257 bears killed on first day of NJ hunt

[villager]

Source: NBC

257 bears killed on first day of NJ hunt
By NBCNewYork.com

New Jersey wildlife officials say a total of 257 black bears were killed on the first day of the state's annual hunt.

The number is nearly identical to the first day of last year's hunt.

State officials said the first bear killed was a 166-pound female shot in the Delaware Water Gap National Recreation Area by an Arizona man. The second was a 205-pound male shot in Warren County by two teenagers from Wayne, N.J.

"I called it out, I just said, 'Are you on him?' Said '3, 2, 1' then we shot on 'go' at the exact same time," said K.C. Abel, one of the teen hunters.

In 2010, 592 bears were killed during the hunt. State officials predict a similar count this year. On the first day in 2010, there were about 260 killed.

<snip>

Read more: http://usnews.msnbc.msn.com/_news/2011/12/06/9247445-257-bears-killed-on-first-day-of-nj-hunt

[coffeenap]

1. Insane.

:grr:

[SkyDaddy7]

12. Why?

Would you rather the population of bears just run out of control so that there are more cases of bear attacks from people & children getting caught between mothers & their young?

[bhikkhu]

22. Bears are very interesting animals

They are omnivores - essentially "generalists" - and inhabit the same niche as ourselves. They organize into the same types of hierarchical and family groups as we do, and are really only dangerous when they feel their family is threatened. Morphologically, they are very distinctive individuals - like us, one bear usually being very recognizable and different from another bear, even in their skeletal features. I read one book on evolution that said it was pretty clear - if we weren't here, bears would be very good candidates to develop intelligent societies eventually.

I know one hunter who said he won't hunt bears anymore, because the last one he skinned looked so much like a person it gave him nightmares.

I suppose they have another on of the same problems that we have, and that most animals have - we tend to reproduce irregardless of the limits of our environment.

[sybylla]

43. Except where there's overpopulation, there's always trouble.

In the fight for food, they break into homes, they forage in towns, they cause damage to property and vehicles who run into them on the road. And they are just as likely to attack people when they are hungry as when they are protecting their young.

I'd much prefer black bears to grizzlies as neighbors. Regardless, whether they are 150 lb juveniles just kicked out of the nest or 500 lb elders camping out at the dumpster next to the chicken shack down the street, black bears don't make good neighbors.

Fortunately this cousin of pigs are mighty tasty.

[The Stranger]

47. The overpopulation is of people -- not bears.

[Doremus]

66. Hear hear.

A quick perusal of aerial maps even as recently as from the 1950s compared to today's satellite images tell the sad tale.

Suburban sprawl has replaced uncountable acres of wildlife habitat.


That there are humans who blame the animals for coming into "their" space after we've literally stolen it is testament that homo sapiens haven't come very far in the last 300 years.

[yellowcanine]

71. It is a little more complicated than that. The bears are increasing even though there are more

people. So there are too many bears and too many people as a result. For example the county in PA I grew up in during the 60s had NO bears - not one. Now there are about 2x as many people there and lots of bears - so many they actually have hunting for them and kill a dozen or so every year. The same thing has happened with deer. Both deer and bear seem to be adapting to people over time.

[zonkers]

59. Bears were the first medicine men. They taught the Indians. When hibernation was

over and they left their caves and would stumble around, looking for nourishment. Indians would follow them around, watching what they ate.

[SkyDaddy7]

73. I totally agree!

I could never kill a bear unless it was a matter of my living or dying! Yes, bears, like us, have no natural predators to keep their numbers in check so we both screw until we have no place to live & something has to give...Unfortunately for the bears we are the more evolved creature so we determine where everyone lives. I think we do a good job with managed hunts & attacking poachers...It sucks that bears & other animals have to be killed!

I will tell you something that I KNOW most people NEVER even think about & probably don't know...If you ever spend a few hours around a pig they are very loving & each one has such a unique personality. I honestly wish I could get myself on a all veggie diet but when you grow up eating certain foods & the convenience it is hard to do! I do eat a lot of fish & seafood, some red meat & hardly any pork at all.

I always wonder & think to myself which animal could be next to evolve to a level of intelligence that allows them to build cities...It is funny you read about bears possibly being a candidate for such a future.

[trayfoot]

72. So right!

You are so correct! I live in an area where the black bear population has gone way out of control! They come into yards and invade out buildings and homes, themselves! They destroy what they can't eat. One attacked and almost killed a man less than a mile from my house last year. I wish our hunting season was more condusive to thinning out this bunch!

[rhett o rick]

81. It takes a special kind of person to point a gun at an animal and blow a hole in it's

body. Sending a bullet from a safe distance to rip thru the animals organs. And to justify it by claiming to be helping Mother Nature.

[freethought]

84. All do respect but

what other options are there?

Relocation? Sounds good. Capture the bear and send it somewhere else. However, it doesn't work well. Bears are attached to home range and if relocated seem to have an uncanny ability to find their way back.

Birth Control? I have read a number of articles about trying to introduce methods of birth control to wild populations, especially with deer, but it is still not a viable option and likely prohibitively expensive.

A regulated hunt is usually the only cost effective option that state governments have.

[rhett o rick]

90. Even if your rational is correct, it takes a special kind of person to shoot a bear. nm

[freethought]

96. With that I would probably agree with you.

If I had a bear in my crosshairs during a hunt I am not too sure I could squeeze off a shot. Aside from that I don't have much enthusiasm for hunting in general any more. Too many idiots out in the woods. The vast majority of hunters that I know, largely concentrate on deer, or upland birds like grouse, plus a few duck hunters. I have only known a few active bear hunters, a 'few' meaning only two or three and none of them were particularly successful at it.

[rhett o rick]

100. I remember well a very significant point in my life.

I was watching a wild life show where a famous bow hunter Fred Bear was hunting grizzly. The camera showed him shooting at a huge beautiful grizzly at about 200 yards. After he shot, the bear took off running at a very fast pace. The commentator stated that if the arrow had hit the bear, then the arrow head would be inside the bear, ripping his insides to shreds as he ran. I had tears in my eyes as I rooted for the bear to keep running and running. He did as apparently the masterful Fred Bear missed. I never looked at hunting the same again.

[freethought]

101. I am virtually certain that

there was a guide armed with an above average caliber rifle right behind him. Only an idiot would hunt a grizzly bear alone. I do recall in the state of Alaska, where there is a regulated/lottery-style bear hunt, the hunter must be accompanied by an armed guide. My guess is that some hunters found out the hard way that if one errs in trying to take down a grizzly bear, they can get torn to pieces.
I remember Fred Bear, his name has weight in the archery fraternity. 200 yards is too far for an effective bow shot. I would guess that Mr. Bear didn't want to get much closer than that.
I actually think that to try a bow shot at that distance is just plain foolish even if you're a accomplished archer.

[red dog 1]

89. k & r

[Mad_Dem_X]

97. +1

[LynneSin]

2. I'm a big hunting advocate but I don't understand bear hunts

Bear meat is just nasty tasting.

At least with Deer Hunting you get yummy Venison

[SkyDaddy7]

9. Beside the meat & fur the hunts...

help control the population just as deer hunts do...Which is the most important reason behind controlled hunts.

[mainer]

27. I've heard that bear meat was tasty. But I have no firsthand experience.

Wonder what people who've tasted it think. (Speaking as one who dislikes deer meat.)

[freethought]

60. I was able to try it many years ago.

As I recall It didn't strike me as all that great. I would easily take a good aged beef T-bone over bear meat any day. It was stringy. I was told that you have to cook the @#%& out of it to tenderize it and to make sure you're getting rid of germs. As I recall the meat was sitting in a crock pot of stew. Whoever cooked it over did it with salt. Wild meats are not for everyone.

[EvilAL]

99. It's pretty good

I prefer fall bear.. It's fattier, but has a better taste. If you take the main hunting animals where I live on the Gaspe coast of Quebec it's probably 6 out of 10, with moose forever reigning supreme.

[RebelOne]

55. I am a big anti-hunting advocate and do not understand any hunts. n/t

[sylveste]

64. well then

the last part of your sentence would explain the first part, no?

[RebelOne]

69. Well, let me put it this way: I am 100% against hunting. n/t

[sylveste]

82. good to hear,

i enjoy it. works out well too, i can hunt and you aren't required to, win win.

[Bryn]

3. Bears and other awesome animals will be extinct

Nice! Arkansas had native panthers and red wolves. They all have been killed off. Life on Earth will be boring without animals and with billions of billions of human beings around.

[hack89]

4. This hunt is designed to slow an explosive population growth of bears

they estimate 300 bears will be killed while 400 cubs will be born.


http://www.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2010/07/nj_environmental_comissioner_g.html

[villager]

5. Isn't there an irony in homo sapiens defining "explosive populations" of other species?

:shrug:

[handmade34]

8. +1

[hack89]

11. A privilege of being the apex predator I suppose. nt

[villager]

13. Like the privilege of eventually destroying the biosphere that sustains you?

n/t

[hack89]

16. The bear population is still growing - nature is winning this particular battle.

not many hunters hunt bear

[happyslug]

42. My Father refused to hunt bear..He like wearing clothes when he went hunting

Sorry, your line called for that old joke. Along with the old line about the Hunter who return home the same day he went bear hunting, when asked why, he said he saw a sign saying "Bear Left", since the bear had all left, so did he.

[hack89]

49. And since the NRA supports the Right to Arm Bears, it can get dangerous in the woods. nt

[LanternWaste]

28. Much like a bank CEO survives and thrives while the less "fortunate" become statistics.

Much like a bank CEO survives and thrives while the less "fortunate" become statistics I suppose.

[hack89]

34. Since the bear population is steadily growing, I am not sure what your point is. nt

[NoGOPZone]

52. That hasn't done much for tigers nt

[hack89]

54. They aren't at the apex. nt

[NoGOPZone]

56. Tigers aren't apex predators? Interesting nt

[hack89]

57. Not in the world of man. nt

[NoGOPZone]

58. OK, I've got it. You've introduced your own definition.

I'm somewhat handicapped by using what I've seen in other sources.

[hack89]

61. No - you need to go back to pick up the context of the discussion

My comment was in response to the irony of homo sapiens defining "explosive populations".

In that context, I was referring to man as the ultimate apex predator.

[NoGOPZone]

62. I didn't know the term was subject to context

I thought its definition was rather simple. So since we can't reach an understanding on its definition or use, I think I'll pass on your susggestion to examine the discussion since I'm sure I'll misinterpret that too.

[hack89]

68. Misinterpretation is guaranteed when you jump into the middle of conversations.

I said "A privilege of being the apex predator I suppose." I said "the" for a reason - to understand why you need to look at the comment I was replying to.

[NoGOPZone]

75. Or when you invent your own definitions

I'm afraid I'm not familiar with the concept of a definitive article when discussing apex predators.

[hack89]

76. You are really sarcasm challenged, aren't you?

I didn't thing I would need the sarcasm thingie but I guess I was wrong.


BTW - do you really doubt that man is the apex predator on earth? There is a reason tigers are nearly extinct.

[NoGOPZone]

77. I'm doubting you know the definition of an apex predator.

Otherwise, your comment about them nearly being extinct confirms my initial point.

To explain some more.

Many animals are mammals. Many animals are apex predators. I've never heard man referred to as the mammal.

[hack89]

85. So man is not the ultimate predator in the world - got it. n

[hack89]

87. Look - I gave a smart ass answer to a post

I certainly did not expect the Spanish inquisition. This has to be an act on your part - no one can be this obtuse.

[yellerpup]

15. +1

Total irony.

[emilyg]

18. +10

[Fair Witness]

20. So very true.

:shrug:

[truebrit71]

24. Yes. The cognitive dissonance is astounding...

...

[a la izquierda]

26. Agreed. eom

[NCarolinawoman]

65. Heh. When I lived in northern NJ as a child, I walked through wooded paths to school.

One of the paths was said to be an old Indian/deer path.

I have wonderful memories of picking blueberries and blackberries and seeing wild orchids, Jack-in-the Pulpits, mountain laurel, and more diversity of ferns imaginable.

People have told me that every bit of that land that was magical to me and my friends, has been paved over--turned into roads, malls, houses, and schools.

I pity the bears and all the other wildlife that were lost to the CRAPPIN bulldozers.

A big F&*# to all the thoughtless, unfeeling homo sapiens who were responsible!!!

:mad: :puke: :cry:

[DontTreadOnMe]

6. I live in central New Jersey

There has been a huge deer explosion in the last decade. This is bringing more bear and wolves down from the Catskills and PA into NJ. THe bear are small and the same with the wolves. The bear seem more common than wolves. I also see fox as well, they are fierce eaters and will go after house cats.

I am not a hunter, but I think they have the numbers correct when they say that bears are increasing in the area, there is plenty of food -- so they need to cull with hunts.

Most people do not realize the amount of wilderness in north western NJ.

[villager]

14. Huge deer population? You mean because they killed... too many predators?

:shrug:

[hack89]

17. With growing bear and coyote populations there are plenty of predators.

the bigger problem is fewer hunters.

[villager]

35. "the bigger problem is fewer hunters" -- restore ecosystems with more hunting!

In fact, if we could just hunt everything, everywhere, at any time, imagine how thriving every ecosystem could be!

[hack89]

38. How do you propose to maintain animal populations at sustainable levels?

in areas close to human population? Animals will breed beyond the capability of the land to support them. Besides starvation, what other solution do you have?

[villager]

39. more wilderness -- obviously human encroachment leads to these "problems"

...which hunters gleefully claim can only be "solved" through more killing...

[hack89]

40. That might be a problem in New Jersey, don't you think? nt

[villager]

50. Well, will it stop you from opposing the next subdivision/shopping mall in the next "undeveloped"

...tract?

Most of these "problems" are of our own making, don't you think?

[hack89]

51. We have an active land trust that I support with time and money

I like living with green space.

[villager]

83. ...for which you are to be applauded!

:thumbsup:

[Auntie Bush]

45. +100

[Gormy Cuss]

53. If there are "plenty of predators" wouldn't the deer population be in check?

The bear hunt is a response to demand by hunters. The state feels there is sufficient population to sustain an annual hunt. It's no different than the hunts for other animals.

[JustAnotherGen]

41. Agreed

I'm in Somerset County - Any given morning before 6:00 a.m. I can see fox, deer, bunnies running through my complex.

People who've only seen NJ when they fly into Newark have no idea about our rolling hills, horse farms, tomatoes, blueberries, beautiful beaches, etc. etc. Sad - because for such a tiny landmass we really do have a lot of diversity of landscape.

[Glorfindel]

7. What do they do with the dead bears?

Process the meat and eat it? I can't imagine that all of them will be stuffed and mounted. It just seems so barbaric, somehow.

[sinkingfeeling]

10. Just breaks my heart.

[Fair Witness]

19. That is not hunting, it's just killing. Hunting is getting food...

disgusting.

[Roy Rolling]

21. Non-violence

As a vegetarian for over 40 years I am certainly non-violent. But I can understand the need to manage the bear population, as well as the human population. Of course, hunts like this turn my stomach and I doubt the necessity, but will concede the point.

However, killing is an easy solution---what other remedies have been considered to manage this problem? All too often the easy way out causes more problems than the solution, as is the side-effect here of a rising deer population because deer predators have been killed.

As the old saying goes: "it's not nice to fool Mother Nature"

[happyslug]

48. Actually the main cause of the increase is deer, is tied in with increase in deer food

Deer is NOT a deep woods animal, nor a open field animal, it is a trig eater and as such a Second Growth forest animal.

Most of the Forest of the Northeast were cut down before 1900. In 1900 those forest lands were wastelands with berries. Bob whites and pheasants thrived in that environment. By the 1940s the berry bushes started to give way to locusts and other secondary growth trees, Bob white and pheasant populations started to drop, while the Deer population boomed, given all of the trigs available to them on these Second Growth forests. Starting in the 1960s you started to see the second Growth Forest grow taller into a mature forest, dominated by Cherry trees, and Maples (If the American Chestnut would have been around, it would have become a dominate tree of that time period). As Mature forest mature, Oaks become the dominate tree, maples disappear, but the Cherry and American Chestnut (If the Chestnut blight had not destroyed them) would still be competitive. In such mature forest, Deer population drops, while Turkey and Grouse boom.

The problem with most of the North east is the true forest entered the Mature Forest stage in the 1970s-2000, they are still maturing, but such forests are hostile to deer. On the other hand, Deer will still seek food, undergrowth is eaten (Thus the proliferation of ferns in the Forest of the North East, Deer dislike Ferns) AND a movement of deer to farms and suburban homes looking for food (Trigs of low laying trees and shrubs).

This maturing of the Forest and the Spread of Suburbia had lead to the situation of to many deer, not the lack of predators. The Deer are preventing undergrowth to survive and thus affecting mature forests. Bobcats survive in the the North East and are known to take out a deer at times, but the main predator is man and has been since colonial days. I can NOT see people liking the idea of Cougars and wolves living in their Suburban cul-de-sac, thus we are stuck with human hunters.

P.S. one of the problem is Human Hunters want to go out in the deep woods, not the suburbs. The problem is the Deer are in the Suburbs NOT the deep woods. In both Pittsburgh and Philadelphia you can take as many does as you want, but to few hunters opt for doe licenses in either county, preferring the boon docks.

[Psephos]

88. A thoughtful and informative post. n/t

[formercia]

23. Shooting a Bear over a pile of Donuts is not Hunting

It's Murder.

[Highway61]

25. Don't even get me started

This makes me sick. Zero respect for life.

[Roy Ellefson]

29. Plenty of Bears

Here in Wisconsin (and nationwide) the population of bear and coyote are exploding. Similarly we are close to having an unsustainable large population of Grey Wolfs (Timberwolves) as well. Regulated hunting is valuable in creating a prey/predator balance and allow for sustainable populations. Wildlife populations in Wisconsin are much more diverse and "successful" than even 75 years ago. In my neck of the woods we now have more wolves, deer, bear, coyote, turkeys, fisher, beavers, muskrat etc. than at any point in the last 100 years or longer.

[zalinda]

30. I lived in an area of Syracuse, NY that you could not call rural

and I saw deer walking down the street at midnight. I was shocked to see 6 deer casually strolling down the paved street. This was only the first time, though. I saw deer pretty regularly after that. While we were moving from that house, my son almost ran into one, while he was moving boxes, at 2:00 in the afternoon. I don't know who was more shocked, he or the deer.

Now, there are patches of woods, here and there, but nothing expansive. The deer have found that food is easy to find in our gardens, and animals like any intelligent being, likes to find easy food. I imagine that NJ has the same problem with deer. It's not really the lack of predators, but the abundance of easy food that bring in the deer, which bring in the bear. Not only is the deer bringing in the bears, but once here the bear find there is easy food, as in gardens, compost piles and garbage cans. Culling them is the only solution, at the moment.

And, some people like bear meat, my ex did. From what I understand it is quite a fatty meat, and so must be cooked properly.

zalinda

[FarCenter]

63. There were two deer in my back yard on two separate days last week

And this is in a fairly densely populated old suburb.

They were enjoying the holly tree.

[Kali]

31. jeebus

must be a shitload of them around
who knew there were so many in freaking New Jersey???:wow:
wonder if that is why Colbert is anti-bear?

[Muskypundit]

32. There is wildlife in new jersey?

[onehandle]

33. It's interesting how some get their jollies.

Getting off on blowing away 'dumb' animals then citing 'statistics' to excuse it.

[villager]

36. +1

n/t

[marasinghe]

79. no worries. think of it as practice ....

for human hunts - being, or to be, conducted by the military, in parts farther afield.
kind of the lite version of "America's Army"; coming soon to a theater near by.

:puke:

[tularetom]

37. I shot a bear once

Afterward I felt really crappy about it. That bear wasn't bothering me, I went into his neighborhood and shot him for basically no reason other than that I could. I've never hunted bear since.

That said, I can understand the motivation behind the NJ bear hunts. It appears that the bear/human interface there has moved into the human's neighborhood. If I woke up every morning to see bears rummaging through my garbage cans I'd be concerned. We've lost cats, dogs chickens and even lambs to coyotes and I have no qualms about eliminating them. I'd probably feel the same about a bear.

[MicaelS]

44. Damn that is a lot of bears for a state the size of NJ

So NJ has a land area of 8,721 sq miles, and a human population density 1,185 sq/mi. No wonder they need to cull some bears.

[onehandle]

46. I drove through part of New Jersey the other day.

The bears were so thick that the wheels of my car didn't touch the ground.

[left on green only]

67. Here is a slightly different take on the situation on the side of the real hunters

among us. It is funny how there was never a problem with the ecology of this land, back when the Indians were the sole stewards of it. Since then, our human kind has really fucked things up; and not surprisingly so, primarily because of our own refusal (translated: lack of intelligence) to limit the size of our population. Perhaps then, in the spirit of fairness, a really viable solution to the problem of the human overpopulation that has decimated the flora and fauna of this once prosperous land, would be to declare an open season on the fearless hunters who murder defenseless wildlife with their high power, scope mounted rifles. We could place ads in Solder Of Fortune magazine for all of the true rambo types who read it, reassuring them that hunter meat has a really appealing taste (kind of like chicken - if you know what I mean). Yesseree, just my idea for taking "civilization" to a new level in this land that we have stolen. :sarcasm:

[tabasco]

70. In my area of WV, bear hunters are the most rancid people.

The lazy fucks use dogs to tree bears and radios to find the dogs, then go execute a treed bear.

Some "sport." Deer hunters are an entirely different breed. 90% of the bear hunters are dumbass scumbags.

[goforit]

74. Humanity going too far

It will catch up.
How many hunters will be eating these bear for food.
None to one.
Men just suck.

[madokie]

78. Do people eat bear?

What ya' havin' for dinner, why, bear ass of course

[freethought]

95. Some do.

I have tried it myself and didn't think too much of it, however that was many years ago. I have only met a few hunters that actively hunted bear. What few I have met and talked to describe bear hunting as 'tedious'. My father, an active hunter for many years, swore off hunting or eating bear when on a deer hunt, he happened upon a black bear having a feast on a dead deer carcase. I asked what the big deal was and his reply was that the deer had been dead for a "prolonged" time. After that, my father swore NO BEAR MEAT. would touch his lips.
Another thing I have heard is that when it comes time to skin and butcher the animal one has to be mentally prepared. As one poster put it, a skinned bear is like a human being. Similar in size and proportions. This has freaked some hunters out from time to time as I have been told.

[madokie]

98. A bear better get a good look at me before I see him if he wants to know what I look like

cause I'm going to be a pile of shit leaving a cloud of dust.

[otohara]

80. Ugh

The Japanese are off to slaughter whales too!

[freethought]

86. Wow, some real polarization on this thread.

I am not surprised that the state of N.J. had a bear hunt. I am surprised of the number of bears that were taken, nearly 600 in 2010.

When I was in college back in the mid to late 1980s, I was actually studying wildlife biology, ecology, and environmental science. I was attending a large state school in western Massachusetts and at the time, state biologists were trying to get a handle on black bear populations west of the Connecticut River. The estimated number was put at about 500 bears and that was 20 years ago. There is little doubt in my mind that population has expanded eastward closer to urban/suburban areas.

As one previous poster said that black bears DO NOT make good neighbors. The "awwwww" effect is easy when you see a few bear cubs ambling in the back yard, but when one of those bears grows up to tip the scales at nearly 300 pounds (the Mass. record for a bear taken during a hunt was 467 pounds dressed weight) and can rip up gardens, damage property, raise havoc with agricultural crops, and on occasion force their way into homes, peoples' opinions tend to change quickly. That's just the cold hard truth of it. Accidentally get between a sow (the term for an adult female bear) and her cubs and you could get ripped to shreds.

Some people have voiced opinions as to why states do hunts. As a response to hunters seeking hunting opportunities. To bring in revenues from licences and the like. For cost-effectiveness. In truth, all three reason are true. Hunters want opportunities and the state responds to that. States get revenues from license sales but the also get funds from the federal govt in which the amount given is based on the number of licenses sold in that state. But also for its cost-effectiveness. In truth, if you have to control a certain type of wild population a regulated hunt is, more often than not, the best way to do it whether you approve of it or not.

Relocation seems like a good option but in truth it isn't. Try to relocate a number of bears to a certain area and about half of them will somehow manage to make their way back, even if they were transported 100 miles away. I have read a number of articles about "birth control" for wildlife, especially for deer. Exactly how do you effectively administer such a treatment to a wild population that could be spread out over hundreds of square miles? How much would this cost? Such an approach is just not a viable option, especially in the current fiscal climate.

Lastly, the article is referring to a regulated hunt of a species that is not endangered or threatened with extinction. The hunters are licensed and the state has an educated guess as to how many bears it wants taken. What went on in New Jersey IS NOT THE SAME as poaching a threatened species like the African White Rhino or the Siberian Tiger.

[Xithras]

91. Sounds bad until you put it in perspective.

I looked a few numbers up:

There are an estimated 3500 black bears in New Jersey. Assuming a standard gender split, that's around 1700 females. Black bears live around 18 years in the wild, and begin breeding around 5 years, so there are probably about 1200 breeding females in the state. Female black bears produce at least two cubs per breeding, and reproduce at least once every three years.

On average, these numbers pencil out to AT LEAST 800 new Black Bears in New Jersey every year*. Because the state is projecting that a consistent 600 bears a year will be taken by these hunts, the simple reality is that the black bear population in the state is still growing. 3500 in 2011. 3700 in 2012. 3900 in 2014. 4100 in 2015. And on. And on. These bear numbers are already higher than those noted by the first European settlers in the 1600's, and they are probably the highest numbers the area has seen since the native americans settled the region 13,000 years ago. Even they hunted the bears to keep their numbers lower than they are today.

These bears aren't going anywhere, and these hunts aren't making any kind of significant dent in their population. It's simply slowing their population growth rate down.

* I should note that ALL of my numbers have been rounded down...bears breed as early as 3 years, live as long as 25, have up to 6 cubs per litter, can breed every other year, etc. The numbers listed here are the minimums. In reality, they are probably producing far more than 800 cubs a year, but that's a safe minimum for the sake of this discussion. Their population is still growing by at least 200 bears a year, but the real number could easily be double that.

[lynne]

92. Bear meat is excellent, not unlike roast beef -

- and one bear can provide a good bit of meat for a family. Not that anyone wants to hear it but thinning the herd is important for the health of the bears as well as the safety of the people in the region. Hungry bears = bears who will damage property and hurt people in their search for food.

[Luciferous]

93. Those poor bears

:(

[lonestarnot]

94. Poor creatures.