News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by Waterluvian on Sunday June 26, 2016 @02:15AM (#11979616)
This is why conservation is important, even as a selfish act. Take away bear habitat and you have safety problem to deal with. And the bear patrol tax isn't cheap!
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by aaron695 on Sunday June 26, 2016 @04:50AM (#11979933)
Meh, you could easily just shoot them all.

How about we stick with humans get great enjoyment knowing large environmental habitats exist as our selfish act.

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by MiguelVieira on Sunday June 26, 2016 @09:15AM (#11980617)
> This is why conservation is important, even as a selfish act. Take away bear habitat and you have safety problem to deal with.

This is not usually the case. Take New Jersey, the most densely populated US state. There are bear problems in New Jersey. But since the 1970s, while the human population has increased 20%, the bear population has exploded from less than 100 to 4,000. This indicates that the bear problems are caused not by an increase in human population, but by an increase in bear population.

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by dforrestwilson1 on Sunday June 26, 2016 @09:41AM (#11980721)
Growing from a very low base of 100, mostly due to human efforts to erradicate them. It's hard to imagine that the effects of human habitation, and the environmental choices of those inhabitans does not impact the bear population. The same reason that deer and coyotes have come back, we limit hunting permits.

http://nj1015.com/510-nj-bears-killed-during-2015-hunt-offic...

Taking protectionism to the other extreme can easily get you to bear town. Monterey, California is infested with the most obnoxious deer population I have ever encountered.

http://www.osidenews.com/2015/03/01/area-attractions-blend-i...

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by hga on Sunday June 26, 2016 @12:31PM (#11981451)
The same reason that ... coyotes have come back, we limit hunting permits.

That depends. They've vastly increased their range, it extended into western Massachusetts in the early '80s as I recall, and in my home state of Missouri you are more than welcome to kill as many as you can (and they're challenging to hunt):

http://huntfish.mdc.mo.gov/hunting-trapping/species/coyote/c...

Hours: Coyotes may be taken all year.

Except during the daylight hours from April 1 - 17, 2016.

Notes: Coyotes, except as otherwise provided in this section, may be taken by hunting, and pelts and carcasses may be possessed, transported, and sold in any numbers throughout the year.

Special method restrictions apply during spring turkey season....

We seriously have way too many of them.

I think the nasty taste of deer has more to do with their increasing numbers than anything else other than various extremes like you note in taking them (when I was in grade school, I think, my mother said NO MORE (MULE) DEER!!! and my father switched to more tasty elk and eventually very tasty moose (as long as you don't get a really old one)).

(Side note: mere words cannot express how happy I am to have been born, raised, and now retired to a part of SW Missouri where there are absolutely no bear (to even get a sighting you have to go 2-3 counties away).)

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by ethbro on Sunday June 26, 2016 @11:03PM (#11983974)
There's a big difference between limiting permit hunting on predator species vs prey species.

I get it -- it's a pain in the ass if you're a farmer and you lose animals. But the answer isn't to externalize that by supporting continued extirpation of top predators.

And yes, occasionally even a baby / teenager / adult gets killed by not being aware of their surroundings. Too bad. Think like a mountain.

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by hga on Monday June 27, 2016 @05:06AM (#11984967)
Well, in the case of Missouri, coyotes are an invasive species, so presumably some of the other mechanisms beside starvation that would normally keep their numbers controlled aren't in effect.

I presume they've moved into Missouri and beyond mostly because they're filling an ecological niche we've emptied by removing species like wolves.

And I'm sorry, but I'm going to pick the side of humans every time, even though the result is messy. In either case, coyotes or wolves, it's critical to make them know their place and be scared of humans. Compare European stories about wolves facing unarmed with guns peasants to their relative historical unimportance in the US. For coyotes, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coyote_attacks_on_humans And I can attest that in Missouri they stay furtive, if not for picture cams and evidence of their depredations, and their howling at night, we wouldn't particularly know they're here.

Whereas foxes are much more tolerated, if not enthusiastically supported by people who don't keep chickens, and aren't hardly as shy. A young pair in fact took up residence right in front of my mother's house.

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by ars on Sunday June 26, 2016 @09:00PM (#11983625)
> daylight hours from April 1 - 17, 2016.

What happens (happened?) between April 1 - 17?

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by hga on Monday June 27, 2016 @05:10AM (#11984975)
It's got to be something related to the hunting season for another species. The only big one in the spring I (sort of) know about is turkeys.

So it turns out the question might actually be, what happens after April 17th? The 18th is the start of spring turkey season, so maybe this is a measure to get them a bit more complacent?

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by moptar on Sunday June 26, 2016 @06:13AM (#11980135)
That's not why we do conservation. We do it because we don't want the bears and other species to become extinct. In ongoing cases of people vs large mammals, the people always win. This kind of thing can't be a long term problem. Eventually the bears will die back to a sustainable population living away from people.
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by thaumasiotes on Sunday June 26, 2016 @01:36PM (#11981705)
> In ongoing cases of people vs large mammals, the people always win.

Except in Africa, where elephants are often an unmanageable menace to human communities.

Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by pvaldes on Sunday June 26, 2016 @07:27PM (#11983330)
Also in Africa and same with elephants. At least 20,000 were killed for ivory in 2015 and are in serious decline, as lions, rhinos and other big fauna from Africa
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by unabridged on Sunday June 26, 2016 @02:29PM (#11981972)
I think a large trench around your village would be enough to stop any elephants.
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by thaumasiotes on Sunday June 26, 2016 @02:55PM (#11982082)
Elephants eliminate African villages by eating their crops, not by destroying their houses.
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by sandworm101 on Sunday June 26, 2016 @02:40AM (#11979658)
This is eastern Russia. Acreage isn't the problem. These animals are being attracted to human settlements by food, what we call garbage. In all likelihood the bear population is higher than can be naturally supported due to the extra food being tossed at them by humans. Canada has just as many bears and has dealt with the problem through changes in our behavior. Problem bears are still often shot (far more humanely btw than in the OP) but attacks on humans are extremely rare.
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by Waterluvian on Sunday June 26, 2016 @02:54AM (#11979701)
The article seems to suggest there's massive illegal logging problems that caused loss of habitat and food.
Re:The Bears Who Came to Town and Would Not Go Away by PhasmaFelis on Sunday June 26, 2016 @04:07AM (#11979858)
I recommend you read the article. It's rather interesting and addressed your points.