Printable View
(disclosure-----this is the station i work for..........i did not have anything to do with the story though)
Some of y'all might be interested in a new study about GSMNP bears...
from what i understand, the study is still in the process of being published, but here's our story previewing it....
https://www.wbir.com/article/news/lo...6-1624fdb95ea1
Fascinating! Thanks for sharing. I'm actually surprised this kind of study hasn't been done before, because on wildlife programs on TV, it seems like all sorts of animals are collared and tracked, land and sea (if not air too). Maybe it wasn't with GPS, but some other less trackable technology? Anyway, I look forward to see new maps of what in East TN is "established" bear country.
Time Zone---
it sorta has in the past...........but with new technology, it makes a more complete, accurate (as much as possible) study.....
That was a good piece. Thanks.
So they thought 95% of the bears were eating and spending all their time in the park, but the reality is that almost all the bears are eating outside the park. The bear density in gsmnp has been artificially managed to levels that do not occur naturally. This seems to be further evidence of that. The park cannot support the bears, but food/trash found in communities surrounding the park do.
Ironically, bear/human interaction is critical to mainting the high bear density in gsmnp. We've been told the exact opposite. Most of us believed that it was the outlier bear that sought food from human communities. This study shows that nearly all bears are getting food from human communities.
Assuming this study is accurate, can we still make the case that the artificially high bear population in the area is healthy?
The only conclusion I've ever come to is that 1) There are way too many bears in gsmnp, and 2) They need to be hunted so they return to the wild and avoid using human communities to support their survival.
You could be right but it maybe that black bears need way more room to roam that we previous thought. This research is in line with current thinking about grizzly bears that they need a corridor in the Rockies from Jasper Alberta to Yellowstone NP to roam.Quote:
Originally Posted by FreeGoldRush
Thanks for posting the video Tn hiker
Truly interesting. Thanks for the posting.
About 15 years ago there was an effort to establish a bear population in Big South Fork. Deer hunting is allowed in limited areas there. Initially bears from the GSMNP were released in Big South Fork but most of them simply made the 100 mile trek back home. Later they brought in pregnant hibernating females thinking the cubs would act as an anchor. Even then some would abandon the cubs. There was at least one story of a bear that was tranquilized in downtown Knoxville on its way back to were it originated.
Maybe they were premature in these efforts. Bear sightings are more and more common place in areas were they haven't been seen in decades.
It must have worked. We saw two there.Quote:
Originally Posted by rmitchell
God bless the bears. They are the original stealth campers. I'm against hunting bears because where I live in TN they do it with packs of dogs---barbaric---plus I respect the black furry mammals and their families and know they deserve to live in the woods just like any of us humans. The Ranger in the vid says "There's alot more people and alot more visitors . . " and that's the core of the problem---human sprawl and black bear habitat loss. TN has about 5,000 black bears and almost 7,000,000 humans---apparently we've lost all control of our numbers and greatly outnumber the bears---which will never be good for the bears.
Wow! I knew they roamed around a lot but I didn't think they covered that much territory. Great article. Headed to the Smokies in a month or 2 for a section. Hopefully we get to see some (from a safe distance).
Quote:
About 15 years ago there was an effort to establish a bear population in Big South Fork
at one point in time-----the locals up there opposed the introduction of bears......
Quote:
The only conclusion I've ever come to is that 1) There are way too many bears in gsmnp, and 2) They need to be hunted so they return to the wild and avoid using human communities to support their survival.
i agree with this......
and there are some hunting preserves, both on the TN side and the NC side, that butt up against Park land.....
That may be true too. And if so, then that might bolster the notion that the park is too small for the number of bears that are there.Quote:
Originally Posted by TexasBob
Bears are opportunists, like ants and hikers. They go where there's food, like your kitchen and hiker feeds. Until you take the food away, they'll keep coming. Bearproof your house, antproof your kitchen, don't feed the hikers and the wildlife will disperse.
The bears aren't starving, no need to shoot them.
The park is stated to be 800 square miles. The square root of 800 is about 28, or just consider a 40x20 mile square. If you dropped a bear in the middle of a 28x28 mile square, the bear would only be 14 miles from the closest edge and about 20 miles to a corner. The bears know where the edges are because they're smart and mama teaches them. The park is not square though either so there's going to be a narrow part and a wide part. Garbage is pretty steady work compared to nuts and berries and bears just want to eat not work for it.
I suppose I could have just considered a circle. A circle that has an area of 800 square miles has a radius of about 16 miles. If the park was perfectly circular, a bear dropped in the middle would need to travel just 16 miles to the edge.Quote:
Originally Posted by Alligator
Quote:
Originally Posted by Uncle Joe
I think the point of the video is summed up in this quote from the video - "The park is huge but it is not big enough for a self contained bear population". There probably are too many bears in the park but having fewer bears doesn't mean they won't roam outside the park if their natural predilection is roam over a large area.