MOST RECENT NEWS ARTICLES

Dr. Stephen Stringham, has challenged NDOW Quota

PRESS RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: April 29, 2012

A nationally renowned bear biologist, Dr. Stephen Stringham, has challenged the Nevada Department of Wildlife’s quota recommendation for the 2012 bear hunt, claiming “the State has not met its burden of proof that this population is robust enough to withstand repeated sport hunting without its viability being seriously jeopardized.”

Dr. Stringham’s findings corroborate those expressed earlier by Dr. Rick Hopkins, who will be speaking on behalf of NoBearHuntNV.org at the upcoming quota setting meeting of the Nevada Wildlife Commissioners on May 11-12 in Reno, NV. Dr. Hopkins will speak both at the Bear Committee meeting on May 10, as well as to the Commission on May 11.

Hired by NoBearHuntNV.org as an on-going independent peer review of the State’s data and analysis, Dr. Stringham’s just released report on the 2012 quota setting alleges:

1. Nevada’s bear population is more likely growing at the rate of 3 percent per year vs. 16 percent, as claimed by state biologist Carl Lackey.
2. The Jolly Seber model used by NDOW to calculate Nevada’s bear population growth rate rests upon assumptions that do not fit Nevada’s bear population. The result is “garbage in, garbage out.”
3. At even a 3 percent growth rate, hunting Nevada’s wild land bears “markedly increases risk of over harvest.”
4. NDOW’s plans to guard against over hunting Nevada’s bears, by reviewing various data in three year cycles, are seriously flawed. “So few bears could be harvested…that trends indicative of over harvest might not reach statistical significance for a decade or more, by which time the population could be seriously impacted.”
5. NDOW has failed to provide data and modeling that are spatially and demographically explicit in order to insure sustainable populations in the various wild land habitats of Nevada.

“Until better methods are employed, the risks of sport harvest appear to outweigh any benefits-benefits confined to one special interest group, trophy hunters,” Dr. Stringham concludes.

“These independent expert opinions all underpin NoBearHuntNV’s position that NDOW and the Commission should not be conducting a hunt or setting any quotas until they can produce peer-reviewed and published data and data analysis,” states Kathryn Bricker, Executive Director of NoBearHuntNV.org. “ While we appreciate the Commission removing the Tahoe Basin from the hunt, there have been no new studies to examine and address any effects on the bear population or bear distribution of hunting only outside the Lake Tahoe Basin. The lack of credible science upon which this bear hunt is based should be of concern to all Nevadans.”

Bear hunt back from hibernation

Nevada’s controversial bear hunt began its third season Sunday, and will continue into its fourth if the Nevada Department of Wildlife has its way. The state’s bear population, which consists of anywhere between 400 and 700 bears, is more than enough to allow a limited hunt, spokesman Chris Healy said. For this reason, he said the department will likely recommend continuing the program when the Nevada Wildlife Commission reviews it in a few months. “We’ve been told by the legislation and wildlife commission that after three years, we would look at the number and discuss what are we doing right, what are we doing wrong, where does the population stand,” he said.

In 2010, the Nevada Department of Wildlife estimated there were about 350 to 450 bears in the state, Healy said. But the department anticipates that number has grown significantly over the last three years. The bear hunt is “tremendously beneficial” to the department because it helps track data, such as the animal’s population, Healy said. But Kathryn Bricker, executive director of NoBearHuntNV, disagrees. “We’ve had various internationally recognized ecologists and biologists review the data and they all said that hunting is not a necessary management tool,” Bricker said. “They hunt because they want to hunt, not because they want to manage the population.” Healy, however, said hunting is a well-recognized tool of wildlife management. “If we are going to stack up experts,” he said, “our experts will win that debate.”

Starting in 2011, bears in Nevada could be hunted in limited number. Fourteen were killed in 2011 and 11 were killed in 2012. No bears have been killed in 2013 so far, but the limit is 20. Since its inception, the hunt has attracted criticism from several organizations defending the bears, which are primarily killed in an area southeast of Minden and Gardnerville. No hunting is allowed on the Nevada side of the Tahoe Basin, following a decision in 2011 to appease critics. But Bricker said it’s not enough. “We’re all very glad that they made that exclusion,” she said. “However we feel the same about the bears in the Pine Nut (Mountains) and Sweet Water (Range).” Bricker is concerned that the state’s bear population is much lower than the Department of Wildlife estimates, she said. However, Healy said hunters aren’t the bears’ biggest threat. “The most dangerous thing to a bear is not a hunter,” he said, “it’s a car.” Cars have killed 158 bears in Nevada since 1997, according to data from the Nevada Department of Wildlife. About 80 were killed for public safety during the same period. “Harvesting 25 bears in two years is by no means going to put the population in any kind of danger,” Healy said of the last two Nevada bear hunts.

The decision to either continue or discontinue a bear hunt in Nevada ultimately lies with the state’s wildlife commission. The Nevada Dept. of Wildlife will make a recommendation to the commission later this year or early next year, Healy said, but calling off a bear hunt at this point would take a “biological disaster.”

This year’s hunt will end Dec. 31. In California, about 35,000 bears roam The Golden State, said Jason Holley, spokesman for the California Department of Fish and Wildlife. Of those, about 1,700 are killed from hunting each year. California also allows bear hunting in many areas of the Tahoe Basin.

New rule doesn’t alter bear hunt purpose

The third year of Nevada’s Black Bear Trophy Hunt started Sept. 15 [”Review to follow Nevada’s third bear hunt,” Sept. 14]. Yes, until 2011 Nevada was the only state not permitting bear hunting.

That is because Nevada’s bear population is the smallest of all western states, numbering only in the hundreds. Good reason not to hunt them. Also, commissioners have allowed this hunt now, despite over 24,000 acres of the bears’ habitat in the Pine Nut Mountains having been destroyed in the recent Bison Fire.

While a “thorough review” of the hunt is being promised, why is using the meat even being considered as a change in the requirements? Is this not a bit of doubletalk? The public will not be fooled into thinking that 20 bears are being killed for food. If this hunt is continued, people will still consider it a trophy hunt.

NDOW spokesman stated it has “learned much” from the 25 bears killed in the past two years. First, this number is too small for significant information. Secondly, what happened to biologists getting sound scientific information from live bears? Killing bears is no “benefit to the bears.” It only benefits the 20 hunters who get a bear trophy.

Elaine Carrick, Reno

REVIEW TO FOLLOW NEVADA’S THIRD BEAR HUNT.

Nevada’s bear hunt begins its third season Sept. 15 and when it’s finished, state wildlife officials plan a thorough review of a practice that has generated substantial controversy.

Up to 20 black bears can be killed from when the season starts until it ends at sundown on Dec. 31.

It’s a number state biologists say Nevada’s bear population can easily handle. Vocal critics counter that one bear killed by hunters is too many and that when the Nevada Wildlife Commission conducts its three-year review of the hunt, it should be stopped for good.

“It is still evident that the vast majority of Nevadans are opposed to the hunt,” said Kathryn Bricker, executive director of NoBearHuntNV, the organization that unsuccessfully lobbied against the hunt.

“I hope they start respecting how people feel about this hunt and discontinue it,” Bricker said. “Nevada did fine without a bear hunt and I would like to see us return to that tradition.”

The hunt was approved by wildlife commissioners in 2010, ending Nevada’s status as the only western state that did not permit hunting of its black bears.

The vote followed a series of contentious hearings that had sportsmen supporting the plan and often impassioned critics opposing it. An attempt to kill the hunt in the 2013 Legislature failed.

During the inaugural hunt in 2011, 14 bears were taken by hunters. Another 11 were killed last year.

“We know it’s still not popular but we did listen to some of the concerns,” Nevada Department of Wildlife spokesman Chris Healy said, citing the commission’s 2011 decision to remove the Lake Tahoe Basin from areas where bear hunting is permitted.

Healy said biologists have learned much about the state’s bears as a result of the hunt, including that more bears live on mountain ranges east of the Sierra front than previously thought. Most of the bears killed by hunters were taken in places like the Pine Nut Mountains and the Sweetwater Range.

“We’re gaining a lot of knowledge on our wildland bears,” said Jack Robb, chairman of the wildlife commission. “It’s been a painful process but if nothing else, I think the bear hunt in the end will be of benefit to the bears.”

Robb promises a thorough review of the hunt after this season wraps up. One change he would like to see is that hunters be required to use the meat of bears killed, a rule that’s not on the books right now.

“We’ll be looking at the regulations top to bottom,” he said.

Robb also credited the hunt and the controversy surrounding it with helping to generate discussions on long-needed changes in trash management to reduce human-bear conflicts in places like Lake Tahoe’s Incline Village.

NEVADA WILDLIFE COMMISSION REJECTS PETITION TO BAN HOUND HUNTING BEARS

The Nevada Wildlife Commission rejected a petition to ban the use of dogs for hunting bears at its meeting in Las Vegas on Feb 1. The petition was filed by six conservation and animal rights organizations including NoBearHuntNV, Nevada Political Action for Animals, Humane Society of the Un…ited States, ASPCA, Nevada Humane Society and the Bear League.

A statewide survey conducted in January 2011 by Mason-Dixon Polling and Research, Inc. showed that only 29 percent of Nevadans supported the practice of “hounding” bears, while 57 percent disapproved. Over half of other states conducting bear hunts have outlawed the practice as being unsporting and unnecessarily cruel both for the bears and dogs.

“The Commission’s decision not to hear legitimate arguments on an issue opposed by the majority of Nevadans demonstrates why legislative change to reconfigure the Wildlife Commission is needed in order to give fair representation to all Nevadans.,” stated Kathryn Bricker, Executive Director of No Bear Hunt NV.

Voting against hearing the petition were sportsmen’s representatives Commissioners Jeremy Drew, Michael McBeath, Scott Raine and Bill Young, ranching representative Peter Mori and farming representatives Grant Wallace. Supporting the petition was Governor Sandoval’s newly appointed and sole public representative, Dr. Karen Layne and conservation representative David McNinch.