Proposed Changes in WV Early Season

[bowhunter7]

Here is an article discussing potential changes to the WV bear season. It doesn't detail any plans, but it does indicate that changes will be made to reduce bear numbers and hints at more early season for other areas in the state besides just the southern counties. The DNR will be at the WV Bear Hunters Association meeting March 9th to shed some light on this. I imagine it will be a long winded emotional meeting as most hunters won't be happy about the changes. I, personally, would like to see them eliminate the early season or open it state-wide just because I'm selfish. We got over run with hunters down here in Kanawha County during the early season last fall making it one of the least enjoyable hunting experiences I've ever had. You couldn't even track your dogs there was so much bleed over from all the collars in the area. We spent half of opening day tracking someone else's dogs thinking they were our's.

Jim

Changes 'a-bruin'
Record bear kill could lead to new regulations, DNR says
By John McCoy
Staff writer
Last year's record-breaking bear kill just might change the way West Virginians hunt the animals in the future, the state's top wildlife official says.

Curtis Taylor, Wildlife Resources chief for the state Division of Natural Resources, believes the bear population is expanding a little too rapidly for its own good - or for the people who live nearby.

"The strange thing about bears is that you don't manage them based on their biological carrying capacity," he explained during an interview in his Charleston office. "You manage them based on the 'sociological carrying capacity' - how many bears the public is willing to tolerate."

Taylor added that high bear harvests in recent years, coupled with research that revealed an abnormally high reproduction rate among bears in the state's southern counties, have convinced DNR biologists to propose changes in the state's bear-hunting regulations.

"We don't know exactly what those changes are going to be just yet," he said. "We recently held our midwinter biologist meetings, and we're just now in the process of deciding what shape any changes are likely to take. We'll make those proposals [Feb. 24] at the Natural Resources Commission meeting."

Taylor said a change in the state's hunting regulations helped build the population from a 1977 level of about 500 animals to its current level of 12,000. He hinted that a reversal of the regulation might help curtail its growth.

"We know how to kill bears," he said. "In the 1970s, we knew that our early gun season killed a lot of females and kept the population down. When we went away from that [to a later-opening season], we saw gradual growth and then exponential growth [in the population]. So we know that we have a lot of options [regarding the timing of seasons] if we want to slow population growth or, if we need to, reduce the population."

Bear hunters, who bagged a record 1,807 bruins last fall, might not embrace those changes as enthusiastically as people who must deal with nuisance bears. Taylor said residents of the state's agricultural areas would particularly like to see bear numbers reduced.

Last year's record-breaking bear kill just might change the way West Virginians hunt the animals in the future, the state's top wildlife official says.

Curtis Taylor, Wildlife Resources chief for the state Division of Natural Resources, believes the bear population is expanding a little too rapidly for its own good - or for the people who live nearby.

"The strange thing about bears is that you don't manage them based on their biological carrying capacity," he explained during an interview in his Charleston office. "You manage them based on the 'sociological carrying capacity' - how many bears the public is willing to tolerate."

Taylor added that high bear harvests in recent years, coupled with research that revealed an abnormally high reproduction rate among bears in the state's southern counties, have convinced DNR biologists to propose changes in the state's bear-hunting regulations.

"We don't know exactly what those changes are going to be just yet," he said. "We recently held our midwinter biologist meetings, and we're just now in the process of deciding what shape any changes are likely to take. We'll make those proposals [Feb. 24] at the Natural Resources Commission meeting."

Taylor said a change in the state's hunting regulations helped build the population from a 1977 level of about 500 animals to its current level of 12,000. He hinted that a reversal of the regulation might help curtail its growth.

"We know how to kill bears," he said. "In the 1970s, we knew that our early gun season killed a lot of females and kept the population down. When we went away from that [to a later-opening season], we saw gradual growth and then exponential growth [in the population]. So we know that we have a lot of options [regarding the timing of seasons] if we want to slow population growth or, if we need to, reduce the population."

Bear hunters, who bagged a record 1,807 bruins last fall, might not embrace those changes as enthusiastically as people who must deal with nuisance bears. Taylor said residents of the state's agricultural areas would particularly like to see bear numbers reduced.

"And then there are other places where people think the number of bears is just right, or they even want to increase the population," he added. "We'll need to adjust our management decisions accordingly."

One particularly complicated situation exists in West Virginia's western counties - an area where bear populations are rising steadily but land-use practices aren't conducive to hunting with dogs, arguably the most effective bear-hunting method.

"You have fairly dense human populations there, and probably some areas that could never be opened to hunting with dogs because the land is carved up into a lot of small tracts," Taylor explained. "One landowner might not mind having dogs running bears on his 200 acres, but the guy on the 200 acres just over the hill might not want that at all. Getting around the land ownership issue is going to be a challenge."

Two options employed in other high-density bear states - spring bear hunts and hunting over bait - don't appear to be on the DNR's short list of options.

"We've talked about spring hunts in the past, and at least at this time I don't think our staff is ready to propose any spring hunting," Taylor said. "As for baiting, I can answer that with a definitive "hell, no." I don't think that's a move we want to make. There are other tools we can use without going down that road."

The most likely scenario would be for the DNR to adopt the same sort of approach it takes toward deer populations. As deer increase in number, they trigger ever more liberal hunting seasons for the county they're in.

"I think what we want is a step-wise approach that is flexible enough to reflect what is going on with the bear population," Taylor said. "Whether that means increasing the bag limit or instituting some special seasons, we plan to use the same approach with bears that we did with deer."

To contact staff writer John McCoy, use e-mail or call 348-1231.

[loaded4bear]

thanks for the update

[kdrchuck]

Thanks for posting that Jim. Did you say there is another meeting coming up?

[bowhunter7]

Charlie,

It's on Sunday March 9th in at the Beverly firehouse (near Elkins).

Jim

[kdrchuck]

looks like proposals go out before that. Better email and call.

[bowhunter7]

Yeah, the proposals will be made later this month, but the final decisions will not be made until much later. We will be able to voice our opinions at the meeting, but I don't think it will make much difference. They want less bear damage/compaints and will base their decisions accordingly. They might throw the WV Bear Hunters Association a bone, but it won't be anything more than a token gesture.

Jim

[bowhunter7]

The DNR had their meeting yesterday and suggested the following proposals.

Increase the bag limit to two bears for Kanawha, Raleigh, Fayette, and Boone counties.

Change the early season to a 9 day season in mid september for the above counties (currently a 6 day season in early November).

Add a 6 day early season to about half of the mountain counties in mid-september (currently no early season).

These are just proposals and not set in stone. The DNR will be having their sectional meetings open for public comment at several locations throughout the state on March 17 and 18th.

Jim

[dog chaser]

I dont hunt in the four early season counties but its hard to believe that they need bears killed that bad especially if you compare their kill #s to some of the other counties. I know i dont want an early season where i hunt but it looks like we may get one.

[bowhunter7]

Yeah, Kanawha county used to have one of the highest kill numbers in the state, but it has just about been cut in half the last few years. I don't think the increased bag limit will have the effect they want. Very few people, if any, will kill more than one bear. Adding the early season to some mountain counties will decrease pressure down here, which I'm all for. That being said I think most hunters would like to see the early season go away completely. I know one thing, it's going to be awful hot in September. Unlike deer and turkeys the DNR doesn't see bears as a resource, they see them as a nusaince and manage them as such. High bear numbers create better bear hunting, but it also costs the state money (to the tune of $188,000 in damage claims last year).

Jim

[kdrchuck]

If money is the concern why not attack that issue directly: Raise the price of the bear stamp. No one wants to pay more to hunt but i surely would if it meant we got to keep the bear population and no early season. Pay a little extra to keep a poulation like we have. Hell yes. They could raise the price of that stamp a lot and bearhunters will buy it. Even if it was 50$. That is less than the gas for one hunting trip. I'll be near Beverly on the 9th. Gonna try to make that meeting.

Opening the early season in more counties will help reduce the craziness in the lower 4, but i don't know how much. Sure will make for some extra craziness in the mountains.

[bowhunter7]

Charlie,

I tried to call you earlier. I'll be at the meeting on the 9th for sure. Even if they raised the price of the stamps they would still have to somehow prevent the damage. The state gets a lot of pressure from farmers and bee keepers, more than you'd think anyway. I'm with you though. That would be a good point to bring up at the public meetings. I think increased revenue is probably the biggest reason they want to increase the bag limit down here, not necessarily to kill more bears. How many people would actually kill two bears? Very few, if any. The opportunity to shoot usually gets spread amongst a large group giving someone little chance of getting a second kill opportunity. The big problem is bears are managed as a nuisance, not as a resource like deer and turkey. Deer and turkey generate enough revenue to cover any damage they cause plus a substantial profit. I don't know if the revenue generated by bear hunting even covers the damage they cause. The bottom line is we are in a tug of war against the state and we'll always come out with the fuzzy end of the lolipop. The state would rather have too few bears than too many. We'll see. We've got the WVBHA meeting and the sectional meetings to plead our case. I'm sure they'll be some hurt feelings before this is all over with.

Jim

[kdrchuck]

I'm curious to how the bag limits would work. Would that allow me to kill 2 in kanawha and one in the mountains? one each? 2 early and then your done? Be nice to be able to kill one early and one late i guess. Lie you said, who actaully would?

[bowhunter7]

I don't know that's a good question. I can't belive they'd let you kill more than two total. Probably read something like two bear limit and at least one has to come from the southern 4 counties.

Jim

[loaded4bear]

there is talk of opening early season in september in about seven counties

[kdrchuck]

Went to the meeting today. It looks like they are going to reduce the population one way or another. And from the presentation. It looks to me like the best way is for us to do it in september rather than letting the bear be killed in deer season. Only thing i would like to see is for the early hunt to be resident only. that wasn't anywhere in the proposals. Only thing we can do now is conact county commisioners and use he comment cards at the sectional meetings and on the website. I personally don't want the early season, but if they are going to kill off the bears, i guess i want to be one of the ones doing it. SO give me september. I think september is the best time to do it also. it will have he largest impact on the population and make reduce this to a one year event. and, it takes away the competition between bow hunters and doggers.