Population reduction by hunting helps control human–wildlife conflicts for a species that is a conservation success story

Abstract

Among the world's large Carnivores, American black bears (Ursus americanus) are the foremost conservation success story. Populations have been expanding across North America because the species is adaptable and tolerant of living near people, and because management agencies in the U.S. and Canada controlled hunting and other human-sources of mortality. As a result, human-black bear conflicts (damage to property, general nuisance, threat to human safety) have dramatically increased in some areas, making it urgently important to develop and deploy a variety of mitigation tools. Previous studies claimed that legal hunting did not directly reduce conflicts, but they did not evaluate whether hunting controlled conflicts via management of population size. Here, we compared temporal patterns of phonedin complaints about black bears (total~63,500) in Minnesota, USA, over 4 decades to corresponding bear population estimates: both doubled during the first decade. We also quantified natural bear foods, and found that large year-to-year fluctuations affected numbers of complaints; however, since this variation is due largely to weather, this factor cannot be managed. Complaints fell sharply when the management agency (1) shifted more responsibility for preventing and mitigating conflicts to the public; and (2) increased hunting pressure to reduce the bear population. This population reduction was more extreme than intended, however, and after hunting pressure was curtailed, population regrowth was slower than anticipated; consequently both population size and complaints remained at relatively low levels statewide for 2 decades (although with local hotspots). These long-term data indicated that conflicts can be kept in tolerable bounds by managing population size through hunting; but due to the bluntness of this instrument and deficiencies and uncertainties in monitoring and manipulating populations, it is wiser to maintain a population at a level where conflicts are socially-acceptable than try to reduce it once it is well beyond that point.

Black bear density and habitat use variation at the Sierra Nevada‐Great Basin Desert transition

“…Compared to these studies, our results suggest that black bears are more constrained by the availability of forest cover in semi-arid western landscapes, although other factors correlated with forest cover (e.g., water availability) may also play a role. These differences in bear density patterns between regions are not surprising given that agricultural areas can provide food resources and concealment for black bears (Garshelis et al 2020), whereas desert shrub and grasslands provide neither.…”

Elk Responses to Management Hunting and Hazing

“…The effectiveness of hunting to reduce wildlife conflicts has been documented in a variety of species including wild boar ( Sus scrofa ; Geisser and Reyer 2004), white‐tailed deer (Conover 2001 b ), American black bears (Garshelis et al 2020), and elk (Cleveland et al 2012). Our results support hunting as an effective tool to alter elk distribution and decrease use of conflict zones, although the results were stronger in Madison than at Sixmile.…”

Recent Trends in Survival and Mortality of Wolves in Minnesota, United States

“…For example, wolf populations in Yellowstone and Isle Royale have been restored through reintroductions, recolonization, and supplementation (Ripple and Beschta, 2012;Hervey et al, 2021) and the Gir lions in India have increased from less than 50 animals to ∼700 in the past 100 years because of committed protection and conservation (Jhala et al, 2019). Some carnivore populations have also been controlled to maintain ecological carrying capacity and to reduce human-carnivore conflict (e.g., American black bears Ursus americanus, Garshelis et al, 2020).…”