Many of the anti-hunting/animal-rights groups often refer to Dr. Lynn Rogers, Minnesota based so-called bearcourse/bearstudy workshop wherein people can learn to co-exist with black bears.
These courses generally run (4) days and cost approximately $1000.00 (of which $900.00 is listed as tax deductible) The fee goes to the nonprofit (501C) (3) Wildlife Research Center. The deductible $900.00 is the portion beyond actual expenses and is considered a donation to further their research and education program. The courses are coordinated by Sue Mansfield a recent graduate of Antioch University, New England where she completed her Master’s work. Mansfield has been conducting field work with Dr. Rogers since 2001.
Together Rogers and Mansfield monitor approximately (50+) bears in the study area learning the bears personalities. Many of these bears are monitored through radio-collars.
Courses are conducted at the Northwoods Research Center and surrounding forest west of Ely, Minneosta.
The course as noted; helps participants to realize the extent of the misconceptions held by the public and anyone who has not actually spent time with bears.
Rogers is noted as one of the world’s experts on black bear behavior and has shown that black bears can be lived with in peace. However, he cautions others severely that his techniques have taken long periods of time to learn to read animals signs.
Rogers further states “It took many years for me to overcome the brain-washing I grew up with about bears. Finally I began to interpret their body language and vocalizations in terms of their fears rather than my fears, and I found that I could build trusting relationships with these intelligent wild animals”
Whether intentionally or unintentionally the research of Lynn Rogers is serving the anti-hunters/animal-rights groups by creating the illusion that we can “get-close” to and “co-exist” with wild black bears. The buzz word here is “wild”.
Rogers and Mansfield are working with and studying black bears in an almost “open-zoo” environment.
As noted by Rogers; he built first and second story ledges where he places feed such as seeds, nuts and acorns, supplementary food to the bear’s diet. As the bears found the food, Rogers hung around and persuaded them to eat out of a large can.
This is simply an old “hunters” game plan. Prior to hunting season in states that allow bear baiting, the hunting outfitters will place (55) gallon drums in the forest and place rotten meat, bread, donuts and molasses inside. This will attract the bears to the area where they will then become accustomed to the feeding schedules. These “food-conditioned” bears will eventually appear as the guides drive into their areas to deposit more food. In fact, in the off-season the outfitters will place buckets of hard bacon or other meat fats, in these locations so any chance the bears get they can return to the baited areas for supplemental refills.
It is no secret that once a black bear or most wild game for that matter find a food source they eventually will become more comfortable with the surroundings. In places where people feed deer they can rattle a can, place the food next to them and have the deer come out of the nearby woods to practically eat out of their hands.
These study bears are conditioned by repetition and fed to accept human interaction and by no way are a reflection of the wild black bears that populate our states and for purposes of this report New Jersey.
There are two issues here:
First: The majority of humans do not want to create a condition wherein they are sharing backyards and public parks with wild black bears.
Second: In spite of Lynn Rogers’s “homey bears” the black bears that the majority of us must deal with are “wild”, “unpredictable”, “dangerous” and have exhibited a change in behavior from once shy and timid to aggressive.
There have been enough unprovoked black bear attacks over the past year alone that supports the “bad-news-bears”.
Just this month:
Caliente, California; a 56 year old mother was mauled by a bear while walking her dogs. Only through the sacrifice of her dogs did she somehow manage to escape though badly bitten and mauled. A nature lover with years of experience in the Sierras, the woman said she’s had countless encounters with bears, and always believed it wasn’t in their nature to attack. But her latest encounter has changed her mind for good.
Great Smoky Mountains National Park; an eight year old boy and his father were mauled by a black bear that pounced on the boy in a creek without provocation. No food was present the bear simply attacked the boy.
“This is so rare”, said Lynn Rogers, I don’t know if you would call a bear like that a demented bear, like some people, or a super bear that decides, ‘Hey, I can take a person” quite a remark from the so-called bear expert.
Well if Rogers would further his research to other areas in the U.S. and Canada places where black bears are “wild” and not fed and studied in the “open-zoo” he would find the answer.
Perhaps so best observed by another more practical bear expert; Stephen Herrero who recanted a Rogers like analogy Herrero had published in his 1985 book on black bears stating that “black bears were essentially benevolent”.
Herrero stated under oath while giving a deposition in a black bear mauling lawsuit against Arizona in a 1996 mauling of a 16 year old girl by a relocated nuisance black bear that traveled back some 100 miles to the same location to attack and permanently disfigure the teenager:
“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.”
Dr. Rogers has been compared some to Dr. Jane Goodall, who interestingly has been criticized by some for; “using feeding stations to attract Gombe chimpanzees” for research.
As for comparisons to Dian Fossey there are none as this very brave and talented woman was studying the vanishing Mountain Gorilla in dangerous, remote areas of Africa where the population, due mainly to poaching, was down to less than 200.
Here is the problem with today’s black bears; they are no longer shy and timid. The human population and development of land has created the need to control and maintain a specific number of black bears that can move about in their own natural habitant.
In essence, black bears do not need to be observed as in the Lynn Rogers open zoo environment, do not need to be fed to bring them into research areas, there is no need to reach out and touch them they should be left to the privacy of the woods and forests where they are born.
Bears are at the top of the food chain and in order to maintain a “healthy black bear population” and this will sound challenging to some, there must be hunting by their only real predator, man. Through, this proven wild game management tool the black bears can be controlled to a number wherein they have enough room to move about in their own natural environment.
In states where we have hunting and still have black bear problems this is an indication that the bear population is not consistent with available habitant. States like Pennsylvania recognize this and adjust their hunting seasons accordingly.
Just imagine what black bear problems we would have in our country today if not for the black bear hunting seasons of our (26) sister states that understand the need to separate politics and emotions from biologists’ input. Hundreds of thousands of black bears would be around today and with them triple the attacks, injuries, deaths and problems.
Lastly, sterilization and other proposed non-lethal remedies have failed and will continue to fail; this is not part of the wild game enviroement. There is no more time for the stall tactics of the anti-hunting/animal-rights groups, inexperienced politicians with personal agendas or the mislead public’s emotions. Non-lethal methods have never and will never work this has been proven in N.J. when black bear problems were down the year after each hunt and substantially increased the years after non-hunting. Wild game is taught to survive, the strong do for the most part to live and breed, others become part of our human food source and other products which is exactly why they were created. No different than domestic animals like cows, goats, chickens, etc a food source.
Mike D.
I stayed at Lynn Rogers research cabin during the MN bear hunt last season. My son was hunting nearby on a bait site we had set up weeks earlier, while I, who had not drawn a tag for the 2008 season, helped out at the field station. I never tire of getting the close bear photos, watching bear families nervously interact with one another, etc. Sharing the experience with my son, and having him spend time close to the bears helped a lot in him being calm for the shot when a nice 200 lb bear came in opening day. I enjoy working with Lynn at the research station, and am amazed at the passion he has for his work. It is unfortunate that the animal rights groups are able to use his research to negative effect for hunters. It is also important to note that without his exhaustive efforts to educate the community, many were shooting and wounding/killing bears out of season whenever they saw one. Now days, most people let them go, and the hunting is better than ever in the community as a result. I have taken 6 bears in the area in the last 8 years, and my son/brothers/friends have taken many as well.
Hi James and thank you for the very interesting story. Yes it is a shame that the animal -right/anti-hunters attempt to use Lynn Rogers to support their cause. What I would like to see are any statements from Dr. Rogers wherein he clearly notes that his research is not in support of anti-hunters.
It is also extremely important for the public to understand that the research Dr Rogers has undertaken and the methods he uses in no way at all is meant to downplay the dangers associated with wild animals in particular the black bear.
James, recently, bear attacks have increased around the country. On October 5, 2009 a 350 pound black bear mauled and killed a woman on her property where her and her husband owned and operated World of Reptiles in PA.
Yes, the woman apparently and obviously made a mistake in how she fed the bear but the point here is that black bear behaivor is changing both in captivity and the wild.
In New Jersey, we are facing the most danger because we have a Government, starting with Governor Christie Whitman that has allowed this to become an emotional, political issue. They have shut down the F&W Biologists and have ignored the process within (26) other states with large black bear populations wherein, both Democratic and Republican Governors and administrations recognize that wildlife management is scientific rather than political.
So now we have 4 years going on 5 without a hunt and dangerous black bear encounters have steadily risen for the same time period. Bears are now traveling within every NJ County and attacks on domestic pets, house breakin’s and serious human encounters are out of control.
Governor Corzine is in the middle, he has an inept DEP that is scared to advise him on the need for a hunt, he himself does not understand hunting as a necessary part of wildlife population management control and he is being duped by the well organizied, misleading anti’s.
Any of us living in bear country and/or who really understand the problem know that “garbage-control”, the main theme of the anti’s is quite important but has absolutely no bearing on population control and the now necessary reduction in black bear numbers.
Where does that leave us? Holding are breath, praying for our children, grandchildren, senior citizens and any human that is finally mauled and killed by the overpopulated, no-fear, black bear. The last straw that will force our politicians to stop posturing for votes, to come to grips with the misleading lies of the animal-right/anti-hunting groups and think of the safety of their citizens.
Basically, this means just taking all of their highly touted educations and learning plain old common sense, “no wildlife population in any state, in any country can be simply allowed to multiply to whatever numbers they can reach.”
This long-winded response to your very important report is in hope that Dr Lynn Rogers will soon recognize that once the black bear reaches the dangerous numbers as it has in NJ, the damage they do, the fear they create will soon have them labeled as “vermin” and when humans start being mauled and killed, as they are now seeing more of, their (black-bear) demise is short coming.
This can all be spared with regular, controlled hunts as they do in the 26 other states. Last point as the anti’s like to play on, yes in states holding black bear hunts there are still problems with breakins, etc but lets make this quite clear, “without hunts in those states over decades, there would black bear population explosions and much more serious issues from overpopulation than those states have to deal with today.”
Dr Lynn Rogers can do more good for black bears by denouncing the anti’s that use his research inaccurately. If anyone knows of Dr Rogers doing so please respond with information.
Mike D
Those who proclaim the dangers of black bears, habituated by food or not, tend to exaggerate the dangers, in order to support their cause, which is usually hunting, or elimination of bears in a particular area. I enjoy seeing this retoric, as it makes much of the populace that doesn’t hunt, fear bears. People are willing to tolerate hunting of bears when they fear them.
To the same extent, Lynn is overly dismissive. He is dealing with a population of bears that has been habituated to close human proximity. The wilder bears that are unwilling to feed at the cabins and research station, tend to be killed more frequently at nearby hunting baits like mine. The well fed bears, being less motivated by hunger, tend to wait till darkness before aproaching the baits and so are killed less frequently. I believe that over time the resident bears frequenting Lynn’s research area have developed a less agressive nature.
I to, would love to be able to have bears coming into my yard. It would irritate me if someone came to hunt the bears that I fed and watched.
I also love to hunt bear more than any other animal I have hunted. I intend to continue hunting as long as we are able to here in MN. I do not envy you the fight you are up against in NJ.
We have constant assaults on our bear hunts here in MN as well. Organizations such as HSUS and others have fought at the national level, in an attempt to affect us here in MN. They are trying to outlaw the hunting of bears over bait in State and National Parks and Forests. Most of our public hunting land is in the Superior National Forest. These folks have used the excuse that hunters are habituating the bears to being fed by humans, thereby endangering the lives of campers and hikers using these public places.
Lynn Rogers was one of those who spoke in favor of hunting bears over bait when this heated discussion took place a few years back. His reasoning for this is that people hunting in close proximety of the animals they intend to kill are more likely to make a quick kill shot. Another point he made was that we needed to have a balance of bear numbers to what the human population is willing to tolerate, or we will end up going back to people gut shooting bears in there yards to get rid of them. He also has shown that over a period of many years of bears being fed in close proximity of people and homes, that nuisance complaints have actually dropped in his area, despite the above average numbers of bears, most habituated to human interaction and feeding.
Thank you for responding unfortunately, you offer nothing but “anti-hunting” logic disguised as “I am not against hunting” forum. You make an excuse for every negative bear incident, again typical anti-hunting rhetoric.
Lynn Rogers studies of black bears was not slammed, the real fact is that his studies and “sight-seeing tours” in a familiar forest setting have absolutely no value, nor offer any input in helping New Jersey control the current black bear overpopulation problems in the suburbs. You would like to make a comparision to black bears being approached at feeding stations by humans, or walking close to them in WRI properties, without being attacked, to a New Jersey black bear invading human space by entering backyards, garages and houses, attacking domestic pets and livestock as well as humans. Lynn Rogers is not an expert in New Jersey black bear studies and for sure would not want to be considered one either.
As for what Lynn Rogers does with black bears in a “controlled-stable” environment out in Minnesota, like having a “pet” bear kiss him or laying down beside a black bear, etc., he would never suggest that any other person try these “stunts”. Perhaps a good reason would be the many “expert” trainers of such “wild” pets that get mauled and/or killed;
2008 Animal Trainer killed by bear for no apparent reason.
2009 Woman killed by black bear she kept as pet for (9) years
Just to name two.
The person that does not understand Lynn Rogers is you or others like you. Lynn Rogers is taking a great risk in what he is doing with stunts like this involving black bears and he surely knows that his number could be up at any time by doing so, however, this is his choice, his passion and everyone, including me respects his passion. What is not respected and becomes dangerous are “people” taking what Lynn Rogers does and attempting to make it part of the black bear managemnt process in New Jersey or to illustrate that black bears are not dangerous.
Lynn Rogers is not going to come out to New Jersey, or any other states natural forests and take a walk in High Point State Park, or any other park or backyard and look to shake paws with or kiss a black bear. That is not the point, nor goal of his studies and research.
I also see you have a great deal of respect for the wisdom of “stay-at-home-Mom’s” so in your world a stay at home mom has no clue to the “real-dangers” regarding her childrens’ safety; “see-a bear” “call-a-cop” or what the heck, the stay at home mom can wait until the bear attacks her children then just call 911. Did you ever stop to think just how many “stay-at-home-Mom’s” may have prevented a tradegy by being alert and taking some actions? No of course not, not in your world, only perverts should be a concern and you know they are easy to spot, right?
Lastly, “misunderstanding” is something reserved for you, whatever you have done for six years, regarding black bears has been for naught regarding New Jersey’s black bear problem, because we have a serious black bear overpopulation in New Jersey, we need no more warnings, no delays for additional studies, just a hunt. Thankfully we now have a Governor that made a point of “endorsing a black bear hunt if elected” and was “slammed” by the anti-hunting/animal-right groups who tried everything possible to keep him out of office and failed, this Governor will finally allow the NJDF&W to put a hunt in place and bring this problem under control.
Mike D
Reply is listed under this article following James response
Mike, I don’t understand your Jan 4 response to James’ Oct 8 post (or are you responding to another post that was later deleted?) I met James when he was up here in Ely for the 2008 bear hunt. He is an avid bear hunter, as he said. His son harvested a bear that season, and James and I worked with Dr. Rogers to protect the research bears during hunting season (most hunters here are very supportive of the research and will not shoot a radio-collared bear, but two were shot that season, so there is a continual need to talk with bear hunters who come to the area).
People have been killed by black bears, and people will be killed by them. Yes, there are examples you can give of people being killed and injured by black bears. It has happened, and it will happen. But it happens rarely, considering how often bears encounter people. People are also killed by horses, dogs, and people. You gave two examples, both of captive or pet bears, and only one was a black bear. You could have given other, more relevant instances, but it wouldn’t change the fact that such things are very rare. (–just noticed you gave some in your first post).
I suppose Dr. Rogers’ “number could be up” as you say, and he could be seriously hurt by a black bear because of what he does. It’s possible, but extremely unlikely. I have watched him interact with the bears in the ways you mention (and, far more often, in other ways besides the “stunts” you cite). I’ve seen the behavior of these wild bears, and it’s ridiculous to say he is taking a “great risk”, any more than someone working with horses, dogs, or people. It’s also possible that someone in NJ will someday be killed by a black bear. But even then, it will be a rare event. Considering how many encounters there have already been (and that for every time a person sees a bear, there are probably a hundred instances of a bear seeing a person), it is clear that it will always be rare.
Probably the most likely way to get killed by a bear in NJ is to hit one with your car (maybe that has happened already.) Maybe more bear/car accidents will help people accept a hunt.
I understand why hunters in NJ feel their tradition is threatened–(and not just bear hunting). There seems to be a strong anti-hunting sentiment there, which we don’t face as much here in Minnesota (yet). I have long thought that a bigger threat to the hunting tradition than groups like PETA is the slob “hunter”, and hunters with attitudes that turn people off. Around here, at least , I find that type of hunter to be a small minority. But they have a disproportional affect on attitudes of the non-hunting public.
You might not ever reach the PETA-type people, but there are a lot of people you might yet persuade. Just make sure you get your facts straight.
Good luck.
Hi Al, and thank you for pointing this out as the reply you referred to was not in response to James it was misplaced by the web administrator and I had it deleted.
The response from James was excellent and appreciated as is yours. If you speak to James again I would appreciate your letting him know; thank you.
Although, I am a hunter and completely support hunting and appreciate the NRA mentioning my site as a strong grassroots level place to find accurate black bear information regarding New Jersey, the main reasons that got me involved with N.J. black bear goes back to 2000 when I communicated with then Governor Whitman.
Number (1) Human Safety; my daughter, as well as many other families, live in a small town with my (2) grandchildren and on many occassions was sent scrambling back into her house as black bears entered the yard.
Number (2) The freedom to pursue legal activities, the right to hunt for one’s own food and/or sport, all as part of wildlife management, population control.
Beginning in 2000 through today I have read nearly every single report regarding black bear activity in the U.S. and Canada. Canada, being a good source of tracking overall black bear behavior. I hunted black bears in Canada for many years and found it quite interesting how smart they were when in their own totally forested, natural habitant.
As a bear hunter I am sure you found this as well.
But as the years moved on from 2000 to this year 2010, the black bear has demonstrated a noticable change in relation to their aggressiveness toward humans and this change is quite more prevalent in states like N.J. where development of land has infringed on their home range.
For example:
From 1900 to 2000 records show (8) people killed by black bears in the U.S. (100 YEARS)
From 2001 to 2009 records show (6) people killed by black bears in the U.S. (9 YEARS)
From 1900 to 2000 records show (11) people killed by black bears in Canada (100 YEARS)
From 2001 to 2009 records show (9) people killed by black bears in Canada. (9) years
(Although, this may not seem like a lot to those that lost loved ones it was a world ending experience)
This clearly indicates that the expansion of human population and combination of land development has led to an increase in the frequency of fatal attacks on humans by black bears and Al, there is no need for me to quote the increase in attacks and killing of domestic pets and livestock nor the attacks on humans that did not result in deaths; several of the OPEDS in my website cover these issues. Just logon to njbearhunt.com and you will find all of the OPEDS including the latest published this week.
So what we need to understand here is that “extremely unlikely” , as in the years between 1900 and 2000 has been replaced with “very possible” as demonstrated by activity betwen 2001 and 2009.
To make a very clear point here and as I have made in responses to others that read any comments about Lynn Rogers and take them out of context, I truly understand the research being done by Lynn Rogers or any of the brave researchers working with wild animals, like the late Steve Irwin, they try to bring us closer to wild animals, their work and dedication is greatly respected, surely by me among millions of others, however, there is an obvious greater risk working with “wild” animals than there would be with working with “domestic” animals like horses or dogs. Sure you can site more injuries with horses and dogs, but people start out knowing that these are mainly, domesticated animals, not wild animals therefore, hundreds of thousands of more people participate in activities with domestic animals.
So I don’t see it as “ridiculous” to say Lynn Rogers is taking a great risk working with wild black bears, I say he is a very dedicated and brave human who is pursuing his dreams and fully knows that at any time one of these wild black bears can experience a mood swing that results in a fatal attack on him. Again, the beauty of this free country.
The main concern I have with Lynn Rogers work, is that many people believe that they can get close to bears as he does and in N.J. the anti’s have continually used his research as “proof” that we can live with black bears and there is no need to hunt them. What I would have liked was for Lynn Rogers to publish a response to these people that in fact, his research has nothing to do with determining whether or not N.J. should hold black bear hunts. Further to that, it would have been good for Lynn Rogers to show support for his fellow, hard working, N.J. biologists that are constantly beat up on by the anti’s for their research and recommendations on controlling the black bear population in New Jersey. Up until this year and under the past Governor and DEP the anti’s have been allowed to challenge every point of research that these experienced professionals have made, they are called “no nothings” that are just looking to keep their jobs by calling for black bear hunting and hunting in general.
Years of dedicated, experienced members of the state Fish & Game are mocked and the anti’s have been trying to convince the Governor to appoint anti-hunting/animal-right people to THE F&G Council. All incorrect and misleading information from the anti’s.
Right now, this year in N.J. humans are at the highest risk of being killed by a black bear than in the last (10) years. Why? the black bear population has gone beyond the number (the University of Stroudsburg just released survey estimates nearly 3500 black bears in N.J.) (SEE MY NEW OPED ON “Should There be a Black Bear Hunt in N.J.) that humans can safely coexist with.
In addition, to the black bear population being out of control, these bears not having been seriously hunted, as the hunts of 2003 and 2005 were limited to the same date as the states deer season, have absoultley “NO-FEAR” of humans, they are breaking into garages, cars and houses.
As for New Jersey hunters feeling our tradition threatened, you bet, but not just with the black bears, it continues with the deer as well. The reason for this is that all around the country the anti’s, such as PETA, and others much worse than PETA, have NOT succeeded in keeping hunting as a political issue, however, no need to tell you about N.J. politicians, we are in fact the laughing stock of the nation as we have politicians living in areas of the state where a black bear is rarely seen, challenging other politicians living in dense, problem black bear areas and calling for a hunt.
This time however, we have a new Governor, Governor Chris Christi, who prior to the election made it clear that if elected he will endorse a black bear hunt and we believe he will bring back overall creditability to our state which has far greater issues than hunting.
Ironically, black bears need the bear hunt because without population control they will surley get into more trouble, already millions of non-hunting citizens are in favor of the bear hunt as they see domestic pets being knocked off and humans pursued, swiped at and houses broken into. Very quickly, the shy, cuddley black bear can become the target of a more aggressive move to eliminate their numbers. The F&G supported by hunters and non-hunting citizens supporting hunting would never allow the black bear to be hunted to extinction, just to have the B.B. population reduced and maintained to a safe level of coexistience with humans. After all, it was the F&G in cooperation with N.J. hunters that stopped black bear hunting in 1970 and to date have abided by “every” law concerning the black bear.
When hunts are put in place and numbers brought under control there will be more room for the bears in the forests where they would surley prefer to live and roam.
Once we begin to hold black bear hunts these anti-hunting/animal-right groups will soon look for another weak state to impose their activities on. Shame with any of these groups is that they fail to see the free right of the citizens of this country to pursue legal activities, like hunting and; carrying nothing more than “emotional-expertize” also, fail to understand the need for hunting as the major portion of any wildlife management program, nor do they respect the experience of professional biologists that must make these decisions.
As I mention in many of my responses to people that truly would not be able to hunt; fine you are respected but those that do hunt; do not picket your homes or interfere with your personal activities.
As for getting my facts straight I appreciate your comment but if you go back through any of my OPEDS, including this response to you, you will find that the strength of this website is based on true and accurate facts.
Last point, “slob-hunters” I agree, but as in any other human, hunter or not, we have “slobs”. As hunters or more importantly, humans we always need to understand that good or bad does not make a difference in the right to pursue a legal activity”. Sitting down to a vension, bear, turkey or fish meal, that you worked hard to cull brings about a lot more to the table than rounding up packaged meat at the super market; spending days in the field enjoying the outdoors while harvesting food is very special; but not to take away the pleasure of those that find it easier and less emotional to use the stores; this is freedom of choice.
Well, I hope this response brings us to a better understanding and please keep looking at the posts for new OPEDS and your comments will always be appreciated should you have the time.
Best Regards and best of luck to you as well.
Mike D
Is this the same Lynn Rogers who was “resigned” from a state agency to avoid a sexual harassment lawsuit? That Lynn Rogers was also fired from another agency for drugging bears to change results of studies in his favor. In wildlife biologist circles he’s a known quack…
Nah, it couldn’t be the same……………
Hi Bo, I appreciate you reading my blog and responding, however my concerns are with the black bear overpopulation in New Jersey.
My blog on Dr Lynn Rogers pertains to the fact that anti’s use his name and studies to falsely support their opposition to a required hunt.
As for anything else regarding Dr Rogers not only DOES IT HAVE NO BEARING on what I write, I don’t believe in rumors, everything I place in my blogs is factual and can be verified, gossip is just that gossip and just what good does “gossip” like you “heard” do for anyone? NOTHING.
I know you may have meant well but Dr Rogers is in fact a qualified expert on black bears in “specific study programs”. I wouldn’t call him a “quack” because he has the right to interface with the black bear in whatever manner he wishes. I would and have in fact called him “brave and gutsy” for getting up close and personal with something as powerful and unpredictable as a black bear.
My only point was that New Jersey black bears are not a part of Dr Rogers programs and what he learns in Mn. within his place of study, is of no use out here for reducing the “wild” black bear population.
Shame is people today are so quick to dig up negative and most often unfair “crap” on anyone. I put your reply in here to make it quite clear that any personal allegations, gossip, off the base of the subject blog, against anyone is NOT supported by me.
To make it clear I do respect the work that Dr. Rogers has and still does regarding black bear research.
Lets’ keep it about NJ black bear overpopulation and getting the overdue hunt in place to bring that population under control.
Mike D
Hi Mike–
–and Bo. Dr. Rogers is far from a quack. The rumors you cite are actually backwards–Dr. Rogers was investigated by his employer, the US Forest Service, when he started questioning logging practices on Forest Service land. The Forest Service settled in order to protect themselves, since the allegations against Dr. Rogers were trumped up to begin with. Here’s a link: http://whitepines.org/Our%20forests%20are%20safe%20now%20-%20right.html
Disclaimer–this is Dr. Rogers’ site, but the quote is from a news outlet in the area. I haven’t been able to find any online independent verification of this, but have heard enough from enough different sources that I am convinced.
I have watched Dr. Rogers work with black bears, and heard him talk. He is a very careful, observant, scientist. When I hear him say things like, “The more I learn about bears the more I realize I don’t know”, I’d say he is a long ways from a quack.
–I should have added, thank you Mike for defending Dr. Rogers’ work. In the link I provided, the relevant paragraph is second from the bottom.
Hi AL, as I stated and let me be clear Dr Rogers is by far no quack, it is the “quack” anti’s that erroneously use his name and research to support there efforts in misleading the public in N.J. on black bear issues.
Mike D
thank you very very much , it is so very good web-site. i adore your website!
Hi Juan, thank you for the kind words and hope u will keep looking for new OPEDS.
Mile D
I truly like your web site
Hi Jarrod, thank you in the next few days I will have a new blog up and it will be noted on this blog as “Knights’ Wit”, hope ypu have a chance to read.
Mike D
ohh…nice send but definitely?/?
Hi Chase, thank you keep reading to answer those ???
Mike D
ohh beneficial info thank you admin Sesli chat
Hi Serena, thank you for reading and responding, look for Knights’ Wit my soon comong blog on all subjects.
Mike D
ohh great data thank you admin Sesli chat
Hi Nam, thank you for the nice words, look for my new blog Knights’ Wit for discussions on all matters.
Mike D
many thanks! just what I was looking for .)
Hi Jenae, thank you for reading and responding, look for my new blog Knights Wit for discussions on all worldly matter.
Mike D
Ok I agree Dr. Rodgers is a little out of the reality plain,and he will be lucky to live
Yes his research has little to do with reality—-feeding stations give me a break
But again I am posting to say—-a DECember hunt is irresponsible—-yeah even the great Doc Rogers supported bear baiting and hunting seasons for bear
as far as living in peace with bears it will never happen
I just believe in giving them a fighting chance
Duck, thank you for reading the blog. Dr. Rogers enjoys his life that is the important thing for him or anyone else that pursues such activities.
The December hunt is a product of the problems the NJDF&W has had in instituting a bear hunt.
Several years ago an earlier hunt even during the bow season was discussed. This gave the anti’s even more opportunities to interfere was the hunt; is the bow safe, the bow season was too early, etc., etc.
I believe once this gets off the ground the time frame will expand.
December hunt irresponsibe and give them a fighting chance?
December will give bears the best chance, too much of a chance when the goal is to lower the population. Weather will restrict their movement, deer hunters will stir up the woods putting them on alert and in spite of the anti’s allocations, they will not be hunted in dens.
Mike D.
I wish all these rogerians would realize that this guy has now reached a time in his life that he is all ego, he is taking you for your money. Selling bear scat. Thats really gross!
bebe, thank you for your comments. Seems that many start out with good intentions and then the $$$ signs set in.
I really don’t care about that as much as I do with the anti’s that use his name and research to support their cause while he just sits back and does nothing to set the record straight regarding hunting as a neccessary part of wildlife management.
Mike D
Hi Mike, the course fees for Dr. Rogers have gone up to $2,000 for the 2011 season. They are running 10 weeks of 8+ individuals each week. That is a significant amount of money($160,000) they anticipate during the 10 weeks.
Rogers is also pushing for a law to protect collared research bears this year. He has 100,000 fans on his Lilly the Black Bear Facebook page that he has encouraged to write into legislators and our DNR Commisioner trying to influence them to pass more laws affecting our hunt, in order to gain protection for the bears he uses to bring in all the money. Between WRI, which is the research branch, and The North American Bear Center, which is the educational branch, they have brought in over 500,000 in donations in just the last 9 months since they ran the internet den camera. That is a lot of money, and Rogers is pandering to and using the anti-hunting crowd to try and force his agenda down the throats of Minnesotans. The anti-hunting groups have also used the discussion thread on the facebook page as a rallying point to fight bear hunts around the country, including yours in NJ. Posters from PETA and the HSUS regularly post on the board asking Lilly fans to write and make calls in support of their militant anti-hunting agenda. Rogers and staff have knowingly allowed this to continue, despite complaints from the hunting community that have long supported his research.
I have spent time on the Lily the Black Bear Facebook page referenced above and while there are diverse opinons about hunting, from what I’ve observed, Dr. Rogers and the administrators of the FB page make it clear that they are not operating an anti-hunting forum. I’ve seen anti-hunting posts removed quickly and have seen reminders that the focus of the NABC and the WRI is not to be anti-hunting. The WRI is seeking a law to protect a very small number of radio collared, brightly ribboned, research bears. From what I understand, there are many hunters that have no objection to this proposal. I would like to believe that the protection of hunting rights can co-exist with protecting and supporting bear research that also brings interest and revenue to the area.
Hi A.M., I totally agree with you and as I have stated many times it is the anti’s that use Lynn Rogers taking his research and comments and putting the anti-hunting spin to work.
Mike D.
Thanks Mike… it serves us better to stay away from the ‘anti’ mentality – that only causes alienation instead of allowing for a reasonable process and discussion to take place. I appreciate your forum.
A.M. agree again; if you have the time read the new OPED I posted just today it covers the 2000 through 2010 history of the N.J. black bear issue. Just logon to:
njbearhunt.com it will be the first post.
Thank you for reading my blog and your kind comments, hope you like the new.
Mike D