Legislation under consideration in Annapolis would force the introduction of wild black bears into each of Maryland’s 23 counties. But don’t grab your shotgun before taking the trash out just yet – the lawmakers involved admit the bill is little more than a political bluff, designed to beat back the advances of liberal legislators who would do away with Maryland’s annual black bear hunt.
At issue is the fate of Maryland’s apparently burgeoning population of black bears: Will they continue to be managed/harvested through a controversial state hunting lottery, be allowed to breed and expand their territory without the intervening hand of man or will they be plucked from their scant remaining habitat and redistributed to each and every county in the state?
These are the options on the table and, beginning Wednesday afternoon during an Environmental Matters Committee hearing in Annapolis, the Maryland General Assembly will ponder House Bill 762 – legislation giving the state 7 years to establish a population of black bears in each of Maryland’s 23 counties.
Del. Wendell Beitzel, a Republican representing Allegany and Garrett counties, is tired of the Beltway politicians acting like they know what’s best for his constituents out in the furthest reaches of western Maryland. Out where people get their local news from Pittsburgh and root for Steel Town sports teams. Out where the snow is measured in feet rather than inches. Out in bear country, where black bears are a legitimate nuisance and everyday threat to livelihood, rather than the relict symbol of enduring wildness they have become in metropolitan and suburban Maryland.
Thus the battle lines are drawn.
Under the administration of former governor Bob Ehrlich, Maryland enacted its first black bear hunt in more than a half-century. The idea was to cull the growing and spreading population of bears while energizing the regional hunting industry and, yes, probably bring in some business for Maryland’s Department of Natural Resources through the sale of hunting licenses and entry into the lottery to determine who gets the right to track and kill a black bear.
The bear hunt was met with great resentment, mostly from the metropolitan and suburban portions of the state, where people couldn’t get past the image of Smokey the Bear being slaughtered to see the reality of living with black bears, which cause property damage, kill livestock and destroy crops.
Enter Del. Barbara Frush, a Democrat representing Anne Arundel and Prince George’s counties, who has introduced HB 657, which would classify black bears as nongame mammals; prohibit DNR from reducing the black bear population in the state and prohibit the department from establishing an open season to hunt black bears.
This was Beitzel’s frustration – a metro politician going after the bear-lover vote with legislation that would likely have no impact on her urban constituents, but would directly affect the lives of western Marylanders living side-by-side with black bears.
So Beitzel fired back. He introduced HB 762, which would require the state Secretary of Natural Resources to establish a program to ensure that, by October 1, 2015, a black bear population is introduced into each county in Maryland.
That’s right, Beitzel essentially just told Frush and her supporters that, if you want to hug bears, we’ll be more than happy to send them your way.
It’s a genius bluff – a ploy to counter Frush’s bill. If the bear hunt is banned, Beitzel will have a greater argument to need to disburse western Maryland’s black bear population – so why not move them to Frush’s own county where people seem to be clamoring for more and more bears?
But is such a premise even environmentally viable? Could black bears live in Prince George’s County? What about the beaches of the Eastern Shore? Here’s what DNR has to say about that:
Historically, black bears were found in all of Maryland’s counties. However, as settlers cleared the landscape for agriculture, industry, and timber production throughout the 18th, 19th, and early 20th centuries, most of Maryland’s suitable black bear habitat was lost.
By the mid-20th century, black bears could only be found in the rugged mountainous areas in western Maryland. By the mid 1950s, only a few bears were estimated to remain in the state. In 1953, the black bear hunting season was closed due to concerns of a dwindling bear population. In 1972, the status of black bears was changed from ‘forest game animal’ to ‘endangered species’ in Maryland.
So, theoretically, black bears did and could live in every county in Maryland – they just haven’t for about a 100 years.
But this is all just a political ploy, right? I mean Beitzel is just bluffing Frush to get her legislation pulled or defeated, right? We’re not actually talking about a redistribution of Maryland’s black bear population into each of the state’s 23 counties, are we? Perhaps.
“Del. Beitzel’s black bear bill was introduced for the purpose of controlling the black bear population in western Maryland. Del. Frush has introduced a bill, HB 657, that would prohibit the hunting of the black bear. If her bill passes then the black bear population would go unchecked. Del. Beitzel’s bill provides a solution that would allow the bears to survive, but in different parts of the state. His office has been in contact with DNR and they have mapped locations in nearly every county where the black bear could survive,” wrote Justin Hanna, legislative assistant for Harford County Del. Donna Stifler.
Stifler, along with Harford County Dels. B. Dan Riley, Susan McComas and Mary-Dulany James, have all signed on as sponsors supporting Beitzel’s black bear population distribution plan.
Harford County gets one or two bear sightings each year, but is a notoriously dangerous place for a young black bear to try and coexist with humans.
A few years ago, there was a black bear who was swimming across the Susquehanna River between Darlington and Conowingo and was tranquilized and shipped out to western Maryland by DNR. When it was discovered the bear had already been tagged as a nuisance animal (with yellow tags literally hanging from his ears), the black bear was euthanized.
Not long thereafter, another young black bear met his maker on the side of I-95 near Riverside.
And, of course, who can forget the affable bear who meandered his way through Harford County, from the Pennsylvania line down onto the heavily guarded Aberdeen Proving Ground U.S. Army post, before being shot by a former racecar driver in Creswell as the bear tried to grab a scrap of food from the shooter’s dog bowl?
But now we’re told DNR has “mapped locations in nearly every county where the black bear could survive.”
Survive? That doesn’t sound too promising. Do we really want or need black bears out there just trying to survive each day, dodging traffic and bullets, while looking for breakfast?
The next logical question, at least to me, is where in each county would these black bears be deposited? Unfortunately, while the areas have apparently been designated by DNR, finding out where they are has proven difficult, to say the least.
“I have not forgotten about your request. I spoke with DNR, unfortunately they only have a large hardcopy of the map. It is rather outdated and could be misleading. I do not mean to give you the run around, but [Senator George] Edwards’ office has a large copy of the map, but they don’t want it taken out of their office. Let me know if this helps,” Stifler’s assistant Hanna offered.
“Outdated and could be misleading?” We’re talking about bears here. You don’t really want to get your lot lines wrong when it comes to where you’re going to establish a population of living, breathing 300-pound meat-eaters.
And what constitutes a population? Assuming DNR’s own estimate that there are about 600 black bears in Maryland, spreading them out evenly among the 23 counties in the state would result with each county ending up with about 26 bears.
In one of Maryland’s smaller counties like Calvert, that comes about to one bear every 8 square miles. That’s not too bad considering the population of Calvert County is only about 84,000. Extending that same scenario to, let’s say, Howard County, we end up with one bear every 9.7 square miles. This is a little more troubling considering those same 9.7 square miles in Howard County would also be home to 9,544 people – as the county has a density of 984 people/square mile. The odds of Howard Countian running into a black bear, perhaps literally, would be quite high.
Can you even move black bears around like this? I mean they have a home range of at least 40 square miles — why would a bear stay in Prince George’s County? I don’t even like staying in Prince George’s County longer than I have to.
From DNR’s own 2004 Black Bear Management Plan:
Increased mortality of relocated bears has been documented due to various factors such as bear/vehicle collisions and hunting mortality precipitated by the bears’ increased movements after release at a new site (Massopust and Anderson 1984, Mark Ternent-PA Game Commission, pers. comm.). Relocated bears may attempt to return to their original home range or may increase movements while trying to learn a new territory. Young, subadult bears are less likely to return to their capture site after translocation than adult bears, but may be susceptible to the aforementioned mortality factors as they explore new habitats.
Bears should be released in an area containing suitable black bear habitat to increase the likelihood of a successful translocation (VDGIF 2002). However, translocating nuisance bears is often not a feasible solution. Limited available habitat, the likelihood that bears will return to the capture area, and the intolerance of humans to bears are all factors that affect the success of these efforts.
OK, so the bears will probably just try to get back to western Maryland anyway once reloacted and, in attempting to return home, would probably become roadkill in the process. And what’s this about “intolerance of humans?” That doesn’t sound too good. You mean the black bears being relocated from Garrett County into Montgomery County might not take too kindly to their new neighbors? This is beginning to sound like something from the Island of Dr. Moreau.
Where’s the voice of reason in all of this? Are there really too many bears in western Maryland? Do we need to keep hunting/harvesting them? Are we seriously talking about redistributing “the wealth” across the state?
B. Dan, bring us home and clear up this mess.
“The bill is meant to send a message. The message is to allow Washington, Allegany, and Garrett Counties to handle THEIR bear problem. What right do people in counties such as Montgomery and Prince Georges have to dictate bear policy in Western Maryland? These are not your cuddly little teddy bears you read about in nursery rhymes. They do threaten the safety of humans , their pets, and property.
“True, humans are encroaching on the black bears native habitat. True, the bears were there first. But at one time all of Maryland was part of the black bear habitat. So maybe we should repopulate the black bears ancient habitat and let everyone enjoy the bears presence in their yards, in their gardens, on their porch as the bears tear down their doors and rip out air conditioner units so they can come into your house for a friendly little Goldilock return visit,” Del. Riley wrote in an email.
Well said. So I think I finally get it. It’s a tongue-in-cheek act meant to parry an attempt by metro and suburban legislators to halt the bear harvest. Right?
“I find it unbearable that other jurisdictions dictate to other, smaller jurisdictions, how to address their local issues,” Riley added.
After all this, I sure hope that pun was intended.
We CAN relocate all of the bears throughout the state. If the bears have trouble adapting to their new surroundings, we’ll just open up BEAR REHAB facilities…
Wait…
The NIMBY people don’t want to live next to rehab places either…
Ever have an agile, skittish whitetail skip off the bumper of your hoopty?
Try that with a 600 pound “Winnie the Pooh.”
What makes anyone think we can relocate bears into every county? When settlers logged the land and put up buildings and highways, the bears were pushed into the less populated part of the state. What makes us think that the counties where the bears couldn’t survive years ago, are capable of supporting a bear population now? Bears do better in less populated areas. Let the bears decide where they want to go and see if it works for them. As we’ve seen in the past, they struggle to adapt in places like Harford. Counties that have more forestation and less of a human population would probably work fine, but that can’t be applied to every county.
Brian- You could have called this post “Bears In The ‘Hood”!
Sweeeet!
When the western Maryland bears start eating people come talk to me about bear management. Otherwise I will just assume that all this is a big bunch of the usual dust kicked up by hillbillies who hate anyone that lives in an urban environment.
This is far more than the “usual dust kicked up by hillbillies.” Speaking for all hillbillies in general, we are quite jealous of your tall buildings, implementation of new fangled technological achievements like electricity and indoor plumming… and oh yeah… your staggeringly higher murder rates.
If you refuse to use the bear hunt as a management tool, then there must be something else that has to be done to control the population. The deer population is a handy example of this. If there was a moratorium on the deer hunt, then the population would explode leading to more and more traffic accidents as a result.
I’m afraid that the more highly evolved urbanites who responded above have completely missed the concept of the “share the bear” plan. It is a modest proposal of sorts that shines a spotlight on this issue.
Since some of you seem to be aching to re-introduce unchecked populations of apex predators back into Maryland, why stop at the black bear? Let’s bring back breeding populations of wolves and cougars too.
They may serve to naturally eliminate some of the whitetail population, and we won’t have another year like 2006 where over 11,500 deer were struck by vehicles statewide.
Of course, once the deer move on, say, north and west, to safer habitats, the predators will be left behind to seek other food sources, like livestock, domestic animals, dumpsters at the Taco Bell…
Wake up, people. It’s not about trophy hunts, or hillbillies. These animals moved on because man and predator cannot naturally coexist in this environment. And, to arbitrarily force their return is, well, unnatural.
I don’t know about wolves, but the cougars might already be back here in Maryland…http://www.acurse.com/hunt_gcat.html
As a former member of the Environmental Matters Committee for 4 years I heard the testimony from both sides: Delegate Barbara Frush – sponsor of the bill to eliminate the hunt and Delegate George Edwards – the orginal sponsor of the bill to spread the population throughout the state. Delegate Edwards, now Senator Edwards idea was just as the writer said a “bluff”. Both he and Delegate Beitzel are faced with in issue that is affecting only thier district. They have worked with the state of Maryland on how to deal with the growing population. It was determined that a hunt was needed to bring the population in “check” with the area could sustain. Not being a hunting advocate, Delegate Frush sponsored legislation to stop the hunt. For her this was truly personal, she does not support hunting. Faced with possibility of an “outsider” having aan influence in what thier district needs, both the Senator and Delegate sponsored this bill to bring the population in “check”. If they can’t have a hunt to lower the population than the only alternative is to remove them from the area.
It was a pretty smart move. When a roadblock was put before them the Western Maryland delegation was able to find a way around it.
Thanks for chiming in Delegate Jennings.
How awesome is this? We can have civil dialog with our elected officials. Hopefully more will jump on board. Spread the word!
Well, Environmental Matters just heard the bill. We called it “Share the Bear”. The sponsor really has no intention of relocating bears to the Boardwalk in Ocean City or to the dumpsters behind Harford Mall, or to any other county. It was just to make the point that ultra liberal, urban areas should not dictate what takes place in the more rural areas of this great state.
It’s not about trophies, huh? So lets ban the collection of trophies, see how well that goes over.
Name one alternative to population control (sterilization, transplantation) other than blowing away (from cover) at a creature that dared to knock over a garbage can when you built a home in it’s fricking habitat, then maybe I’ll believe population control is the issue.
Until then, do us the decency of just admitting you want to blast the shit out of some bear. Please.
Although I do admire the whole “modest proposal” tactic. An oldy but a goody.
we the people have a monopoly’ of killing anything that moves includeing humans, gunshot by accident.
being the recipient of unwanted gun fire. bringing in the bear will increase the crazy’s running loose in the wood’s. of which people such as my self find relaxing while looking for big foot & cougar etc.
on occasion digging up some vintage bottles’ & animal lover my self I do believe they should be protected as well.
Joshua,
You mentioned 2 alternate ideas – sterilization & transplantation
Transplantation: HB 762 does just that. It would have the DNR catch BlackBear from Western Maryland and transport them throughout the state.
Sterilization: the problem with this was how to administer it. Method 1 was to feed it. However, there was no way to ensure it was not consumed by other animals, thus causing a drop in population of those animals. The other option was to catch the bear and administer it. This has 2 major set backs: 1 – cost and 2 – making sure you keep treating the same bear.
Since we’ve got some of the movers and shakers checking in here, I’ll throw this question out to Del. Jennings and Del. Norman:
If given the opportunity, how would you vote on HB 657 – Ban the Bear Hunt and HB 762 – Share the Bear?
What about all you non-elected officials? How would you vote on each bill?
Personally, I don’t like the idea of killing bears, but I recognize I don’t have to live with the problems they cause to western Maryland residents. Honestly though, I think I would gladly adjust my lifestyle to accomodate a population of black bears in Harford County.
Take that with a grain of salt, however, because I’ve already adjusted my lifestyle to accomodate living with just about every other critter under the Sun – most under my own roof.
C’mon Josh, do you really think every hunter lines his/her walls with pelts, heads, and antlers? I know a lot of hunters whose homes are completely devoid of trophys of any kind.
When I lived out west (think waaaay out west), there was a serious problem with elk and antelope starving during periods of extreme drought. Should those hunts be banned, it would place a serious strain on the ecosystem there by allowing the population-stressed by a dwindling food supply-to continue to grow.
Managed hunts are just that-managed.
Every year since the return of the bear hunt to Western MD, the hunt has been suspended before it was officially over. It has been stopped BEFORE the target number was reached to avoid over-harvesting. This is “smart growth,” animal style.
In the interest of full disclosure, I am not a hunter (I prefer to hunt the most elusive of game…man). It is the fundamental issues here that I am arguing.
First and foremost, that this is truly a local issue to the people of Western Maryland, hours and worlds away from the Annapolis crew.
Second, that nobody is advocation the eradication of the species. Without practical, smart controls in place, the situation for the black bear in Maryland will only get worse.
I would defer to the Western Maryland Delegate, allowing hunting, and I would hope that he would defer to me on issues primarily affecting Harford County. I would not defer to the Montgomery County delegate as I don’t believe that there are all that many bears down there. Please keep in mind that the “share the bear” bill was to just make a point, as JB indicated.
Thanks Wayne,
I can’t help but wonder though, what IF something went haywire – a freak snowstorm and some of the delegates can’t show up or something – and HB 762 – “Share the Bear” ends up passing?
It’s one thing to make a point, and I think it’s a pretty brilliant political strategy, but it is a bill and it could get passed – however unlikely that scenario might be. Then we would have a very interesting situation on our hands.
Something else comes to mind. Is there a prohibition on moving Maryland animals to Pennsylvania or West Virginia? Or vice versa? I know the one nuisance bear I cited in my article above, like many of Harford County’s black bears, had wandered down from Pennsylvania.
Intangible lines on a map mean little to a meandering bruin.
As it was stated earlier, loss of habitat is why the bear population has shrunk to only 2 counties. Due to the fact that if transported to Western & Eastern Shore there would not be enough habitat to sustain the bear, I would oppose HB657 an allow the hunt to go on.
Brian–
The bill can’t pass. First, it’s a Republican bill, which means that the Democrats will hone in with their “no” votes if it comes to a vote, so they would actually have to not be there for it to pass. If the Democrats aren’t there, the “balance” of power in Maryland says that we would be a little under quorum. There’s also all of those checks and balances to get through– those Montgomery Democrats would have to forget to show up through the house committee, house floor, senate committee, and senate floor votes, and let the bill cross MOM’s desk. Further, the house chair, senate chair, speaker, and president pro tempore would have to accidentally allow the bill to come out of their desk for a vote.
If all that happens, MOM and DNR can employ the full efficiency of the state government to delay putting the bill into effect– and the bill itself says it wouldn’t even actually go into effect until 2015. Given that it’s Annapolis (and the surprisingly public & contested black bear issue– remember that this is the issue that cost former Speaker of the House Cas Taylor his job), the legislature’s position on the issue would most likely change 5 times.
Finally, the bill only says that a “black bear population has to be introduced.” The Governor (with help from the AG) determines how to put the bill into effect. Introducing one bear in a small cage in a zoo in each county satisfies the language if the Gov says it does (unless the judges he appointed determine otherwise after a long legal process, during which time the policy can be changed to render the lawsuit moot).
I only went in to all of this to show just how difficult it is for a bill– particularly a Republican bill– to have an impact.
As far as transporting animals across state lines goes, the bureaucracy of the states in question could handle it. Why any of this needs to be a legislative issue is beyond me– the DNR and counties should be empowered to implement whatever hunting regulations fit public policy to whatever areas of the state they deem proper.
It’s just a shame that Del. Frush’s bill doesn’t have the same hill to climb….
Brian,
It is not as bad as you think it is down here in Annapolis. Many Republicans get their bills passed. The House just passed one of Delegate Stffler’s bills and one of Delegate McComas’ bills. It happens more time than you can imagine.
Trust me, not only do Republicans have concerns about Montgomery County’s Delegation but many of us Democrats have issues with them especially concerning illegal immigrants .
Special note to Brian. My good friend, Cas Taylor lost his election because he voted for the “Gun Safety” bill. Check with Delegate Myers who defeated Cas.
Got to go and meet the Aberdeen citizens who have come to testify for the hotel tax.
Brian-
As Delegate Riley pointed out, having an R next to one’s name does not automatically kill a bill. Both Delegate McComas and I each passed three state-wide bills last year alone. We work hard and manage quite well to get our points across on behalf of our constituents.
I find it refreshing that the Western Maryland Delegation is doing what it can to take care of their Western Maryland constituents. It will be their prerogative to see how far they wish to take this bill if it is, indeed, needed.
Thanks
Delegate Riley and Delegate Stifler,
Thanks for your replies. I did not mean to say that it is impossible for a Republican to pass a bill. I meant that it is difficult– which is why Delegate Stifler’s passage of 3 bills is impressive. My post was meant to demonstrate how hard Harford’s delegates work to get bills passed.
Republican bills aren’t killed automatically, but it is a tougher job. Being a member of the dominant party makes it considerably easier to pass a bill, and the Democrats definitely have it easier. Of course, not all Democrats are equal, either, and I’m glad that you are on what I believe to be the right side of this issue, Delegate Riley. It shows that public servants can vote based on issues and not just party lines– I’m glad to see you say that it it’s not just Republicans that have concerns with Montgomery County’s delegation. It seems that the beliefs of the more liberal of that delegation’s members (which has included Franchot) are further away from those of Harford Countians every day, and the public needs to know that your beliefs and that of the left wing of your party are not always in alignment.
I am glad that all of Harford’s delegates who have posted have commented that local courtesy is the most important factor here. It is good to know that the concept is still alive and well, and that the lack of local courtesy in regard to the elected school board bills isn’t the norm.
Special Note to Delegate Riley– Thank you. The Bear issue was a hot topic in Annapolis that election, but you’re right that the gun safety bill had more of an impact in the voting booth.
It’s great to see the feedback from our legislators here. I hope it becomes a regular occurrance.
Mr Norman’s point gets to the core of the issue. I would bet the Wicomico County delegation doesn’t give a tinker’s damn about black bears in Oakland, so why should the Montgomery County delegation?
On the same line, it looks like Judiciary killed the serial number encoded ammunition bill. I know that was a hot issue in the county.
Del. Norman,
Thanks for the update on this “stinker.” From what I could tell, the Harford delegation was openly opposed to this back door gun ban.
(Even though it would have provided jobs for people with really tiny hands and great eyesight scratching serial numbers on the backs of all those bullets…)
&whats wrong with having black bears in counties other than western maryland?It’s way past tIme for a population cap on humans in our state.
) In addition, deaths have been reported rarely with concomitant administration of terfenadine and erythromycin. ,