A bear near Sebastopol

[scamperwillow]

I'm still willing to set up a petition if someone will do the research on who to send it to. Perhaps that contct at Fish and Wildlife? Or was it fish and game?

PS from me-now that we know the reality, maybe it's time for that petition.

[Marty M]

; at Fish and Wildlife? Or was it fish and game?

California Department of Fish and Wildlife press release:

Department Name Change Effective Tomorrow

December 31, 2012
by CDFW

The California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) will become the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW), effective Jan. 1.
The new name was mandated by AB 2402, which was signed Sept. 25 by Gov. Edmund G. Brown Jr. and is one of numerous provisions passed into law during 2012 that affect the department.
“The name of the department was changed to better reflect our evolving responsibilities,” said Department Director Charlton H. Bonham. “As our role has grown to meet 21st century expectations, we remain committed to our traditional responsibilities and to honoring our deep roots in California’s natural resources legacy.”
Traditionally known as game wardens, the department’s law enforcement staff will now be called wildlife officers.
Californians will notice new Internet (www.wildlife.ca.gov) and email addresses for CDFW employees. The old URL and email addresses will continue to work indefinitely.
Many department materials will continue to bear the old name because AB 2402 reduced the cost associated with the name change by preventing CDFW from undergoing a wholesale turnover of materials, including signs, uniforms and supplies.
The mission of the department continues to be “to manage California’s diverse fish, wildlife, and plant resources, and the habitats upon which they depend, for their ecological values and for their use and enjoyment by the public.”
In furtherance of that mission, the department carries out numerous responsibilities related to the commercial, recreational, educational and scientific use and enjoyment of California’s natural resources.

[Dixon]

I'm sorry Peggy but they may be decent people but their chosen profession involves, to a personal extent, protecting wildlife. When they can't even lobby effectively enough to harness the resources to be able to relocate a "problem" animal who trampled upon some fences that we constructed on THEIR land, then I'm not at all tolerant or understanding of their practices in certain areas.

Blaming the staff of DFW for their insufficient funding is a nonsensical and nonconstructive response. It is not their job to lobby for more funding any more than it's your job as a citizen to lobby for more funding for them. Furthermore, their DFW bosses have certainly been lobbying for more funding, but with limited success, as the money is being diverted to war and other oppressive but lucrative enterprises. I used to work in mental health; are you gonna castigate me for the lack of funding for mental health treatment? If you wanna castigate someone for inappropriately directing our tax dollars, start with the fuckwads who spend our money on wars and Wall Street handouts, and leave the peons of agencies like DFW alone. Sheesh!

[sambacat]

Well, I didn't have any porridge to serve them, but we had a lovely tea party.

[odeek9]

Blaming the staff of DFW for their insufficient funding is a nonsensical and nonconstructive response. It is not their job to lobby for more funding any more than it's your job as a citizen to lobby for more funding for them. Furthermore, their DFW bosses have certainly been lobbying for more funding, but with limited success, as the money is being diverted to war and other oppressive but lucrative enterprises. I used to work in mental health; are you gonna castigate me for the lack of funding for mental health treatment? If you wanna castigate someone for inappropriately directing our tax dollars, start with the fuckwads who spend our money on wars and Wall Street handouts, and leave the peons of agencies like DFW alone. Sheesh!

Point taken. In my frustration my phrasing was very poorly done as I meant the DFG in its entirety and not simply those of a lower echelon. That said, the fact remains it need not officially be part of one's job in order to do as best as one can to influence the direction an agency is going. Sitting back and allowing certain policies to be enacted with which you disagree is unconscionable. The power lies within.

But I will take your respectful words and give to them all of the consideration they merit.

[gypsey]

What is the point of the blame game? So far odeek you have offered not one solution.

I'm sorry Peggy but they may be decent people but their chosen profession involves, to a personal extent, protecting wildlife. When they can't even lobby effectively enough to harness the resources to be able to relocate a "problem" animal who trampled upon some fences that we constructed on THEIR land, then I'm not at all tolerant or understanding of their practices in certain areas.

[peggykarp]

What would the petition say?

I'm still willing to set up a petition if someone will do the research on who to send it to. Perhaps that contct at Fish and Wildlife? Or was it fish and game?

[odeek9]

What is the point of the blame game? So far odeek you have offered not one solution.

Am I being "blamed" for not having a solution? Interesting. No one has, including you. Why? There isn't one. Nothing of any viability anyway, or that can be accomplished within a reasonable time frame before the inevitable outcome.

A few thoughts, but that's it. Although not realistic on many fronts, I still searched last night for a professional trapper thinking that perhaps donations might cover the cost, though doubtful. I found many-yet not a single one for larger animals. And I firmly believe that there are more than a solitary bear so expenses would be prohibitive. A silly solution. But when you come up with a better one-something other than a petition-let us know.

These personal attacks have led us astray. How about going back to the bear and improving his chances? Think you can manage that? Good!

[peggykarp]

How about going back to the bear and improving his chances?

This is mostly a repeat of my previous post but I think it's worth repeating.

The only ways to improve the bears' chances that have been put forward so far are what F&W and also some WACCOBB posters have advocated: people need to secure their animals, food supplies, trash, garden produce, fruit trees, etc., so the bears will not continue to rely on humans for their food supply and hopefully will head north. Also, if the bears comes around, to make loud noises like airhorns or barking dogs (from a safe distance from the bear) or loud music, etc, to chase them away. F&W also said erecting single strand electric fence around fruit trees, koi ponds, can be effective (although not 100%).

I think creating a flyer with this info on it and posting it in the areas where the bears have been seen (and may be heading) is a good idea.

How about going back to the bear and improving his chances? Think you can manage that? Good!

[Thad]

https://news.sky.com/story/1102544/m...-bears-stomach

Human remains have been found inside a black bear that was killed near the scene of a deadly mauling in a remote area of Alaska.

[scamperwillow]

I guess it would say that we are in favor of and asking for relocation of the bear(s) so a safe, wilder area. Maybe if enough people signed, they would find the funds somehow. I suppose we could even offer to help raise funds? We could also address it to our local state officials - Noreen Evans, Wes Chesbro, Mark Levine.

What would the petition say?

[parlyvous]

https://news.sky.com/story/1102544/m...-bears-stomachHuman remains have been found inside a black bear that was killed near the scene of a deadly mauling in a remote area of Alaska.

And so....? Was there proof the black bear killed the 'human'? Grizzlys in their territory will hunt and consume humans...remains may have gleefully been consumed by the black bear, thankful to his cousin 'Grizzly" for the 'leftovers'. We humans do NOT own this planet and we are fair 'game' for carnivores, expecially in remote areas....after all we are meat on the hoof too.Until we respect other species and their right for a place on this planet we will continue to force them into sharing space with humans. We readily kill them for having the audicity to wander into "our" territory....to be fair it should work the other way also.BTW: Black bears do not intentionally stalk humans for consumption...known fact. They'd much rather go in the other direction if able..but again our encroachment into more and more of other species territory is only going to force confrontations....and sadly, generally our response is deadly."Spare the Bear!"

[peggykarp]

I think it's a great idea. I like the idea of offering to help raise funds. We could aim for a significant but doable number of signatures -- 100? -- and then request a meeting with a rep from F&W for a group of us to present it. Don't know if someone from F&W comes over this way regularly but guessing because of bear they will be around.

I do think it needs to be done ASAP; time is not on the bears' side.

I guess it would say that we are in favor of and asking for relocation of the bear(s) so a safe, wilder area. Maybe if enough people signed, they would find the funds somehow. I suppose we could even offer to help raise funds? We could also address it to our local state officials - Noreen Evans, Wes Chesbro, Mark Levine.

[gypsey]

I don't blame you for not having a solution but rather was responding to your posts "blaming" the DFG.. Another poster phrased it more constructively than I did, and you responded in kind. In any case, some of the solutions I've offered in my posts have included:
-Go to the DFG site and educate ourselves about the bears and their re=emergence as well as the consequences to their safety
-Learn from their instructions for removing bear attractants and also encouraging them to leave
-Finding out if the DFG's tranquilizing and safe removal program is in force (Peggy Karp spoke at length with DFG, see her posts--it's not.)
-Now, perhaps taking up a petition/funding to have the bear(s) safely removed.
Hopefully we can continue to dialogue until we find a workable solution on behalf of the bears.

Am I being "blamed" for not having a solution? Interesting. No one has, including you. Why? There isn't one. Nothing of any viability anyway, or that can be accomplished within a reasonable time frame before the inevitable outcome.

A few thoughts, but that's it. Although not realistic on many fronts, I still searched last night for a professional trapper thinking that perhaps donations might cover the cost, though doubtful. I found many-yet not a single one for larger animals. And I firmly believe that there are more than a solitary bear so expenses would be prohibitive. A silly solution. But when you come up with a better one-something other than a petition-let us know.

These personal attacks have led us astray. How about going back to the bear and improving his chances? Think you can manage that? Good!

[gypsey]

Thanks again Peggy for another constructive and useful post. I also wonder if we can ask DFG and our local elected representatives what WE can do to restore the needed funding for bear removal. As mentioned, I lived on Vancouver Island for 13 years and bear mobiles were used to safely trap the bears. During the summer and early fall, these young bears were everywhere. However, wildlife is part of the "marketing" of the area I lived in so a change in public consciousness here to value our wildlife may also needed. That could take time. And while a petition was suggested--and I repeated--we know that removing just the bears we're seeing now is not a lasting solution.
SO thanks again Peggy for reminding us of the preventative solutions we have at hand to give the bears a chance.

I believe the Keep Them Wild flyer on the DFG website could be downloaded and copied as a flyer.

How about going back to the bear and improving his chances?

This is mostly a repeat of my previous post but I think it's worth repeating.

The only ways to improve the bears' chances that have been put forward so far are what F&W and also some WACCOBB posters have advocated: people need to secure their animals, food supplies, trash, garden produce, fruit trees, etc., so the bears will not continue to rely on humans for their food supply and hopefully will head north. Also, if the bears comes around, to make loud noises like airhorns or barking dogs (from a safe distance from the bear) or loud music, etc, to chase them away. F&W also said erecting single strand electric fence around fruit trees, koi ponds, can be effective (although not 100%).

I think creating a flyer with this info on it and posting it in the areas where the bears have been seen (and may be heading) is a good idea.

[joybird]

This sounds good. What if we pledged funds now, to be used when or if bear is relocated? If we said we have x # of dollars to donate maybe that would make a difference.
I wonder what a relocation might cost?
I pledge to donate some $'s.

Joy

I think it's a great idea. I like the idea of offering to help raise funds. We could aim for a significant but doable number of signatures -- 100? -- and then request a meeting with a rep from F&W for a group of us to present it. Don't know if someone from F&W comes over this way regularly but guessing because of bear they will be around.

I do think it needs to be done ASAP; time is not on the bears' side.

[Lisa W]

This past Monday, the bear in question wandered onto my daughter's dads property in Forestville. They awoke to it "fishing" in their koi pond looking for breakfast. They took some pics then my 16 yr old daughter, on instinct to protect the fish, went out on the porch (with the pond b/w her and the bear), made herself look bigger telling it to go away and kind of growling at it. The bear wandered on up the hill and disappeared. Afterwards she couldn't believe that she had done that & said she wished she could have gone up to it and pet it because it didn't seem scary or aggressive. Of course I'm glad she didn't try but I was impressed with her bravery. Her dad sent the pics to KTVU news and they came up to SoCo from Oakland to interview them for the news, while I watched from the sidelines. It seemed like much ado about not much, but it was cool seeing them on the news that night and she got her 5 minutes of fame. And the newswomen got a day out of the big city into our neck of the woods, quite literally. Here is the newscast: https://m.ktvu.com/videos/news/fores...familys/v4T2d/

I hope this bear gets to a safe place where someone won't try to shoot it. Be safe Mr Bear.

All for now, Lisa

I would be so grateful if the bear wandered by my property and I had a chance to see him/her.....seriously people, its not a 18ft Kodiak Bear, they arent going to eat your small children ( although I have prayed Paul Hobbs meets a Kodiak in a dim alley) all this nonsense about relocating them! leave them alone, or move to town!

[odeek9]

I don't blame you for not having a solution but rather was responding to your posts "blaming" the DFG.....

I thought that the final sentence in my post would be easily understood. Obviously I was mistaken

All of your thoughts-thoughts, not solutions- are valid common sense suggestions mentioned by many. When I use to backpack a great deal it was known to not even keep hand cream, toothpaste, deodorant, etc. in the tent as all such items serve as attractants. One has to be incredibly circumspect at all times. To reiterate all of the ideas to redirect the bear are somewhat useful. But the fact remains that the vast majority of area residents would have to follow the guidelines in order for them to have any chance of being effective. Not possible-most don't even care.

I DO, in part, place blame upon the shoulders of the DFG. It's their field of expertise and regardless of supposed budget restrictions (which I must admit is plausible during these economic times) accessing funding through some means, re-dispersal plans, or finding an alternative to protect and/or save the bears is their job! They provide only words. I'm not convinced that a peaceful means of dealing with the bears is of interest to all. There are many, many good and decent folks employed by the DFG I'm sure. With good hearts. With good intentions. But just like in any profession , the agency is comprised of individuals. And not unlike everywhere, the attitudes, motivations, priorities, and agendas are absolutely diverse. From one end of the spectrum to the other. And from prior experience I question as to the importance of saving the bear, as opposed to just getting it all over with for some-policy makers especially.

I don't have a legitmate resolution, nor have I heard one that will actually SAVE the bear (s). I said from the beginning of this thread that relocation had been phased out. No one paid heed. In its stead are aversion techniques. It saddens me greatly as I have little faith in the outcome. Its been left to us and that's problematic on many fronts. I'm totally in favor of donations for relocation as you mentioned. I said in a previous post that I couldn't find a business capable, or willing, to do so. Where's a good mountain man when you need him? And the clock is ticking.

I know that this post will be picked apart for any number of valid reasons. It was hastily composed. But as I stated once before I love all non-human animals far more than the human variety. Consequently, I could not care less what you may think of my posts, or for that matter me. I just don't give a damn. My most earnest wish, my hope, is that someone creative developes a scheme to SAVE THE BEAR. We're grasping at straws. Petitions, flyers are plans to be commended. But not enough. Drastic action needs to be concocted by someone. And no, Gypsy, I'm neither bright enough nor creative enough to be the one. But he/she is out there. The bear will be lost to some fool at any moment now. That's all.

[Dixon]

And so....? Was there proof the black bear killed the 'human'?

Apparently you didn't read the article, or you'd have known that the black bear was witnessed attacking and killing the man whose remains were later found in its stomach.

Black bears do not intentionally stalk humans for consumption...known fact.

Like so many "known facts", there are exceptions. This was one of them and, as the article mentioned, not the only documented case on record.

[Scott McKeown]

Human remains have been found inside a black bear that was killed near the scene of a deadly mauling in a remote area of Alaska.

While black bears under certain circumstances can be potentially dangerous and should be respected, they are not as aggressive, as say, brown bears can be. And they certainly are much less aggressive than human beings. Putting this in perspective, according to the website of the North American Bear Center in Minnesota (which seems like a reasonably respectable organization given that people like Jane Goodall are on their official Board of Advisors) of the estimated 750,000 black bears in North America the average statistic has been about one killing of a human being per year by black bears in all of North America.

So one out of 750,000 black bears will kill a human each year. Compare that to the statistic that in North America one out of 16,000 human beings will murder another human each year. So with respect to human beings, black bears are approximately one-fiftieth (1/50th) as fatally aggressive to humans as human beings are to other humans.

Scott

[gypsey]

I know I tend to be optimistic because of my experience on VI (Canada) with its bear management program in the 90's. All of us knew what to do and what we could reply on from fish and wildlife.
Anyway whether or not we disagree on the definition of solution (vs thoughts), I appreciate your taking the time to write such a thoughtful reply.

I thought that the final sentence in my post would be easily understood. Obviously I was mistaken

All of your thoughts-thoughts, not solutions- are valid common sense suggestions mentioned by many. When I use to backpack a great deal it was known to not even keep hand cream, toothpaste, deodorant, etc. in the tent as all such items serve as attractants. One has to be incredibly circumspect at all times. To reiterate all of the ideas to redirect the bear are somewhat useful. But the fact remains that the vast majority of area residents would have to follow the guidelines in order for them to have any chance of being effective. Not possible-most don't even care.

I DO, in part, place blame upon the shoulders of the DFG. It's their field of expertise and regardless of supposed budget restrictions (which I must admit is plausible during these economic times) accessing funding through some means, re-dispersal plans, or finding an alternative to protect and/or save the bears is their job! They provide only words. I'm not convinced that a peaceful means of dealing with the bears is of interest to all. There are many, many good and decent folks employed by the DFG I'm sure. With good hearts. With good intentions. But just like in any profession , the agency is comprised of individuals. And not unlike everywhere, the attitudes, motivations, priorities, and agendas are absolutely diverse. From one end of the spectrum to the other. And from prior experience I question as to the importance of saving the bear, as opposed to just getting it all over with for some-policy makers especially.

I don't have a legitmate resolution, nor have I heard one that will actually SAVE the bear (s). I said from the beginning of this thread that relocation had been phased out. No one paid heed. In its stead are aversion techniques. It saddens me greatly as I have little faith in the outcome. Its been left to us and that's problematic on many fronts. I'm totally in favor of donations for relocation as you mentioned. I said in a previous post that I couldn't find a business capable, or willing, to do so. Where's a good mountain man when you need him? And the clock is ticking.

I know that this post will be picked apart for any number of valid reasons. It was hastily composed. But as I stated once before I love all non-human animals far more than the human variety. Consequently, I could not care less what you may think of my posts, or for that matter me. I just don't give a damn. My most earnest wish, my hope, is that someone creative developes a scheme to SAVE THE BEAR. We're grasping at straws. Petitions, flyers are plans to be commended. But not enough. Drastic action needs to be concocted by someone. And no, Gypsy, I'm neither bright enough nor creative enough to be the one. But he/she is out there. The bear will be lost to some fool at any moment now. That's all.

[odeek9]

I know I tend to be optimistic because of my experience on VI (Canada) with its bear management program in the 90's. All of us knew what to do and what we could reply on from fish and wildlife.
Anyway whether or not we disagree on the definition of solution (vs thoughts), I appreciate your taking the time to write such a thoughtful reply.

Thank you Gypsy. An unexpected yet very pleasing response

[peggykarp]

Below are excerpts from https://www.sierrawild.gov/bears/faq, a govenment site. This is essentially what the DFW biologist Conrad Jones told me. One thing mentioned here, which Jones also alluded to, is that relocation seldom works. It all reinforces my belief that the best hope for the bears is that residents all practice aversive conditioning. This may not be possible to achieve. But to whatever extent we can achieve it, the bears' chances will be improved.

# # #

What do “habituated” and “food conditioned” mean?
A habituated bear is one that one that has gotten used to being around people and does not respond to the presence of humans—they essentially ignore people. These bears are more likely to learn that human structures, automobiles, campsites, and populated areas are possible sources of food, thereby becoming food conditioned. Getting into improperly stored human food (trash, etc) even just once can start a bear down this path.

What does it mean to aversively condition a bear?
Aversive conditioning and hazing are techniques wildlife biologists use in their efforts to retrain habituated bears, but the general principle is the same. The goal is to recondition habituated bears to avoid populated areas and eat natural foods, thereby breaking the cycle that draws black bears into populated areas.

Why do resource managers sometimes have to kill bears?
A bear that has grown accustomed to human food may become aggressive toward people. If aversive conditioning techniques don’t work to break this cycle, and a bear continues to demonstrate aggressive behavior, resource managers are left no choice but to euthanize the bear. This cycle invariably begins with the unfortunate bear getting food from a careless or unknowing person.

Why don't resource managers just relocate problem bears?
In short, relocating bears rarely works. Over 95% of bears removed from their home range will find their way back, become a problem somewhere else, or die from challenges created by their relocation.

[Barry]

Ah... but we DO have a Spell Checker: Reptilian Overlord 2.0.

Besides Dixon, your browser should be set up to spell check as you type. It seems it can miss typos in pasted in text. If that happens, select all your text and then right click and bring up the spelling dialog.

[odeek9]

Below are excerpts from https://www.sierrawild.gov/bears/faq, a govenment site. ...
Why don't resource managers just relocate problem bears?
In short, relocating bears rarely works. Over 95% of bears removed from their home range will find their way back, become a problem somewhere else, or die from challenges created by their relocation.

That's extremely interesting to me. On the one hand my eternal skepticism invokes thoughts of my distrust of government publications. And also that this is a perfect cop out for not seeking, or allocating discretionary funds we have no knowledge of, monies for relocation ie "Why do it? It doesn't work." My understanding is/was that years ago, when relocation was frequently employed, that the bear was moved hundreds of miles away in order to avoid having the rascals return.

On the other hand, I never considered the bears having difficulties by virtue of being in a new area, and also that relocation doesn't alter behavior. I'm a 20 year recovering addict and relocation was a common action for some of us. To change environments thus increasing the odds of getting clean-didn't work for us either. You basically are who you are. It's internal and not external. So these words from the publication are certainly food for thought, although I'm leery regarding the stated figure of 95%. Or perhaps just hopeful of its inaccuracy.

Maybe these "facts" have been mentioned before and I wasn't paying attention, but I find it (if true and I think it is, at least, to some extent) extremely disturbing. Extremely.

[gypsey]

Thanks Peggy,
Again you are educating all of us through your diligent research. On Vancouver Island, bear relocation could work because in the area I lived, there were mountains and thousands of acres of protected wild parkland with rich food sources for the bears. We don't have those resources here yet bears can have a travel range of 125 miles..

We also had a populace who mostly treasured their wildlife and saw them as an important linchpin in the amenities and economy of the region. Yet here, until recently black bears have been considered "extinct" in our county. There's no perceived economic or cultural benefit, yet.

Because we're all part of "ecotopia"---the west coast from here to the border of Alaska, I'm going to research what our neighbors from Oregon north are doing. Maybe we'll get some good info and if so, I'll share on WACCO.

Why don't resource managers just relocate problem bears?
In short, relocating bears rarely works. Over 95% of bears removed from their home range will find their way back, become a problem somewhere else, or die from challenges created by their relocation.

[peggykarp]

Here's a flyer I created to post and hand out, which Barry kindly made into a postable image. It's just a starting point. Please download it, change it if you wish to in any way, and distribute it. Thanks!

[The flyer below is an image. I've attached the source Word document that you are free to modify -Barry]

[Chris Dec]

Peggy this is a wonderful start.

Expand

I had an idea to get the word out to the community through the children, and to the parents, with a fact-filled and informative coloring sheet. I have found that the fastest free way to get a flyer dispersed is to ask the schools to insert into take home packets for the kids. School is out for the summer, but in the event that the bear problem is just beginning, education and awareness is in place by September. Also, these can be handed out at day care centers, pools, summer school, campgrounds, etc.

The lined through copy is because Andy's is just a suggestion. It could be Ace Hardware, Safeway, or anyone who wants to participate and contribute, or funds collected could go towards honey sticks to be handed out.

The Farmers Markets are filled with kids, and the Sebastopol one is Sunday... the new Forestville one is starting up June 25th on Tuesday afternoons.

A printer, like Sprint, or A.I.M., would have to be approaced to offer to duplicate the form, another way for a local business to contribute.

I am putting this out there to anyone who wants to run with it, and, of course, I will gladly complete the flyer, being a graphics person, once text is finalized.

Here's a flyer I created to post and hand out, which Barry kindly made into a postable image. It's just a starting point. Anyone can change it in any way they want and then distribute their version of it.

[mamaj]

This is a great idea -you should give some also to 4c's main childcare office in Santa Rosa and Russian River childcare so all their providers can receive them for all the kids they care for all year around. And print them in spanish too. Looks like you will be busy!

I had an idea to get the word out to the community through the children, and to the parents, with a fact-filled and informative coloring sheet....

[Ice Queen]

No I will NOT color the bears, I will wish them well finding their own natural food which includes berries and acorns. I hope I never see one beause reporting that could sign their death warrant. Go on with your lives as the bears will. Just leave them alone.

I had an idea to get the word out to the community through the children, and to the parents, with a fact-filled and informative coloring sheet. I have found that the fastest free way to get a flyer dispersed is to ask the schools to insert into take home packets for the kids.