MANAGEMENT OF
NUISANCE BEHAVIOR
Click on a photo
to view a larger imageAs
with any wildlife population, objectives and attitudes of
landowners, land managers, resource users, and the general
public will determine if bears are considered an asset or a
liability. Human attitudes will ultimately determine whether
or not bears can survive. Public perception of the Louisiana
black bear will be partially dependent on immediate and
effective responses by wildlife professionals to reported
conflicts. Black bears may be killed by individuals who are
unaware of solutions to simple problems, who feel that no
effective solution for their particular conflict exists, or
who think that no one cares. Because the Louisiana black
bear is listed as threatened under the Endangered Species
Act, killing bears within the historic range of the
subspecies carries federal and state penalties that can
include heavy fines (e.g., up to $10,000 in Louisiana),
suspension of hunting privileges, and jail time. Informing
the public about potential conflicts and available solutions
is an important strategy in the overall restoration effort.
In
general, conflicts between humans and wildlife can be
addressed by either managing the animals involved in the
conflict, manipulating the resource being damaged, or by
placing a physical or psychological barrier between the
conflicting resource and wildlife species. These same
principles can be applied to management of human/bear
conflicts. Due to the legal status of the Louisiana black
bear, conflict resolution will rely heavily on non-lethal
damage control techniques, such as barriers, capture and
aversive conditioning, and resource management strategies.
Destruction of offending animals will only be considered if
human health and safety is jeopardized and all other
measures have failed. Ideal management plans should
emphasize conflict prevention and, when problems arise, the
implementation of practical solutions.
Hunting is often recommended as a damage
control tool because it reduces wildlife populations and
associated problems to acceptable levels and elicits
human-avoiding behavior in the hunted species. Legal harvest
may become part of the overall management plan for the black
bear in the future. Until the subspecies is recovered,
however, hunting is not considered a management option for
the Louisiana black bear. Biologists will need to determine
that restoration efforts have been successful, the
harvestable surplus, and the maximum density of bears that
will be tolerated by the public before bear hunting will be
permitted.
Trapping nuisance bears and releasing them
far from their capture site is called relocation. Relocating
nuisance bears can cause them to roam over large areas in
search of familiar surroundings. Bears have an excellent
homing instinct, and will attempt to find their way back to
familiar territory. Bears have been documented traveling up
to 400 miles from relocation sites. This increases their
susceptibility to being killed by vehicles along roads or by
humans who perceive a threat to their own safety. Because of
the stress and increased human interaction, relocated bears
have a reduced chance of survival. In addition, moving a
problem animal from one area to another can potentially
bring a nuisance to the new area. Consequently, bears
involved in conflicts with humans should be left in their
established territory whenever possible. Nuisance behavior
can be altered through live trapping, conditioning, and
releasing bears into the same general area. This can be
accomplished by using the bear’s intelligence and quick
learning ability to “teach” bears to stop nuisance behavior.
This is referred to as aversive conditioning (see Aversive
Conditioning section).
Barriers preventing access by bears may
totally eliminate some ongoing problems and offer the
greatest immediate relief from conflicts that arise.
Barriers, in most cases, are both economically and
technically feasible to install and are considered a viable
option for controlling many types of bear-related damage.
Solar-powered electric fencing for bee yards, for example,
is an extremely effective bear deterrent.
Management of the resources being damaged
or threatened is also applicable to our goal of effectively
managing bear/human conflicts. In some cases, conflicts may
be avoided by keeping susceptible resources away from bear
habitat or by removing attractants that lure bears to those
resources.
Cooperative Management
Approach
Most state wildlife agencies have the sole
responsibility for addressing bear/human conflicts when they
occur. However, the Louisiana black bear is a threatened
subspecies under the Endangered Species Act, thus, a federal
role for managing the species exists. State and federal
agencies have worked cooperatively to develop protocols for
addressing conflicts. Written plans outline standard
procedures that will be taken when bears create problems,
including preventive measures, aversive conditioning, and
possible removal of offending bears.
The responsibilities, relative to conflict
management, of the various state and federal agencies have
also been identified. In Louisiana, problems are addressed
by USDA Wildlife Services and the Louisiana Department of
Wildlife and Fisheries, in consultation with the U.S Fish
and Wildlife Service. In Mississippi, the Mississippi
Department of Wildlife, Fisheries and Parks is the lead
agency with assistance from the US Fish and Wildlife
Service. The Texas Parks and Wildlife Department will
provide assistance to citizens who report bear problems in
Texas and those in Arkansas are handled by the Arkansas Game
and Fish Commission.
A Conflict Management Team consisting of
the USDA Wildlife Services, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
the Louisiana Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and the
BBCC staff has been working together successfully for the
past several years in Louisiana. Efficient and effective
response to complaints is more feasible when duties are
shared among professional agency personnel. The responder is
determined by the location, time, and availability of
participants. |