Proposed Changes in WV Early Season
Posted: Mon Feb 11, 2008 11:58 am
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.
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.