More Than 50 Black Bears Killed in N.J.

[Thom Little]

As opponents turned out to denounce them, hunters killed more than 50 bears Monday at the start of a state-authorized hunt aimed at thinning New Jersey's burgeoning bear population.

The hunt, restricted to the state's northwestern corner and open to about 4,400 hunters with permits, got under way in freezing weather after legal challenges by animal rights groups failed.

.......

About a dozen hunt opponents gathered at a weigh station at Wawayanda State Park, confronting hunters and forming "bear rescue teams" with plans to tend to wounded bears and follow hunters in what they said was a mission of mercy. Many protesters wore bright orange shirts, the same color required of hunters.

"Today, for us, is a very sad day," said Lynda Smith, president of Bear Education and Resource Group, one of two groups that unsuccessfully sued to delay the hunt. "They're here to kill them, we're here to help them."


http://www.ajc.com/news/content/shared-gen/ap/National/Bear_Hunt.html

[DS1]

1. Sport Hunters. Can't live with em', can't skin 'em and eat 'em

[flvegan]

50. What exactly is a "sport hunter" anyway?

Hi.

[wordpix]

51. one who kills animals for sport because it's "fun" and makes his dick seem

bigger

[The Stranger]

70. Oh you can't?

[HillDem]

2. Stephen Colbert would be proud

[jilln]

11. I saw that last night

and was appalled.

[TX-RAT]

3. we're here to help them."

What did they think they could do?

(with plans to tend to wounded bears) Yea right, what a rodeo that would be.

(follow hunters in what they said was a mission of mercy.) Harassing legal hunters is an arrest-able offence.

[seriousstan]

6. Give them a big bear hug.

[jilln]

12. Some people are willing to get arrested

to save a life. Other are just willing to kill. I know which side I'd rather be on.

[TX-RAT]

23. Your choice.

[imported_dem]

25. While sitting in jail

exactly how would you be saving a life ?

[jilln]

39. brilliant question!!!

not

[Squatch]

56. As opposed to your brilliantly 1980's response?

[imported_dem]

4. The protesters better be careful

There are laws in New Jersey prohibiting hunter harassment.

[Squatch]

20. Yep...it sure is...

23-7A-2. Hindering or preventing the lawful taking of wildlife prohibited; specific acts prohibited
No person may, for the purpose of hindering or preventing the lawful taking of wildlife:

a. block, obstruct, or impede, or attempt to block, obstruct, or impede, a person lawfully taking wildlife;
b. erect a barrier with the intent to deny ingress to or egress from areas where wildlife may be lawfully taken;

c. make, or attempt to make, unauthorized physical contact with a person lawfully taking wildlife;

d. engage in, or attempt to engage in, theft, vandalism, or destruction of personal or real property;

e. disturb or alter, or attempt to disturb or alter, the condition or authorized placement of personal or real property intended for use in the lawful taking of wildlife;

f. enter or remain upon public lands or waters, or upon private lands or waters without permission of the owner thereof or an agent of that landowner, where wildlife may be lawfully taken;

g. make or attempt to make loud noises or gestures, set out or attempt to set out animal baits, scents, or lures or human scent, use any other natural or artificial visual, aural, olfactory, or physical stimuli, or engage in or attempt to engage in any other similar action or activity, in order to disturb, alarm, drive, attract, or affect the behavior of wildlife or disturb, alarm, disrupt, or annoy a person lawfully taking wildlife; or

h. interject himself into the line of fire of a person lawfully taking wildlife.

[LeftyMom]

33. Some people choose to do what's right in defiance of the law

I applaud thier efforts.

[SOS]

37. You are hearby charged

with an "attempt to make loud gestures".
It's hard to believe that something this stupid is an actual law.

[Name removed]

49. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[saigon68]

148. Adios

[stepnw1f]

123. I Hope Thousands Stampede the Hunters

How about them Apples...

[WI_DEM]

5. I'm surprised a small and so populated state as NJ has that many

I guess there reasoning was they were getting too close to populated areas? Wish they could have figured a way of not killing them but putting them to sleep and moving them elsewhere.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

7. That part of NJ is fairly rural.

Plus, it's close to the mountains.

[brentspeak]

8. All the construction going on here

is pushing forest animals further and further from their habitat and into suburban backyards. It's not unusual to see deer skipping across the Garden State Parkway or the Turnpike.

[BJW]

30. The Statistics are Suspicious

First off, BEARS ARE NOT HERD ANIMALS. HERD animals do, in fact, reproduce at higher rates than non-herd animals, which reproduction does mean starvation and die-off for some of the herd, particularly elderly, sick or very young herd members.

Here's some facts about black bear reproduction rates, lifespans, nutritional requirements, behaviors, etc. Reproduction rates are very low, are not annual, AND importantly, bears REDUCE their reproduction rates dependent upon available turf and food.

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Ursus_americanus.html

I am disturbed by the disingenous statistics used by NJ to support the hunt, as well as the specious "thin the herd or they'll starve" idiocy being applied to these NON-HERD animals.

The article quotes NJ officials as giving a population range for black bears of 1600-3200, a 50 PERCENT range, meaning that it could also be as low as 800 bears (more likely) or as high as 4800 bears (extremely unlikely).

Now, given that the article stated that approx. 100 bears were in the area in 1970, when the last formal hunt occurred (keep in mind that informal/illegal hunting occurs regularly anyway)

AND taking into account scientific facts about bear reproduction, longevity and habitat needs--it is EXTREMELY likely that the stated population range of black bears used to justify the hunt (1600-3200) is EXAGGERATED.

It's simple. DO THE MATH.

[lynne]

9. It's unfortunate but necessary -

- otherwise the bears suffer the effects of overpopulation with reduced food to get them through the winter, reduced habitat and becoming a hazard to humans because they are both hungry and lacking space.

Instead of fighting the hunt in court, the bears would be better served if the Education and Resource Group came up with and funded a method of birth control to prevent the bears from reproducing or took it upon themselves to fund the removal of the bears from the area.

Until then, thinning the herd via legal kills is the only option.

[jilln]

10. spoken like a true hunter

Nature is helpless without our lethal "solutions"!!!

[lynne]

19. I'm willing to entertain any other solution -

- that you'd like to offer.

What plan would you put forth to solve the problem that is both realistic and feasible?

[TX-RAT]

24. Prepare for the sound of crickets.

[A Simple Game]

26. Yep, that what I thought too.

I doubt if the poster has even been close to anything other than a teddy bear.

If anyone were to come face to face with a 400 lb. bear on their back porch, or anywhere at night, they might have a different opinion.

I don't hunt. It's not the bears fault and I sympathize with the bears, but some times harsh solutions are necessary. If you can't move the bears far enough they just come back. Not sure but I can imagine that birth control is expensive and time consuming. Hunting is far better than bear-human conflicts and or starvation.

On edit: just fixing stupidity

[MadisonProgressive]

109. Birth control? Putting a condom on a bear would be very dangerous!

[TX-RAT]

114. lol, can't wait to hear that story.

2 guys, a case of beer, a bear and a condom. Hell of a joke in there.

[MadisonProgressive]

117. Somehow I think it would be a bit messy

[jilln]

40. I was working

Some of us do that in between visits here.

[BJW]

31. Read the article first

animal activists are proposing that non-lethal methods of discouraging bears from entering "human" areas be used first. But, this would require some people to change a few bad habits...

[lynne]

34. I did read the article. Are you speaking of the fireworks -

- used to frighten the bears from populated areas? How does that reduce the overpopulation or solve the problem of them having too little to eat to survive the winter and raise young? And, they WILL raise young no matter how hungry they are.

At their current numbers the bears are destined to die of starvation and related disease unless they are thinned. Frightening the bears will only move them to another place and does nothing to address the cause of the problem.

[LostinVA]

45. Quit laying off Park Rangers and let them cull them

That's what should be done with deer, too. That way, mainly old and sick deer can be humanely shot, and the Rangers and wildlife people can determine the best course of action. Not a bunch of NJ rednecks who run around the woods half-assed drunk wounding game and bot following the blood trail to kill it. That's my family in NJ, and all of their friends. I'm absolutely sure there are responsible hunters, but there are also alot of idiots. Let professionals take care of this.

[lynne]

53. Ironically, my husband is a Park Ranger -

He knows his weapons but has never hunted a day in his life. He's more the fisherman variety.

In reading about the NJ hunt, I found that PA and NY have been doing this annually for quite a few years due to the high population of bears. Almost 3,900 bears have been taken this year in PA alone.

Since the NJ hunt was a special state approved limited event, I would think that it would be fairly well supervised. The article indicated that they planned to have the NJ hunt more frequently to keep the population down.

[jilln]

66. birth control

http://www.nj.com/printer/printer.ssf?/base/news-1/1132121443271670.xml&coll=1

Of course this wouldn't satisfy the bloodthirsty, but obviously it's an option. It is also used for deer in some areas. Do you really believe that we can send people to the moon and cure some diseases, yet we can't find a nonviolent way to control wild animal populations?

Most people don't know that the people charged with "protecting" wildlife by government are partially funded by selling hunting licenses... an obvious conflict of interest.

[Squatch]

67. Birth control is temporary and terribly expensive

Link

[jilln]

110. Yes, killing is cheaper

Still doesn't make it right.

[yellowcanine]

73. Birth control is not "obviously" an option. It is only obvious if you

don't know much biology. If you can name ONE example of where a wild animal population has been successfully controlled with birth control I would like to hear it.

[jilln]

111. Like I said, it's not gonna appease the bloodthirsty.

Only blood can do that, no matter how mean, backwards and unnecessary.

[yellowcanine]

144. That's a cheap shot. If it doesn't work it doesn't work. Has nothing to

do with blood lust. I am NOT a hunter. Some of us believe in using the scientific method to solve problems, not cheap emotional rhetoric and name calling.

[yellowcanine]

72. What is "natural" about having so many bears they are eating out of

garbage cans? You don't have to be a hunter and I am not but I do know a little biology, thank you. The fact is that bear and other wildlife populations will grow beyond carrying capacity without predation. Yes, that is nature's way and it is lethal. We, like it or not are the only predators for bears, being as I haven't heard of many wolves in NJ lately. There are probably a few coyotes but coyotes, unlike wolves, generally aren't a pack animal, and a mature bear will knock a coyote silly if the coyote is so foolish as to attack it. So man being the ony practical predator - we can either have organized hunts or we can kill them on the highways with semis, SUVs and Honda Civics. Your choice.

[losdiablosgato]

83. Death happens in nature, there have to be preditors

In this case it is man. I only regret is I am not there to jion the hunt. I have already filled my freezer with deer and hog this year. I start sausage making this weekend.

[shrike]

141. Nature has plenty of lethal solutions to overpopulation

They're called starvation, dehydration and predation.

[BJW]

29. Bears are NOT herd animals

BEARS ARE NOT HERD ANIMALS. HERD animals do, in fact, reproduce at higher rates than non-herd animals, which reproduction does mean starvation and die-off for some of the herd, particularly elderly, sick or very young herd members.

Here's some ACTUAL facts about black bear reproduction rates, lifespans, nutritional requirements, behaviors, etc. Reproduction rates are very low, are not annual, AND importantly, bears REDUCE their reproduction rates dependent upon available turf and food.

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Ursus_americanus.html

I am distured by the disingenous statistics used by NJ to support the hunt, as well as the specious "thin the herd or they'll starve" idiocy being applied to these NON-HERD animals.

The article quotes NJ officials as giving a population range for black bears of 1600-3200, a 50 PERCENT range, meaning that it could also be as low as 800 bears (more likely) or as high as 4800 bears (extremely unlikely).

Now, given that the article stated that approx. 100 bears were in the area in 1970, when the last formal hunt occurred (keep in mind that informal/illegal hunting occurs regularly anyway)

AND taking into account scientific facts about bear reproduction, longevity and habitat needs--it is EXTREMELY likely that the stated population range of black bears used to justify the hunt (1600-3200) is EXAGGERATED.

It's simple. DO THE MATH.

[lynne]

35. I am aware that bears are not herd animals -

- as I was raised in the mountains and I know from personal experience what a bear will do when it is hungry. I've watched them walk through town in the middle of the day to rummage in trash cans and check out peoples parked cars looking for food. A hungry or ill bear is a time-bomb and nothing in its path is safe. Dogs, cats, kids included.

All it takes is a nasty hot spell, a drought, or a particularly harsh winter to throw off the seasons supply of food for a bear. Then their increased numbers are compounded by less-than-average food supply and the bear parade begins.

[BJW]

36. and then reduced reproduction rates commence

[yellowcanine]

74. Carrying capacity is finite regardless of whether or not an animal is

a "herd" animal. It is interesting that you seem to claim more knowledge of wildlife biology than trained wildlife managers (whose salaries are paid by taxpayer money not hunting licenses - so there is NOT a conflict of interest). Your population guesses are just that - guesses - not based on any real understanding of bear biology. The wildlife managers are also obviously "guessing" to a certain extent as well - but at they presumably understand bear biology and have some population surveys to support their "guesses." In 1970 there were NO bears in Lebanon County, Pennsylvania where I grew up. Now they shoot 10 - 15 bears a year there in a three day season. Do you have any idea how many bears there must be for that many to get killed in a three day period? I certainly don't but think about it. As you said, bears are solitary animals. That means they are more difficult to find for a hunter than deer. So we can safely assume that bears have to be fairly plentiful for a hunter to find one to shoot in dense woodland where one could pass within a dozen yards of a bear and not know he was there.

[theHandpuppet]

76. "Carrying capacity is finite regardless of whether or not an animal is...

...a herd animal".

Too bad humans don't think this applies to them as well.

[yellowcanine]

77. Actually humans act like a herd animal at times. Think football

game after the game is over.

[theHandpuppet]

88. I was thinking more of the carrying capacity

Humans are the ones who need to stop breeding.

[mike_c]

43. is there any data to suggest that NJ bear populations are actually...

...starving or at risk of genuine overpopulation? For large, mobile omnivores like bears, this is largely an urban myth. More often the real problem is human encroachment on wildlife habitat so that, as one poster remarked below, bears end up on back porches. This is NOT a bear population management issue, no matter how fervently the state fish and game folks try to dress it up as one-- it's a HUMAN population management issue.

I don't know what population thresholds the NJ fish and game authorities use, or how they set them, but I can say that there are LOTS more bears here in northern California than there are in NJ, and they're only occasionally a nuisance most of the time unless they get a taste for timber cambium. They certainly don't need to be culled. Mostly, that's because the human population density is quite a bit lower here. I suspect the NJ cull has more to do with people protecting their trashcans than with any genuine concern for bear population welfare.

[Canuckistanian]

13. MMmmm, them animal activists is good eatin'...

Yep, just fry 'em up with butter and mushrooms at the hunt camp...

[noonwitch]

14. I don't have a problem with hunting overall

But this is a man-created problem, with too many people living where the bears live. The hunters alone can't solve this problem, there needs to be a relocation program for bears who are trapped alive, since we know the people are not going away.

[happyslug]

27. Relocate where? Pennsylvania does NOT want them, Neither does NY.

And where in New Jersey would you relocate them to? Meadow-lands? Trenton? Like White Tail Deer, No one wants Black Bears in their back yard.

[pokercat999]

61. Atlantic City , they could all get rooms at the Taj. The buffet

is bear food anyway.

It would be hard for them to throw the dice at the craps table maybe the Donald could get some really big dice to make it easier for them. We wouldn't want the bears to be stuck on slots only, however I say keep them OUT of the poker room. There are already enough players that don't bathe.

[yellowcanine]

78. I am thinking the pig farm in Crawford. Then * could be a hero and hunt

"bar" and he wouldn't think he had to be play at being our dear leader anymore.

[carolinalady]

54. You can try--but they just come back. We had six they relocated

to another part of the state--PA and they were back tags and all in two weeks time.

[yellowcanine]

80. What is a nice Carolina lady like you doing in Yankee land?

[carolinalady]

99. until 2 years ago I was a PA yankee all my life! n/t

[yellowcanine]

106. I grew up in Lebanon County and went to Penn State. Left in 1979 and

haven't looked back but I still love the place.

[carolinalady]

139. I grew up in Centre county and went to Penn State as well. n/t

[yellowcanine]

143. Oh wow. Centre County and State College are great. What years did you

attend Penn State?

[carolinalady]

145. 84-89--took a year off to live in CA. n/t

[yellowcanine]

146. Go Nittany Lions!

[Coventina]

15. What kind of "human" wants to kill something they can't even eat?

:puke:

[imported_dem]

16. Who says you can't eat it

Bear meat is very edible. High in protein.

[Squatch]

17. Bear is actually quite tasty.

[Mithras61]

18. Who says you can't eat bear?

Several tasty looking recipes here: http://www.bowhunting.net/susieq/bear.html

[lynne]

21. Bear meat is excellent!

I looked to see if the article stated where the meat went but it didn't. It would have been nice if the meat had been butchered and given to the homeless but I would imagine that the hunters took it.

[jilln]

41. Apparently humans are tasty too.

[lynne]

42. I'm sure humans are tasty to a bear -

which is all the more reason to reduce their numbers. Are you saying you'd rather that a child be injured or "eaten" than the bear population be reduced via a controlled kill?

I'm afraid I'll have to side with the safety of the child on this one.

[flvegan]

47. The last time a child

was abducted and eaten by a bear was when, exactly?

Actually, draw a parallel with the last time a child was abducted and killed by a person.

You'll probably get my point then.

[Xithras]

87. The last time was in NY in 2002.

Fallsburg New York, to be exact. A 5 month old baby was on a porch with its family when the bear ran up, grabbed it out of its stroller, and tried to run into the woods with it.

I hike several times a year in Yosemite National Park and its surrounding forests (hence my avatar), and have come face to face with black bears more times than I can count (ok, I counted, eleven runins that I can remember). People see these as cute and cuddly, but black bears are brazen, the human adapted ones are NOT afraid of us and when hungry have no problem with approaching people to get food, and they kill, injure, or harass many people every year in their search for sustenance. That's not even getting into the property damage they inflict on homes and cars.

Bear numbers are high in places like NJ because their food sources are so abundant. If the environment were more natural and they had to forage entirely on their own, there wouldn't be nearly the number of bears in NJ.

[silvermachine]

68. Too funny...

...yeah, all those bears runnin' around eatin' kids. It's everywhere. Abrams Report did a great piece on it the other night. Beth Twitty is involved now saying we need to boycott the Chicago Bears for the remainder of the football season.

[AntiCoup2K4]

82. Well, maybe if the child was somewhere in Connecticut in the early 1950's.

....it might have been excusable.

Do bears eat chimps?

[karlrschneider]

22. We face a somewhat parallel dilemma out here where I live...

not with bears but with dogs. People from the city bring unwanted dogs and cats out here and dump them apparently thinking they will be adopted. And that does happen with a lot of them, almost everyone in this lakeside community has taken at least one stray unwanted pet. We have 3 adopted doggies and one cat and would love to take in more but it just gets to be too much what with the feeding costs, vet bills, spaying & neutering and so forth.

So the unfortunate result is that a lot of people see suffering animals (most domestic small animals can't feed themselves) and shoot them. There is no "pound" in this county. The "road kill" we see every day is appalling. I don't have a good solution, I'm just pointing out the problem isn't limited to one area or species.

[BJW]

32. But the bears AREN'T starving

I totally agree with you that people dumping domestic animals off to fend for themselves are really scummy. Dogs are pack animals and are certain to die without other dogs around to form a pack with, plus they don't have experience. Domesticated cats can and do hunt and kill, but without having had a "Mom" to show them how to gut and eat their prey--they starve too!

Now onto my rant about the black bear hunt in NJ:

BEARS ARE NOT HERD ANIMALS. HERD animals do, in fact, reproduce at higher rates than non-herd animals, which reproduction does mean starvation and die-off for some of the herd, particularly elderly, sick or very young herd members.

Here's some facts about black bear reproduction rates, lifespans, nutritional requirements, behaviors, etc. Reproduction rates are very low, are not annual, AND importantly, bears REDUCE their reproduction rates dependent upon available turf and food.

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Ursus_americanus.html

I am distured by the disingenous statistics used by NJ to support the hunt, as well as the specious "thin the herd or they'll starve" idiocy being applied to these NON-HERD animals.

The article quotes NJ officials as giving a population range for black bears of 1600-3200, a 50 PERCENT range, meaning that it could also be as low as 800 bears (more likely) or as high as 4800 bears (extremely unlikely).

Now, given that the article stated that approx. 100 bears were in the area in 1970, when the last formal hunt occurred (keep in mind that informal/illegal hunting occurs regularly anyway)

AND taking into account scientific facts about bear reproduction, longevity and habitat needs--it is EXTREMELY likely that the stated population range of black bears used to justify the hunt (1600-3200) is EXAGGERATED.

It's simple. DO THE MATH.

[BJW]

28. NJ Wildlife Officials Population Stats Seem Suspicious

First off, BEARS ARE NOT HERD ANIMALS. HERD animals do, in fact, reproduce at higher rates than non-herd animals, which reproduction does mean starvation and die-off for some of the herd, particularly elderly, sick or very young herd members.

Here's some facts about black bear reproduction rates, lifespans, nutritional requirements, behaviors, etc. Reproduction rates are very low, are not annual, AND importantly, bears REDUCE their reproduction rates dependent upon available turf and food.

http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/information/Ursus_americanus.html

I am distured by the disingenous statistics used by NJ to support the hunt, as well as the specious "thin the herd or they'll starve" idiocy being applied to these NON-HERD animals.

The article quotes NJ officials as giving a population range for black bears of 1600-3200, a 50 PERCENT range, meaning that it could also be as low as 800 bears (more likely) or as high as 4800 bears (extremely unlikely).

Now, given that the article stated that approx. 100 bears were in the area in 1970, when the last formal hunt occurred (keep in mind that informal/illegal hunting occurs regularly anyway)

AND taking into account scientific facts about bear reproduction, longevity and habitat needs--it is EXTREMELY likely that the stated population range of black bears used to justify the hunt (1600-3200) is EXAGGERATED.

It's simple. DO THE MATH.

[karynnj]

79. As a NJ resident living in what is considered

an outer suburb of NYC, we had a bear cub in our backyard. We only knew because our Maltese, all 6 pounds of him, went to the sliding glass door and wanted us to let him go out and get him!

[Chicago Democrat]

38. New Jersey Bears.. wow.....

got an extra chemical taste...

amazing they are there.. Hope some survive.

[flvegan]

44. Once again, it's not hunting. It's shooting and killing.

Big difference.

[LostinVA]

46. Yup, agreed.

I have no problem with most hunting, although I have no taste for it and can't understand why some do. But I don't like the shooting and killing way to "hunt."

[flvegan]

48. Well, when "hunt" is defined

it certainly falls outside of the boundaries of most of the crap posted around here.

But then, "sportsmen" don't like to be partitioned into the bloodlust groups that so many fall into.

[Squatch]

55. Explain, please.

Are these animals contained in some enclosure? Are they restrained?

Tell me how this is different from any other bear hunting season in NA.

[flvegan]

59. Mmmkay

Hunting should really be defined in a way such as to pursue intensively, so as to capture or kill.

Sitting in a tree stand, watching a bait pile of doughnuts (or whatever shit the hunter would otherwise salivate over) with a high powered rifle, isn't hunting.

It's shooting, with an end result of killing.

Explained? And I never suggested it was any different than almost any other "hunt" anywhere that's done for sport or enjoyment.

[imported_dem]

60. I don't know of anywhere where it is legal to hunt on a baited field

That is a serious offense and generally carries some serious penalties.

[flvegan]

63. Even with

the baiting removed, it's not hunting. Just shooting and killing.

[Squatch]

64. The (possible) end results of hunting over bait or stalking an animal

are the same, to me. Meat in my freezer. I ascribe no spirituality to hunting nor do I think there are good hunts or bad hunts.

Hunting is a harvest of game. I hunt to put meat in the freezer I could not otherwise buy at the local Farm Fresh.

[Kixel]

92. Wow...

You seriously don't know much about hunting. My brothers all do it when they can get a license. They do go and bait the bear in advance, but you are required to stop baiting several weeks in advance to the start of the season opening. Of course, my brothers aren't all that normal. They sit in a tree with sticks as they are bow hunters.

It is very frustrating to see open minded people condemn something they may not have a lot of knowledge on. Oh, and I am not a fan of bear meat, but I know many folks who love it.

[Squatch]

65. I know quite a few places where this is legal.

For instance, I used to hunt wild boar and feral pigs over bait in the Ozarks. I would scratch out a 10' x 10' area, dump a gallon of whole milk over it, cover it, and come back the next day. Ususally, the spoiling milk would attract the pigs who like to root around in the dirt.

Also, I've hunted black bear in Washington state over bait. I bowhunt, so I need them to come close enough for a humane shot. I would bring a ham hock and hang it in a nearby tree. In theory, it should have worked, but I've never been able to get a bear within shooting range.

On edit...I just saw that hunting over bait in WA was prohibited in 1997, after I moved from there.

[RebelOne]

85. Fields are baited for dove hunts.

And there are some states that allow hunting over bait.

[TX-RAT]

97. "Fields are baited for dove hunts."

I sure hope not, dove fall into the category of migratory birds. Hunting migratory birds over baited fields is a federal violation.
With that said, hunting of game (non-migratory)over bait, is very common in many states. Deer, Turkey, Hogs, bear.

http://www.aces.edu/timelyinfo/ForestryWildlife/2004/September/Dove_Mgt_in_AL_legal_issues.pdf#search='dove%20hunting%20over%20bait'

[Name removed]

52. Deleted sub-thread

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[freethought]

57. Wow! This is practically a war here on this thread.

I will give my 2 cents on the NJ bear hunt. Keep in mind I am hunter myself, take from that what you will.
I have never personally hunted bear. As I have heard from others, they describe it as 'tedious'. I also don't hunt with the intent of bagging a trophy for my wall. If I take an animal it is with the intent that it will be used, meat eaten, hides sold and tanned, etc...

If certain controls are to be kept on wildlife populations, a regulated hunt is the best way. As far as bear are concerned any talk of relocation or 'birth control' is nonsense. Relocation does not work and birth control is not feasible and too expensive. Sorry, but state governments are not going to put forward large amounts of cash to bear birth control.

It is very easy to be taken in by the image of a cute little bear cub. When that cub grows into a 500 pound animal that raids your trash, damages crops and property, opinions can change really fast. Trust me on that note.

It is very easy for some to wish for a return to pristine ecosystems. I think that is misguided. For even in the most undisturbed and pristine ecosystems the predator/prey, eat-and-be-eaten, hunter/hunted are going to play out. That is just the way nature works.

It is sort of unfortunate that the situation in NJ has to be handled in this particular way. In the absence of natural population checks there just aren't any usable alternatives.

[miles55]

58. Guess some rednecks needed.....

to mentally enhance their penises by mindlessly killing some bears. I bet they're 60 feet tall now and have members the size of locomotives now......

:sarcasm:

[RebelOne]

62. LOL!

[yellowcanine]

84. You know I am not a hunter but I am tired of the self rightousness

displayed by some posters here. Hunting is a legitimate sport when the animals are truly wild (as opposed to so-called "canned" hunts). Some people see it as a connection to their hunting and gathering ancestors. If we liberals get so high and mighty that we write off all of the "redneck" hunters and other outdoor sports persons we deserve to lose. Most hunters and fishermen are our natural allies - they want to preserve wild habitat just as we do. We should figure out a way to accomodate that natural relationship and cut out the self rightous pontificating about hunting. It is not any more inherently "wrong" for a hunter to shoot a deer than for somebody to sit down to a turkey dinner. You don't have to eat turkey - you could get plenty of protein from beans. But I am not a vegetarian either because I think biologically humans are designed to eat some meat and meat eating is part of our psychological make -up as a result, just as hunting is for some people. Rant over.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

94. you're not a Hunter nor areyou a spokesman for humanity-you defend killing

this is the year 2005 and almost 2006.
The rules have changed on a planet with six billion people.
We are not in the 19th century -we're not in the 20th Century.
Your personal ideas are idiotic "sit down to a turkey dinner"( ha ha ha) based on nothing but your opinion.
My opinion: STAND UP and quit sitting down.


Get with the picture(if you want to help this planet survive).
Or don't--I personally don't care what you do.

[yellowcanine]

95. What exactly is your point? That people are not adapted to meat eating?

Then why do we have canine teeth for tearing meat and digestive systems adapted to digesting meat? How does that change with the number of people? I don't see the connection. Some animals can eat grass. People can't eat grass but they can eat animals that eat grass. Most of the earth is more suitable for growing grass than grain or beans. Ever been to Mongolia? I have and I challenge you to go there and then tell me you can feed all of the people in the world without meat. Millions of acres of steppe and about 12 inches of rain a year. Try to grow wheat there and you get about 12 bushels per acre because the little rain they do get comes at the wrong time. But Mongolia has some fantastic natural grasslands that are perfect for grazing animals. Until you figure out a way for humans to live on grass don't tell me that we can feed all of the people in the world without eating animals.

[LeftyMom]

96. FYI: Many of the people opposing hunting on this thread

would find dining on a turkey as revolting as shooting a bear.

[yellowcanine]

98. I realize that. See post # 95. Vegetarianism is not much of an option

for most people.

[LeftyMom]

100. I don't want to drag this thread off-topic

so let's just say that I disagree.

[yellowcanine]

102. Fair enough. But I would like your recipe for tall fescue salad sometime.

[LeftyMom]

103. There's no need to unleash the snark

There's plenty of information out there about the inefficiency of animal agriculture, how most food shortages are due to poor distribution of resources, how many times over the grain fed to animals could feed the world's hungry. I don't need to repeat it all to you, it's all been cited on DU many times before or you can google it yourself.

[yellowcanine]

105. May be snarky but still true. You can shout about inefficiencies all

you want but the fact remains that humans cannot live on grass (how inefficient is that?) - many animals can and it would be environmentally degradating to tear up perennial grasslands and plant annual grain crops in many places. Food distribution is a lot of the problem, no question, but it is also true that given a choice, most people (and especially poor people) will include some meat in their diets. You can't just ignore that. There are sound biological reasons for it and no amount of argument by people who have the luxury of being a vegetarian by choice rather than by necessity is going to change that.

[LeftyMom]

107. I'm not shouting about anything.

I'm just saying that we can feed everybody on the planet a healthful plant-based diet. We don't need to create huge new grain belts, just divert the grain that's currently used as fodder for farm animals and there will be more than enough.

[yellowcanine]

108. Hmm. Have you done the calculations on this or is this just a WAG

on your part? And even if that were true, what are you going to do about the poor people who are going to want to buy a piece of meat the first time they have a couple of extra dollars? Tell them to eat bread? The number of people who will voluntarily forgo meat is very small. So how would you deal with that reality?

[Beaverhausen]

112. The inefficiency of production and distribution of meat products is...

...well documented. I will find a link soon (have to go for a bit)

[yellowcanine]

115. You all keep missing the point. Animals eat grass. People don't.

So people have zero efficiency at getting food value out of grass (which covers a lot of the earth's surface, particularly in arid regions) UNLESS they eat an animal. Secondly, people like meat - poor people as well as rich people. And for some poor people in arid regions it is the only way they are going to get enough protein. It is a biological imperative. What are you going to do about that? Give them tofu? I don't think so.

[TX-RAT]

116. Would love to see it, i've been raising cows for over 25 years.

[yellowcanine]

118. I grew up on a dairy farm.....I never was a big fan of cows though. I

always thought they were like some people - selectively dumb. Too dumb to figure out where they were supposed to be but smart enough to give you a hard time when you tried to help them figure things out.

[TX-RAT]

120. Their dumb until it's time to pen them.

Or try to load a 2000 pound Brangus Bull in a trailer. Better than a rodeo.

[Beaverhausen]

126. Here's a start

from here:
http://www.renewableenergyworks.com/sustainability/meatless.html


But as many University at Buffalo environmental studies students have reminded me, there are also good environmental reasons for becoming vegetarian. This powerful argument for abstaining from meat has just come to light in the past couple years. I've taken some time to acquaint myself with the facts and figures and have reached the conclusion that the vegetarian diet and lifestyle are as fundamental to being environmentally responsible as recycling, conserving energy and fighting pollution.

Conjure up in your mind an image of America's Midwest farm belt. Can you see those "amber waves of grain"? Do you think of it as America's bread basket? If so, try again. At most, only 30% of the grain grown in the U.S. is used to produce bread and other grain-based foods directly consumed by people. 70% of our annual grain crop is fed to livestock to produce meat.

Even when animals are permitted to graze, converting forage into meat, they are unlike(ly) to go from pasture to slaughter. The more likely scenario includes a trip to the feedlot for fattening on grain for 4 to 5 months.

All in all, nearly 150 million tons of grain are fed to U.S. livestock annually. All that to produce only about 20 million tons of meat-products. In a sense, this process wastes 130 million tons of grain a year. an amount estimated to be enough to supply every person on earth with a cup of grain a day.

Animals are inefficient converters of grain to meat. Besides producing meat, livestock use food to produce body heat and fuel body maintenance, muscular development and activity. Also some of the food they consume ends up being excreted as waste. With all this inefficiency, no wonder so much grain is needed to produce meat.

SNIP

It takes a lot of water to raise grain-fed livestock. It has been estimated that a hundred times as much water is needed to produce a pound of beef than It does a pound of wheat. If it were not for livestock crop production, not nearly as much water would have to be pumped out of dwindling Midwest aquifers or diverted from rivers like the Colorado which no longer even reaches the Pacific Ocean. An estimated 6000 megawatts of electric generating capacity has been lost from rivers in the Pacific Northwest due to diversion for irrigation, much of it for livestock production.

The livestock industry is also responsible for the mega-use of fertilizers and pesticides. If it takes ten pounds of grain to produce a pound of meat, that makes the meat habit roughly 10 times as fertilizer-consumptive and pesticide-polluting as a diet based on eating grain directly. Pesticides and fertilizers significantly contribute to non-point source water pollution.

*********
Much more at the link

[TX-RAT]

127. Sorry i thought you were talking about an actually study.

That link was a joke.

[Beaverhausen]

128. A joke?

Can you disprove any of it?

[TX-RAT]

129. Whats to disprove?

(The inefficiency of production and distribution of meat products is...
...well documented.)
That was your statement, now what does your link have to do with. If you want to call comments by a vegetarian about why he doesn't eat meat a study, then knock yourself out. He provided nothing to back up his figures.

[Beaverhausen]

130. There are figures stated in the link and in the sections I posted

but go ahead and ignore them. Its ok. Lots of people don't realize what their burger costs the planet. Enjoy it!!!

[flvegan]

132. You might as well be fighting with rodeo clowns

If they earn money from it, they'll likely not believe the downside.

[Beaverhausen]

133. I know but I think some other DUers will read it and learn a thing or two

Lots of people do have an open mind about these things and all it takes is a little education.

:hi:

[TX-RAT]

142. rodeo clowns?

Thanks for the complement, there was a time in my life when i considered being a Rodeo Clown. That was just after i came to the conclusion i wasn't worth a shit as a bull rider.

Now back to these so called studies. Just as soon as the people who conduct these studies start using all the info, and not just what they want, i'll give them the consideration they deserve. Until then, these studies are unreliable.




(If they earn money from it, they'll likely not believe the downside.)

First off, i'm in the cattle business, to make money. If you don't like it, i'm sorry, thats your problem, not mine. As for the downside, well when people who actually know something about the business, (instead of people who are just pushing an agenda) can show me a downside. Then i'll give them consideration.

[TX-RAT]

136. (go ahead and ignore them), - I will, their meaningless.

I've been in the business for over 25 years, my cows, as with everybody else's in this area are raised in pastures. Most of the time it's with no supplemental feeding of any kind. We limit the number of cows to about 18 to 20 per section (Section is one square mile). If in a bad year, the only supplemental feed they receive is cottonseed. Cotton is the biggest product grown in this area, with the seed being a byproduct of ginning. I feed nothing that is specifically grown as cattle feed, i can't say that for everybody around here, some have been known to feed range cubes (Alfalfa compressed into pellets), but thats usually those that didn't make arrangements with the gins ahead of time. From what i read the only numbers they used were from commercial feed lots. There is no comparison. Most cows in this area are raised on ranches, and only make it to local processors or butchers, there is no huge costs in shipping.

Knowing this, makes the numbers used in the study you posted incorrect, and the entire study unreliable. Thats usually the results when people, who think they know what their talking about, butt heads with those that do it for a living.

[flvegan]

131. Dr. David Pimentel, PhD, prof at Cornell U

You can read parts of his study here, with links to more:
http://www.vegsource.com/articles/pimentel_resources.htm

Maybe you'll find this to your liking...or not.

[TX-RAT]

121. I don't want a plant based diet.

I like meat in my diet, as a matter of fact, humans like it so much they've been eating it for thousands of years.

[Ayesha]

150. This vegetarian agrees!

Actually, you are both right. The meat production system in much of the world today is very inefficient and wasteful, and we'd be better off planting edible crops instead of animal feed IN THOSE AREAS. However, there are other places where vegetarianism would in fact be worse for the environment, because mass quantities of veggies would have to be imported. The idea of, say, Inuits converting to a vegetarian diet is plainly ridiculous. Broccoli doesn't grow well in Alaska!

[jilln]

113. Those of you who are in favor of this

should go out and kill the bears and any animals you eat with your own hands. That could fairly be called hunting. Anything else is just bloodlust with fancy toys.

[TX-RAT]

119. You don't want to hunt or eat animals, no problem.

I just can't figure out why you want to hassle those that do. Man kind has been doing it for thousands of years.

[NickB79]

134. Why with our bare hands?

Do we ask vegetarians to grow their own grain by digging in the soil with their bare hands?

Since humans have been using tools to kill game for several MILLION years, what's the big deal about using tools in the 21st century? Would you feel better if a hunter used a bow to kill a bear? Bows are pretty ancient tools compared to firearms (we've "only" been using firearms for 500 years, after all).

A properly placed bullet or slug will drop a black bear within seconds. Why would you suggest a hunter use anything less than the most humane tools to kill the animal?

[yellowcanine]

69. They are going to "tend to wounded bears" ???? I am sure the bears

will be appreciative. That is just stupid.

[blindpig]

71. The base problem is too many people.

Black bears once inhabitated all of eastern North America. By the end of the 19th century they were nearly exterminated in all but the most remote areas. Thanks to conservation efforts their numbers have rebounded a little while at the same time our numbers have expanded enormously. Not only do we take up more and more space but our increased numbers increase the possibility of human/bear interaction. Hardly the bears fault.

We humans need to control our numbers so that other species may thrive too. We need to start acting as though we're part of Nature instead of pretending that we're above it. That mistaken belief will destroy us.

I have nothing against a hunt regulated by sound biology with the long term sustainability of the species as the primary goal. I do have problems with the way bear hunting is often conducted, bears being tracked to their hibernaculum and killed in a most unsporting manner. I realize that's sentiment but it puts the lie to such practioners calling themselves "sportsmen".

Mention should be made of the demand for bear parts for Chinese Traditional Medicine. Our bear populations are being whacked, 25% of Great Smokies NP being poached in recent years. Wonder if any of this hunts bag is going to Asia?

[yellowcanine]

75. Maybe the bears will unite with deer to do something about the humans.

Just a thought. And since I have had that thought I will never think of Bambi the same way again.

[blindpig]

86. When I think of Bambi

I think of Andy Warhol's Bambi Meets Godzilla :evilgrin:

Won't be the bears and deer that do us in, more likely bacteria, though in the end we are our own undoing.

[Beaverhausen]

91. Lets let hunters shoot at each other

that should take care of the "overpopulation" problem!

AND that would be an actual sport, as opposed to hiding and shooting unarmed animals who are simply out trying to fatten up for their long winter's nap.

[tabasco]

81. Those bothersome bears will be gone soon enough.

First only in zoos and then gone forever.

So go the bears, so go the humans.

Future generations will read of our stupidity, or maybe not.

[The Sleeper]

89. My .02

Bears have been ALL OVER the place this past summer. In PA, One kept coming up on our porch trying to steal our gas grill. That's never happened before. My BIL in Western NJ had quite a few bears in and out of his backyard this year. He lives in a fairly old town, and has pets and children.

Too many bears is a problem for bears as well as people. The same is true of deer...in fact, deer are WAY more dangerous than bears, as they CAN get you killed by jumping out in front of your car. I had a deer do that to me in my little Brit convertible, and I was lucky to come away uninjured.

Solution ? I'm not a hunter, and personally I think it's a drag to kill them.
Perhaps the Giggling Murderer will draft bears into the military to show them dirty freedom hating terrorists that we mean business. I wouldn't put it past him......

....as long as Halliburton gets the contract to outfit and feed them, of course....

[saigon68]

124. LOL

Good to see someone, has a sense of humor

[woodcutter]

90. NPR reported

this morning, from a local affiliate in N.J. that as of last night at 8:00 P.M. there had been 200 bears killed, with the largest one weighing in at 660 pounds.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

93. PAUL McCARTNEY AND BONO-very seriously could put the heat on N.J.-

this is uncivilized and needs to be brought to public attention.

[Tarc]

138. It is not

Jesus, this kind of PETA-pandering is what kills the Democratic Party.

[NIGHT TRIPPER]

147. ----------IS SO !!-----------na na na na na---your "it"

PETA ROCKS !!
as long as they irritate tards like you!!

so there!!

he he he

[Tarc]

151. PETA

People Eating Tasty Animals

I am leftist on most issues in this country, but not gun control and hunting.

[TX-RAT]

101. Wonder how many are hit by cars in PA

[yellowcanine]

104. I don't know but PA is the numero uno for deer-car collisions.

http://money.cnn.com/2005/11/04/news/newsmakers/deer/index.htm?cnn=yes

[saigon68]

122. WISCONSIN IS # 10 for Car/deer encounters

We got a few (by hunting) this year. They make very good eating.

Especially when prepared as a thuringer sausage.

http://home.pacbell.net/lpoli/index_files/thuringer.pdf

substitute venison for beef

My daughter got 2 in the last 2 years with her car

[stepnw1f]

125. Fun or Necessary?

I hear the necessity for thinning overpopulation but I also see an overeaction to defend hunting more so. Another example of a necessary evil being legitized for "sport". Just weird...

[flvegan]

135. Hunting was actually found to be less efficient at controlling bear/human

encounters/conflicts.

Very interesting read by Edward A. Tavss, PhD, Rutgers

http://www.savenjbears.com/CorrelationOfReductioninNuisance.pdf

Page 6 is a conclusion that should be a must-read for those choosing the "gotta shoot 'em to protect people" mindset.

[yellowcanine]

137. Did you look at the study? It was a non-peer reviewed literature study

presented at a public forum done by a guy who has no apparent credentials in wildlife biology or behavior(Chemical Biology). The study compared apples to oranges using correlations. He compared "education programs" to "hunting programs". How about "hunting programs" plus "education programs". As far as I could tell it wasn't there. There was no control for different initial populations and comparisons were made between national parkland in the West and private land in the East - hardly a fair comparison. Ever hear of "correlation without causation"? It was essentially a study comparing what happens when one educates people about bear behavior and when one doesn't. And of course when one educates people about bear behavior (how to keep them from getting into garbage bins, for example) the negative interactions go down. Just because a study is done by a Ph.D. doesn't mean it means anything.

[carolinalady]

140. My father-in-law recently installed a low-voltage fence around

his covered trash cans (like farmers use). The bear was completely unphased by the fence and politely took an entire bag of trash with him across the stream that runs through his property. Of course, he still had to clean up the mess. Preventing garbage raiding is a very tough problem.

[Maine-ah]

149. I'm not one for hunting, but at least in NJ they actually

have to hunt the bear. Up here they bait 'em.

[Roon]

152. I thought the bears were hibernating at this time of year

What are they doing? Killing them in their dens while they are sleeping?