PDA

View Full Version : Nuisance bear activity 06/12



Silver Bear
06-12-2009, 07:09
http://www.knoxnews.com/news/2009/jun/12/park-reports-high-nuisance-bear-activity-during/

This article is from this mornings paper 06/12. A lot of people have been telling me about seeing a lot of bears in Cades Cove.

Happy Trails,

TIDE-HSV
06-12-2009, 10:19
When Walnut Bottom was full last weekend (we finally got in on Sunday night), I was looking at the neighborhood and hadn't been into Cataloochee in a long time. I asked the backcountry guy what was the thinking in closing #40, but not #41, which is only a stone's throw away. He didn't know. For that matter, Sterling is under warning, but Walnut Bottom isn't. The bears range up and down that mountain freely and there was bear scat almost in the campsite at Walnut...

Ox97GaMe
06-12-2009, 21:36
One should remember that 'multiple bear reports' does not always correspond to 'multiple bears'. For example... I was at Russell Field Shelter a couple weeks ago. I met 11 hikers, all stating that they had seen 3 bears between Mollies and Russell. There is, in fact, a Mother bear and 2 cubs that roam the ridge between the two shelters. This does not equate to 11 bears, or 33 bears. It is 1 bear family. You will always see the 3 bears together until the cubs get old enough to wander away without mother worrying about them.

The same is true in Cades Cove. Almost every night, there is a mother bear with two cubs that crosses the loop road near the last cutoff road. Everyone that drives through there between 4 and 6 will likely see this family of bears making its way across teh valley.

As for closing specific campsites.... This is usually done if a bear has become a nuisance bear at a particular location. That is to say.. a bear has raided food bags or tents at that site and has not yet been tagged or relocated. Bear warnings are put up in areas where bears are active, but have not yet become a nuisance. The warnings are an effort to deter hikers from staying at those locations and to alert hikers to not provoke a bear into becoming a nuisance bear that needs to be relocated or killed.

Remember, a fed bear is a dead bear.

TIDE-HSV
06-12-2009, 21:45
I totally agree with all you said. However, it still doesn't explain the anomaly of closing #40, with #41 without even a bear warning. I don't remember how far apart they are, but it can't be two miles...

Ox97GaMe
06-12-2009, 23:21
I dont know the exact reason, but this is the case with several campsites each season. For example.. campsite 15 is closed, but not 14 or 16, both are within 2 miles as the crow flies. 92 is closed, but not 94 or 95.

I would attribute it most likely to one of two possibilities.

a) the travel patterns of the problem bears do not take it close to the other nearby campsites or shelters.

b) the other campsites dont get as many hikers staying at them, therefore fewer bear sightings or instances of bear activity reported.


Also note that between 40 and 41, there is a ridgeline. Perhaps in that particular instance, the bear doesnt climb up the ridge and down into the nearby valley. Maybe the bear stays near Woody Place and walks up and down the two streams that run through the valley between Polls Gap and Woody Place.

Ox97GaMe
06-12-2009, 23:26
I also noted on the latest backcountry campsite closings that almost all of them were within 2 miles of a road. Perhaps (and this is a stretch) hikers are carrying in coolers of food to those sites, which could be attracting the bears. But then.... what hiker would even consider doing that. They would be carrying in coolers of beer instead, right????? Maybe the coolers of beer are a contributing factor in the bears being labeled as 'problem bears'. Maybe what we have instead are problem hikers enticing the bear.

This was the case at Mt Collins Shelter last fall. A cooler of beer, toted in .7 miles. A bear roaming in the area. A recipe for disaster. The bear rips off part of the shelter roof to get to the drunk hikers that were antagonizing the bear. One dead bear. Should have been 4 dead idiots instead.

TIDE-HSV
06-12-2009, 23:53
Well, you like to think that they know what they're doing . I've thought of all of the factors you've mentioned. As I mentioned in the "density" thread, they estimated 400 in the park in 1972, when I started packing seriously. With 1500 now (and some rangers think that's a big underestimate), maybe their ranges have shrunk so that the problem guys and girls can't range as far without running into another bear...

Pokey2006
06-13-2009, 01:12
Bears in Cades Cove have a crazy amount of contact with human beings, all because of that God-awful loop road. Every time I've been there I've seen bears with big crowds of people snapping pictures and getting as close as they can. That goes on all day long, every day.

Close the loop road to motor traffic, and you might just have fewer problem bears to worry about.

TIDE-HSV
06-20-2009, 09:39
Well, we have reservations at Sheep Pen the 27th and 18th, Forge Creek on the 26th. This'll be the first time back since the bear stole my wife's pack there. It's currently under warning. I'll report back...

Dogwood
06-20-2009, 14:00
Very often, behind every so called problem bear, their lurks a problem human!

Was in Yosemite Valley walking on the trail from the backpacker's campground to Yosemite Falls when I smelled what seemed like a combination Outback Steakhouse and KFC competion for the after church on Sunday buffet/restaurant crowd. I thought to myself, if their are any bears within miles they will surely be attracted to these aromas. As I got to the place where the smels were eminiating from I saw a lady cooking steaks and barbecued chicken on a self made fire right under a sign that read "Campfires and Cooking Prohibited." Just as I was reading the sign a young adult black bear swept in from behind some trees and stole a big steak off the fire as the lady had her back turned. Several other campers saw what happened. All started to talk about the problems with the bears in Yosemite Valley! A ranger came over and scared the bear away and also gave the lady a fine for breaking the rules. Now, I ask you, if someone walked into your living room while you were hungry and thirsty with 2 hot pizzas and a twelve pack would you be tempted to try a slice and tall one?"

TIDE-HSV
06-20-2009, 14:16
I hear you. The weekend my wife's pack was stolen, we'd been with a group, an environmental groups, which shall remain unnamed. Everybody else left on Sunday and my wife and I remained until Monday. Not only were they drunk and rowdy, but they threw garbage into the fire ring. We had to dig it out and hang it with our food. However, I'm sure the bear had been rewarded often enough - intermittently reinforced. One interesting thing was that, when he took my wife's pack, several Ziploks fell out. They had not had food in them nor been in contact with food. However, the bear bit each one thoroughly - you could tell he equated Ziploks with food...

TIDE-HSV
08-15-2009, 08:16
Well, one more pack robbery, this time at Walnut Bottom. On 8/11, an interesting family showed up at Laurel Gap shelter, late in the day. They were originally Afrikaners, now living in St. Louis, where he's a pediatric anesthesiologist. She had covered her pack, no food in it, with her three kids rain gear, for waterproofing, I guess. The bear slashed the rain gear to get at the pack and took the pack, with her clothes in it...