Grizzly bears to be killed to help moose

Wed Apr 6, 9:44 PM ET


ANCHORAGE (Reuters) - For the first time since Alaska became a U.S. state, hunters will be allowed to use bait to lure and kill grizzly bears under a program intended to boost moose populations in parts of interior Alaska.



The Alaska Department of Fish and Game began issuing permits last week for a predator-control program aimed at clearing out the majority of grizzlies in a 3,000-square-mile (777,000 hectares) area of brushy terrain and tundra near the Canadian border.


The program, launched on April 1, allows permitted hunters to use bear-attracting food to lure the animals to spots where they can be shot. The practice, though used in the distant past, was not permitted during the 46 years of Alaskan statehood.


Alaska hunters have long been allowed to use bait to lure black bears, but that practice was never extended to the larger and less plentiful grizzlies and coast-dwelling brown bears.


Critics say it is unethical and dangerous because it acquaints bears with human and pet food, such as the stale pastries and bacon grease used at bait stations. Alaska voters last fall rejected a ballot initiative that would have outlawed the practice.


The Alaska Board of Game, a panel appointed by Republican Gov. Frank Murkowski, has determined that the grizzly bear-killing program is needed to increase residents' opportunities to successfully hunt moose, said Fish and Game spokeswoman Cathie Harms.


"The moose population is depressed. It's at densities not quite but close to half of what the board had held as an objective," Harms said.


Critics say the program could devastate the grizzlies, animals with slow reproductive rates, with no real benefit to the moose.


"It's unconscionable, as far as I'm concerned," said John Toppenberg, director of the Anchorage-based Alaska Wildlife Alliance, "There's no real science to back that up. What you have is some people complaining that there's not as many moose to shoot as there were in the 40s, and so on."


Harms said state officials have concluded that in this part of Alaska, grizzlies are the main source of predation on moose, followed by wolves and black bears.


An estimated 135 grizzly bears live in the targeted area, and the program seeks to have up to 81 of those killed, state officials said. The target area is included in a program that has allowed aircraft-assisted hunters to kill 266 wolves since November, according to Fish and Game figures.

Ok? So the BEARS need to be thinned out.......

[quote]Critics say it is unethical and dangerous because it acquaints bears with human and pet food, such as the stale pastries and bacon grease used at bait stations.

From the sounds of this you'll be able to make a good breakfast in camp and kill a nice bear before lunch

I have yet to shoot enough bears or moose, and if shooting one of these species to enhance the opportunity of shooting the other, so be it...there are a couple of places in this great State where a resident can shoot a brown bear without a tag (parts of 20D and 20E, 25D, most of 13). In Unit 20E, residents and non-residents alike are allowed to shoot 2 brown bears per year. They started shooting wolves from planes last year (or was it the year before?). I bet getting a brown bear baiting permit is not easy for the regular Alaskan. I wish I could get one.

Very interesting idea, but John Toppenberg is quite mistaken when he says "There's no real science to back that up..." there is a lot of science to back it up, i.e.:

Ungulate Population Models with Predation: A Case Study with the North American Moose
Francois Messier
Ecology > Vol. 75, No. 2 (Mar., 1994), pp. 478-488

and thats only one of many...

With respect to the lowering of grizzly populations in that area, no matter whether you believe it is "right" or "wrong" they are being managed in accordance with short term human wants. Rather than argue that the science is "bad" (and look like an idiot) Mr. Toppenberg should focus on changing attitudes about long term ecosystem equilibrium. He is no more credible than the rednecks who want to argue that wolves are not healthy for the GYE. They just need to be managed via hunting....

The argument with both lies in simple recurrent predator-prey equilibrium- where do we want that equilibrium to be?

Now if we could just get wolf hunting opened up in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming......

IV

IV: I think that most decisions with regard to natural resources are made on "short term human wants." That includes oil, wood, food, paychecks, national security, and wolves and brown bears. I think Alaska has some of the most aggressive, enlightened, and successful game management policies in the world. Everywhere else in the United States, for example, the rednecks have killed all their grizzly bears and wolves, and made it so hard to even have an opportunity to shoot a sheep or goat that it is rediculous. If Alaska wanted to have only moose as a prey species for human hunters, as they do in northern Europe, the state would just kill all other preditors (brown bears and wolves mostly), and we would have hundreds of thousands of moose. But that is not what the state is doing. People hunt whales and seals up here and they do so successfully with proper management. All big game species in Alaska are important and I think the fact that we have huntable and sustainable populations of game species that cannot be found in the lower US or most of Canada illustrates the success of the game management in this state.

quote:

The Alaska Department of Fish and Game began issuing permits last week for a predator-control program aimed at clearing out the majority of grizzlies in a 3,000-square-mile (777,000 hectares) area of brushy terrain and tundra near the Canadian border.

This statement makes the subject area sound like something it is not..3000 sq. miles is 0.5% of the state's surface area...3000sq.miles/586,400 sq.miles (the states total surface area). I think the states total hectares is in the billions. It is a very small area. Newspaper articles always sound good unless you personally know something about what they are writing about...then, it seems twisted or just plane wrong. It would have been a more 'fair and balanced' article if the writer was honest about the area being affected. This article vaguely reminds me of Fox news network.

rwj,

If you are an Alaskan resident, you can get a baiting permit. All you have to do is come to Tok, find your spot in the control area, GPS it, and then register it with the Tok department. Getting a permit to hunt the Control area is open to ANY Alaskan resident. I hope this helps.

Northway: Amazing. Thank you for the information. I am going to look into this tomorrow. Thank you again. I am an Alaskan resident.

Under the predation permit there is no bag limit either.

There are only about 135 bears in the control unit.

Average annual take in the unit is 14 bears with a two bear per year limit for hunting.

Most bears in the unit will probably be sows with cubs or cubs which are illegal to take.

81 bears is the maximum allowable take but it may be hard to even get half that.

In my opinion the control permit is just an attempt to get more than 14 bears per year out of the area. The limit is already 2 per year by the hunting regs.

What I don't understand, is if we are trying to reduce the number of bears, seriously do that, why not allow taking of sows? Seems that would be the most efficient and effective way to reduce the population.

I guess due to public perception, you could exclude lactating sows or sows with cubs.

Sows are legal.

Only sows with cubs or cubs (bear in second year of life) are illegal.

Thanks for clearing that up R.

I always find the writers of "special interest" a queer sort. I wonder if they ever et grizz? F&G came in some 7 yrs back and stated we have 3 1/2 bears per/sq. mi.-- I wonder if Kathi wants some grizz hump or backstraps. Me - I have favored the taste of moose fat and the tenderloins - pretty tasty! I like to have the grizz around and even enjoy their company but they infringe on my families diet and I agree thinning out the population would allow for the moose population to be enhanced greatly! Understanding the evolution of things "the strongest survive" we still have to eat. I would like to see them who write those notes of "concern" live where we do and attempt to eat grizz on a regular diet -whoops- I mean moose.

I am not completely clear on the baiting rules. Like number of bait sites Except that each station must have G.P.S. coordinates and only two bait stations can be used for black bear at the same time.

The bait permits are only given out in Tok. You do not have to bait. Predation permits can be picked up at other F&g offices if you don't bait.

my thoughts have always been that no one knows whats best for its state than the people who live there.the other 49 states have done a pretty good job of wrecking there environment, alaska is and if allowed to govern itself will always be the most prolific state in the union for resources. im sure the people who live there will do whats best for there home.the rest of us should concentrate on cleanig our own back yard up first.my hats off to alaska,dont let anyone take control out of your hands.(many would like to)and the next time someone asks for some wolves to import to put in large national parks"say no"because someone forgot to tell the wolves they had to stay there. of all the things ive lost in life,i miss my mind the most.

I think they are doing it because the fish and game department has noticed a 95% mortality rate for moose calfs due to grizzly predation.

Thats a lot of grizzlies.

Forgot.

It was only in that area.

quote:

hunters will be allowed to use bait to lure and kill grizzly bears under a program intended to boost moose populations in parts of interior Alaska.

How many natralists will you be allowed to import as bait?

Don't need to import any more of them, lots living here at the time - any tree living, bunny huggers interested in seeing some bears this next week, I will be hunting 16A and could use some fresh meat for "baiting" purposes.................

Correct me if I am wrong but didn't I hear that this program just netted one or two bears? One of the problems is it is expensive to have that hide tanned or rugged or whatever. How many can the average person afford to do?

That is what I heard too.

Something about that the bears are unpredictable towards coming to baits compared to black bears.

If a person can afford the gas it takes to get to the area. I would think that they could get the hide tanned too.

What I'll never understand is that the when fish and game what animals of any type reduced in numbers.

That they put resictions on why register bait sites why have permits. If they want bears killed you open the area up to all and say go kill a bear.

But no we only want bears killed in a certain way.

Not only is this a propblem there but in many other states with other type of game. We have to many geese,deer ect.

But instead of opening season on them they do it have assed and put many resictions on when how ect. That really limits the number taken.