NJ Bear Hunt   NJ Bear Overpopulation Issues

In the past the Black Bear has only two predators to fear the Brown Bear and the hunter. However, over the past (10) years the black bear has faced a new threat; the tree-hugging human community.  

Anti-hunting and animal-rights groups have joined forces to use the black bear as a platform for their core existence. Although, having lost battles around the country they found a home in New Jersey where they succeeded in 2000 by successfully turning the black bear overpopulation problem into a political football. Governor Christie Whitman was the first causality as she gave into the pressure; casting aside the New Jersey Fish and Game professionals decision to hold a 2000 black bear hunt in order to reduce and balance the black bear population to a level that would allow the safe co-existence between bears and humans.

Bear roams near a residential area in New Jersey

The New Jersey Fish and Game and hunters have been targeted by anti-hunting and animal rights groups and used to create a situation wherein the real problem of “black bear overpopulation” was masked by putting the emphasis on the “Fish&Game Council’s looking to protect their jobs” and “hunter’s looking to trophy hunt black bears”.

Nothing can be further from the truth or so irrelevant to the overpopulation problem. If not for the efforts of the NJF&G whose conservation efforts brought the black bear back from the estimated 100 to numbers between 2000 to 3000 and hunters that respected the F&G biologists decisions and participated in the non-hunting laws and regulations then we would not be having this black bear overpopulation issue today.

However, while the hunting community was observing the rules many tree-huggers were behind the scenes feeding and baiting bears into areas for the purpose of observing and photographing the once timid and shy black bear creating a “Zoo” atmosphere within the boundaries of their homes and land. This situation has contributed to the food conditioned bears that lead to aggressive behavior.

As the human population continued to increase so did the development of land to accommodate both housing and commercial building. In areas where black bears may have been fed new houses cropped up and with the increased housing a new food source; garbage. This coupled with black bear population growth is where we began to experience the change in black bear activity and behavior.

This is best explained by the testimony of a known bear expert Stephen Herrero who recanted a conclusion stated in his 1985 book to the effect that black bears were essentially benevolent. Herrero was called for a deposition involving the 1996 lawsuit against the state of Arizona wherein a captured, tagged and relocated black bear returned to it’s place of origin, nearly 100 miles, mauling and disfiguring a (16) year old girl participating in a 4H outing. The state settled for 2.5 million dollars and you can believe that the girl and her family would gladly have given that up to have stopped that life altering attack.

Herrero stated under oath; I do think that there is more danger than I realized from food conditioned, habituated, and aggressive bears, the combination of the three. And if I were rewriting that chapter, I would emphasize that there are three ingredients, habituations, the food conditioning, and rewarding aggressive behavior over time that increased the chances of injury… I have learned since the publication of the book that there is more involvement in serious injuries by black bears than I knew of at the time that I wrote the book. (Knochel v. State, Arizona Superior Court, Civ. No. 98-09396, Deposition of Stephen Herrero, January 6, 1999, at pp. 218-219)

So we know that the development of land is pushing the black bear out of their natural habitant. We also know that the population of both humans and the black bear is increasing. We know that garbage has become a food source and efforts are clearly in place as people are making every effort to secure garbage, including stronger shed and garage doors as bear have progressed beyond garbage pail and bear resistant containers.

We know that birds can no longer be fed, as the harmless and safe feeding of birds now attracts the black bear to our homes. Backyard barbecues’ require a people watch both during and after cooking as bears seek out the smell of food. Home baked pies and cookies now must be secured in smell proof containers less we have black bear visitors in our kitchens. Schoolyards now have watch posts and black bear drills, parents wait at bus stops protecting their children from “lunch-bag” seeking bears. Developments near forests have parents leaving car doors unlocked so children may reach the safety of a vehicle should a bear wander into the area. Small children must be kept inside along with domestic pets; livestock requires flock guards such as dogs or Llamas and all of these precautions will still do nothing to stem the growth of the black bear population or the inevitable tragedies we have already seen and are still to come.

All of this at a time when the economy and conditions in the US created the need for people use and enjoy the privacy of their own backyards and state and public parklands.

We have to face the issue now and that is there is simply no way whatsoever to allow the black bear population to continue to grow. There is only so much land to be safely shared by humans and a wild black bear and that safety zone has been surpassed. There is “absolutely” no other way to reduce the black bear population and maintain the proper balance than hunting. This is no longer about hunting, although this is a legal right of our citizens, it is about “population-control”.

All of the so-called bear-education bear resistant garbage cans, adverse conditioning will have no effect on the problem; “There is not enough land to support the current black bear population”. Sterilization is a proven failure and has no place in the population control equation.

The education we need is that “never” should politics, emotions or personal preferences of our leaders be allowed to interfere with the decisions of educated and successful professional biologists. No other state allows this to happen, both the former and current Governors of Maryland simply stated to all; we understand and respect the emotions regarding the hunting of black bears in Maryland but as recommended by the F&G the hunt will go on; and it did.

Our New Jersey F&G professionals calculated and brought back the black bear, now we must allow them to maintain this great mammal to a level where they can roam in their own habitant. Neither the F&G nor hunters would allow the black bear to be hunted to extinction or anywhere near it. Need proof? Look at the successful work both have done to bring the black bear to the current levels.

In the final analysis, do we gamble with human life for the sake of an anti-hunting/animal-rights movement? Do we allow inexperienced politicians to override trained, educated and experienced wildlife biologists? Is any family out there or any person willing to chance the life of a human being over that of a wild mammal?

This is just plain common sense, let the F&G professionals perform their job, let the hunters do the work and at the same time make good use of the game through consumption as a healthy food source. Let the black bear population be managed to a safe co-existing level and stay that way.

Save Human Life; Support the Hunt.

 - Mike D