Cargando…

Local Attitudes towards Bear Management after Illegal Feeding and Problem Bear Activity

SIMPLE SUMMARY: The “pot bears” received international media attention in 2010 after police discovered the intentional feeding of black bears during the investigation of an alleged marijuana-growing operation in Christina Lake, British Columbia. Residents of this small community were surveyed by pho...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Dubois, Sara, Fraser, David
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: MDPI 2013
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4494444/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26479542
http://dx.doi.org/10.3390/ani3030935
Descripción
Sumario:SIMPLE SUMMARY: The “pot bears” received international media attention in 2010 after police discovered the intentional feeding of black bears during the investigation of an alleged marijuana-growing operation in Christina Lake, British Columbia. Residents of this small community were surveyed by phone twice over the following year, before and after government actions. This study aimed to understand local attitudes on how these bears should be managed and whether they differed from existing bear management policy. Results indicate a significant problem with the public view of wildlife feeding and a gap between public and expert opinion on relocation and killing of food-conditioned wildlife. ABSTRACT: The “pot bears” received international media attention in 2010 after police discovered the intentional feeding of over 20 black bears during the investigation of an alleged marijuana-growing operation in Christina Lake, British Columbia, Canada. A two-phase random digit dialing survey of the community was conducted in 2011 to understand local perspectives on bear policy and management, before and after a summer of problem bear activity and government interventions. Of the 159 households surveyed in February 2011, most had neutral or positive attitudes towards bears in general, and supported the initial decision to feed the food-conditioned bears until the autumn hibernation. In contrast to wildlife experts however, most participants supported relocating the problem bears, or allowing them to remain in the area, ahead of killing; in part this arose from notions of fairness despite the acknowledged problems of relocation. Most locals were aware of the years of feeding but did not report it, evidently failing to see it as a serious form of harm, even after many bears had been killed. This underscores the importance of preventive action on wildlife feeding and the need to narrow the gap between public and expert opinion on the likely effects of relocation versus killing.