slick
WKR
- Joined
- Feb 13, 2014
- Messages
- 1,799
Why do elk in non hunting areas do their thing around people with no regard? While their truly wild counter parts that live in areas they get shot, are much more skittish? It is a conditioning effect. Momma teaches young ones to fear humans where they can be killed. Just like momma's in preserves teach their young ones its ok to feed 10 yards from tourists with no fear. To say that same conditioning won't apply to a Grizzly is just not giving the bears much credit.
I know, I know, I'm just a dumb easterner that has no idea how the west works. But, I ain't that dumb and, neither is the grizzly bear.
Let’s compare apples to oranges. That sounds like fun. First off. Elk are a prey species. They are inherently MORE fearful 2nd. 120,000 elk in MT, 100,000 in WY, and another 100,some thousand in ID with tens of thousands of hunters trying to kill elk, it’s a learned behavior that ones that get shot at, and survive are fearful of being shot at. I don’t know the last time I saw 60+ grizzlies running together.
Now. 1) predator. 2) top of the food chain. Sure. The grizzlies that get shot at and missed, or the VERY few females with cubs that get shot (remember sub quota of 2 in WY) will have a learned behavior to avoid humans/hunters after that. But now we’re talking maybe 6 (let’s say 2 sows with 3 cubs). That then have a less than 60% chance of surviving (that’s 4 cubs) will carry on a trait in an population of 700+ bears (just the GYE) where there is either no hunting (parks) or already thousands of hunters in the woods shooting at animals already.
I don’t care where you’re from. I don’t believe that hunting 3% of the population, which MIGHT pass on a learned behavior to now suddenly avoid humans more-so than they already should to less than 1% will have any affect on whether or not they decide to attack people or not.
It’s a number game. Expanding bear territory= more conflicts with humans=more bear attacks. Sure, if we shot 100 bears a year, or whatever the number is to keep their population at a sustained level, maybe we would see a decrease in bear attacks. But the notion that shooting 3% of a population leads to an increased fear of two legged doesn’t add up