and fisherman

the next time you take a walk on a hiking trail ,its probably die to hunters and fisherman ,without thier fees there would be 2 choices

1)greater loss of land ,which in turn means less habitat for animals
2) raise your taxes to protect the land that supports these animals

trust this if the 2nd was chosen ,many would complain about that too and eventually the politicians would rob this fund and you would still continue to pay a tax for something most would not be able to enjoy

against land incroachment by people?

take a good look at your surroundings ,once it was wooded and a thriving ecosystem for many animals

human encroachment will never be stopped ,unless ofcourse its too dangerous to humans

wildlife is a resource that man has exploited since time began ,only difference now is we have laws and fees that harvest wildlife in a controlled manner brought upon bu hunters and fisherman alike to protect the very resource they harvest,this benefits everyone including animals

hunting and fishing is a conservation tool that should and must continue,that is the natural process
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2012, 08:06 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,597 posts, read 17,279,425 times
Reputation: 17643
"....morally wrong since healthy adult black bears have no natural predators. "

Where to begin????

First off we are the bears natural enemies, if that makes a difference to you.

We are part of nature, not just passive observers.

There is no such word as un-natural as we all are one and living according to the requirements set by the periodicity of planetary alignment which creates the conditions of gravity, atmosthere, temperature and light which all living thing must meet in order to live.

Black bears are the most researched animals next to deer and fruit flies.

As for stepping aside and waiting for the bears to control the deer populatuion, indicates the rest of your information is of dubious value to any real discussion as is the thought that random garbage raids and isolated bird feeders somehow cause bears to produce more survivable cubs is a real stretch of the concept of 'carrying capacity'.

Suggest some scientific reading vs the activist propaganda as well as revisiting the moral aspects of your position, as if you eat any meat you are guilty of the moral degredation which you acccuse hunters of as well as promoting class warfare among non human species. Just like us hunters you make decisions on who get to live and who gets to die. how does it feel to participate in blood sports? Tell the turkey you had last thanksgiving that you don't abide by killing defenseless animals.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2012, 08:31 AM
 
Location: NJ
23,597 posts, read 17,279,425 times
Reputation: 17643
Taxpayer money spent of bear edu.....but bears can't read




A majestic black bear roaming the wilds of north Jersey taken June 1st 2011. controlling their population will ensure they don't exceed carrying capacity and will reduce the statistical chance of a fatal situation which would then call for the extermination of all bears in NJ.....with the refrain...'if just one human life could be saved"

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2012, 12:20 PM
 
2,535 posts, read 6,676,219 times
Reputation: 1603
It would certainly make a majestic rug! I want one!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2012, 02:26 PM
 
76 posts, read 174,447 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
"....morally wrong since healthy adult black bears have no natural predators. "

Where to begin????

First off we are the bears natural enemies, if that makes a difference to you.

We are part of nature, not just passive observers.

There is no such word as un-natural as we all are one and living according to the requirements set by the periodicity of planetary alignment which creates the conditions of gravity, atmosthere, temperature and light which all living thing must meet in order to live.

Black bears are the most researched animals next to deer and fruit flies.

As for stepping aside and waiting for the bears to control the deer populatuion, indicates the rest of your information is of dubious value to any real discussion as is the thought that random garbage raids and isolated bird feeders somehow cause bears to produce more survivable cubs is a real stretch of the concept of 'carrying capacity'.

Suggest some scientific reading vs the activist propaganda as well as revisiting the moral aspects of your position, as if you eat any meat you are guilty of the moral degredation which you acccuse hunters of as well as promoting class warfare among non human species. Just like us hunters you make decisions on who get to live and who gets to die. how does it feel to participate in blood sports? Tell the turkey you had last thanksgiving that you don't abide by killing defenseless animals.
First off, I am not an animal rights activist or anti-hunting. I want to see healthy and balanced ecosystems and hunting can be part of that. In fact, I'd like to see more deer hunting and a greater focus on females to reduce the population size to a more sustainable level.

Hunting of predators is not compatible with this vision. People long left being just another variable in the system. Our technology gives us the ability to destroy the system if our behavior and actions are not regulated.

The question to ask is when people were just another variable in a balanced natural environment, what was their relationship to predators? When people lived in hunting and gathering bands, predators would rarely be killed. To expend valuable energy searching for predators, which are much less numerous than ungulates, would have been a quick road to the extinction of Homo sapiens. Therefore, adult healthy bears were never commonly preyed on by humans (or any animal) when our hunting was "natural" and are not evolved to sustain such "harvests" (they may not go extinct, but their age structure and social system will be vastly changed).

Frankly, I don't consider leaving jelly doughnuts out for bears and sitting in a tree stand "natural" nor do I think it is sporting.

Growing evidence exists highlighting negative impacts of hunting predators. The following extracts are from an biologist/ecologist and former hunting guide clearly illustrate the practical problems with predator hunting, which include creating social chaos and more problem animals as well as removing the wrong animals:

Underlying all these assertions is the assumption that hunting will reduce human conflicts. One might presume that given the strong support for hunting that there is a lot of scientific evidence to buttress the contentions that hunting reduces livestock losses, increases prey abundance, and reduces predator attacks on humans. Unfortunately there has been little research to date that tests these assumptions, and is a growing body of evidence suggests that indiscriminate predator control, whether due to sport hunting or by predator control agencies like Wildlife Services, has the opposite effect and actually increases conflicts between humans and predators.


A self fulfilling feedback mechanism results whereby state wildlife agencies institute hunting of predators, creating more social chaos, which in turn leads to greater human conflicts, and more demands for even greater predator control.

For instance, Adrian Treves writing in a review of hunting effects on large predators in the Journal of Applied Ecology concluded “the direct impact of hunting on conflicts with carnivores over game and property damage is unclear and even doubtful given the inability or unwillingness of hunters to remove specific individuals selectively.” In other words, hunting if it works at all is a very blunt and ineffective “tool” for alleviating real and/or perceived conflicts between predators and humans.

Another study which looked at hunting of bears in five states and one Canadian province found that as bear deaths rose as a consequence of more liberal hunting regulations, so did conflicts with humans. As a comparison, the authors also reviewed bear-human conflicts in unhunted bear populations where education and changes in human behavior were implemented such as use of bear proof garbage cans, and found that even as bear numbers increased, human conflicts decreased significantly. They concluded that bear hunting was an ineffective means of reducing conflicts.

Perhaps the best control we have on the effects of hunting on predator-human conflicts is California. In 1991 California voters passed an initiative that outlawed hunting of cougars. Today California has more cougars (about 6000) than any other western state, yet has the lowest per capita rate of cougar attacks in the West. In other words, in states where cougars are hunted so they presumably “fear man” there are far more cougar attacks on people than in California—even though California has more people, and more cougars than any other state—thus should, statistically speaking, have much higher per capita cougar attacks.
California also has one of the lowest livestock losses in the West attributed to cougars as well suggesting that hunting is ineffective at reducing conflicts with ranchers—in fact the evidence suggests that hunting actually increases livestock losses in many instances.


In the latest year for statistics (2009) California Fish and Game removed (i.e. killed) only 42 cougars in the entire state. This is very conservative compared to the hundreds killed annually in other western states that permit hunting yet have far lower cougar populations. For instance, Oregon hunters killed 247 cougars in 2009 and this number does not include the cougars also killed by Wildlife Services for livestock depredation and/or human safety. Yet Oregon with a human population 1/10 the size of California reports far more human/cougar conflicts than California.
Another recent study of cougars in Washington found a similar relationship. As cougar hunting was intensified by the state wildlife agency, and researchers were able to document that the cougar population was actually in severe decline, yet complains and conflicts between humans and cougars actually increased.
What’s going on here?

The answer is that large predators like cougar, bears, and wolves are social animals. And indiscriminate hunting disrupts predator social relationships creating social chaos. Just as humans living in a war zone resort to desperate means to survive including stealing, robbing, illegal trade, prostitution, and what have you, predators respond to social disruption in ways that results in more human conflicts. One explanation is that hunting skews populations towards younger animals. Younger animals are less skillful hunters, and more likely to travel greater distances either in hunting and/or looking for a territory to occupy, thus putting them in potential conflict with humans.

AND

Furthermore, when state wildlife agencies increase hunting effort of predators by adopting more liberal seasons and take of animals in an effort to reduce human/predator conflicts, they ignore the geography of hunter effort. Hunters generally do not target the very animals of most concern—i.e. those animals habituated to life near human communities and/or preying on livestock located on private lands. There is a logical reason for this. Hunters tend to hunt the larger blocks of public lands, not the fringes of towns where one may find habituated predators as well as the private lands where livestock killers are likely to roam.


http://www.newwest.net/topic/article/hunting_and_predators_does_it_work/C564/L564/

On the garbage issue, half eaten frozen dinners, pizzas, etc. offer far more calories than skunk cabbage, berries, and other natural foods. The use of bear proof containers are nonexistant in most areas I seen with good sized bear populations. As a result, there is no surprise that bears dependent on sufficient fat stores to survive winter semi-hibernation will venture into neighborhoods for easy and calorie rich human refuse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-05-2012, 02:45 PM
 
76 posts, read 174,447 times
Reputation: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by hikinman63 View Post
many here have no idea that without hunters and fisherman ,many of our species that we enjoy looking at ,are due to hunters and fisherman

thier license fees go to protecting land that will never be developed ,which in turn supports ecosystems for many wild animals that are now thriving becouase of hunters and fisherman

the next time you take a walk on a hiking trail ,its probably die to hunters and fisherman ,without thier fees there would be 2 choices

1)greater loss of land ,which in turn means less habitat for animals
2) raise your taxes to protect the land that supports these animals

trust this if the 2nd was chosen ,many would complain about that too and eventually the politicians would rob this fund and you would still continue to pay a tax for something most would not be able to enjoy

against land incroachment by people?

take a good look at your surroundings ,once it was wooded and a thriving ecosystem for many animals

human encroachment will never be stopped ,unless ofcourse its too dangerous to humans

wildlife is a resource that man has exploited since time began ,only difference now is we have laws and fees that harvest wildlife in a controlled manner brought upon bu hunters and fisherman alike to protect the very resource they harvest,this benefits everyone including animals

hunting and fishing is a conservation tool that should and must continue,that is the natural process
This is a silly argument. All the fees and taxes you talk about are simply earmarked for these uses. These fees could just as easily be earmarked for welfare or state pensions and the sales or income tax (mostly coming from non-hunters) could be earmarked for these conservation uses. The point is the earmarking doesn't matter as it all goes into all government coffers to be allocated in a certain way.

In reality, it is a bad thing since the Division of Wildlife is funded by these fees (which could just as easily be funded with other government funds) and provides incentives to favor hunting over other uses of habitat.

Bottom line is non-hunters provide vastly more sources of government revenue than hunters.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-07-2012, 03:48 AM
 
Location: melbourne australia
32 posts, read 62,979 times
Reputation: 34
Default mate do you know how many kangaroos and boars they kill over hear???

hundreds and thousands of kangaroos and boars are shot for there meet and if its not the aussies who shoot them its the native aboriginals who spear them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top