Tweets:

This was brought on by the discussion on the bear hunting initiative, which I
admit to not being too familiar with. I don't want to jump in to the debate,
especially over issues which many of you know more about than me; however I
thought the following might be of some interest. This is not addressing any
particular earlier statements, except perhaps some of Don's comments about
feeding bears to prevent their becoming nuisances, and how that has worked
well in Oregon.

Clarice and I surveyed a 2500 acre tree farm east of Arlington (in the
Cascade foothills just below the big Jim Creek naval communication station)
for a young logger owner who fed bears. I asked him for some more info:

He said that feeding bears is a very good way to prevent bear damage to
trees. In the spring black bears can essentially do in a tree plantation.
He thins his trees, and finds that the bears go after the 10 to 20 year trees
that he had selected to continue growing (rather than stay in the unthinned
areas). They girdle the tree just above the root crown, looking for carbos
in the cambium. He feeds for three months in the spring.

The Washington Forest Protection Association consults with tree farmers that
want to undertake such a "project" and sells the feed. He hangs feed in
areas away from any roads, and at first puts up some meat to attract them.
After the bears start coming to the feeding station he finds that they do not
do any more damage. So, it's effective. Also, an adult bear eats about 20
lbs of the feed a day, so you can estimate the number of bear in an area. He
is also sure that feeding helps them survive the stress of finding food in
the spring. Therein lies the rub.

One year he fed 4 bears, the next he had 14. At 20 lbs a day, for three
months, 14 bears eat a lot of chow. This has to be carried in, in 50 lb
sacks, by hand, every day. It is serious work. (the cost is $0.23 a lb.). He
decided that it was too much, and invited hunters in the next year. He
strictly keeps hunters away from the feeding stations (but they did
themselves hunt with bait). They killed 6.

This year he is feeding four, more or less. He has used up 7000 lbs. It
seems to work (he has no bear problems) and he is not seeing an increase in
population (over the last three years).

He is concerned about whether the initiative will prevent the use of bait for
killing "problem" bears. Problem, by this definition, of course, would be
those that exist when the population gets to be too big in his tree farm for
him to feed. This is a real concern (apparently the damage by the bears is
not trivial) not just a question of sport. (I don't know about what the
initiative covers; he thought it would totally outlaw the use of bait, even
for "bear control"). If what you want to do is eliminate bears which, under
your management system, are too numerous, you of course want to use the
quickest, easiest way.

I know a lot of us on this list, myself included, have problems with
"wildlife management" that essentially is an extension of the farmer's
concern for pest control. Nevertheless, I also know this person is
conscientious, manages his timber so that it generally has an abundance of
wildlife (as we saw the month we were out there) and is not himself a bear
hunter. He also is sure that none of the local hunters have taken advantage
of his feeding stations for an easy kill.

Don't know whether any of this helps. I still am undecided about the vote.
-------------------------------------
Name: Jerry Broadus
jbroadus at seanet.com
901-16th. St S.W.
Puyallup, Wa. 98371
206-845-3156
07/18/96
13:33:30