Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Man vs. Bear — The Debate.
Here in Oregon, a rancher recently shot and killed a black bear that was hunting his cattle. The bear made the news, as it hit a record-breaking (for this area) size of 490 pounds. That is a lot of black bear, which is the smallest and most widespread of the species in North America. Of course, the real fun of this article is the comments section. As could be expected, the arguments boil down to city environmentalists versus country conservationists.
For us city folk, the arguments come down to three points:
1. The bear was just doing what bears do, hunting for food.
2. We’re the trespassers on the bears’ natural habitat.
3. It’s just mean to kill bears for little reason.
I’ll see if I can refute my fellow city folk’s arguments.
Yes, the bear was just doing what it does. However, bears like to go for easy meals and will frequent an area where they know they can get them. Once this bear decided that he’d found the world’s best beef buffet, he would have stuck around until he’d eaten his fill. This being early spring, that could be a while. Bears are large animals and there’s little deterring them.
Point two is essentially a reference to “urban sprawl,” which is essentially a popular myth. The contiguous United States is only 5% developed, and the bar to be considered “developed” is set pretty low. Even the most urban states of New Jersey and Rhode Island are only 33% developed. Here in the West, we are on the very low end of development. We’re hardly expanding into the bears’ turf. That’s not to say it doesn’t happen, but it’s not as dramatic as the “urban sprawl” narrative would indicate. Moreover, this took place in rural southern Oregon on long-established ranch land.
If anything, bears move in on our turf. A couple of decades ago, Oregon voters made it more difficult to hunt black bears. The ads run by environmental interests showed dramatic, heart-rending pictures of scared bears being hunted. Urban and suburban Oregon rushed to vote in favor of the limitations. Of course, if the bears are hunted, they will breed and increase in numbers. Bears are very territorial animals. They don’t like to share their hunting grounds with other bears too much. The more bears there are, the more they will spread out in search of their own hunting ground — which can mean human areas.
You can say what you want about trophy hunting, but the last point is very subjective. It also ignores all the objective costs in losing cattle to a hungry bear. One cow can have a value somewhere between an old used car and a brand new automobile. Imagine if someone came by your house and destroyed your VW Bug one night, then came back to sniff around your Prius. You are probably going to do something about it.
Finally, despite everything that Disney taught you, Bears aren’t human. They don’t reason. They don’t discuss the issues with you.
They are kind of like Progressives.
Published in General
When you want to protect a species, make it fun, legal. and prestigious to hunt. Hunters invest in their recreation more effectively than “environmentalists” or bureaucrats because they seek a measurable result for themselves and their posterity.
There are only so many 747 aircraft configured to deploy the volumes of capsicum necessary to deter bear infiltration, and we”d rather use them to fight wildfires. Bears are best managed by legal hunters, not Sriracha; painting the West in hot sauce is not responsible animal management.
…or to farm.
Need ivory? Start an elephant farm.
Besides, the last thing we need are bears with a taste for Asian-fusion cuisine.
Yes, you should apply the pepper sauce after you’ve shot and butchered the bear. Anybody have any good recipes for a bear steak marinade?
Just buy them off with flowers and an apologetic card.
C. U.,
I can bearly hear you from Woodburn…
I holler in your direction next time I’m in that neck of the woods — woods being a place where bears go. My folks live there, so I go to Woodburn on occasion.
They may not be afraid of humans, they just don’t want to be around them. What’s the difference.
May I suggest the difference is there are two ways to not be around humans:
1. Avoid them.
2. Kill them.
An animal that is afraid of humans is more likely to opt for (1) rather than (2). One that is unafraid of humans will – at a minimum – give (2) greater consideration.
I am for animals reviving Kipling’s Law of the Jungle, especially:
Ye may kill for yourselves, and your mates,
and your cubs as they need, and ye can;
But kill not for pleasure of killing,
and seven times never kill Man!
Seawriter
I theoretically may kill one of these furry things in 6 months in Idaho. No clue what I’ll do with it though. Maybe just cuddle the fur.
Slow cook the flesh. Tan the hide. Keep the skull as a warning to progressives who bother you.
I like that idea.
Thanks Patrick!