# What Happened to 50% of our bear since 2008?



## GVDocHoliday (Sep 5, 2003)

Nimrod1 said:


> GVDoc,
> 
> While I'm not of the mind that the sky is falling, or that the bear population is plummeting, I don't think that the ONLY reason for range expantion is population growth. Habitat loss, or change can easily explain a segment of the population looking for new range. In my little corner of the state I think the population is growing, with animals moving on to less crowded areas. Don't claim to know what is going on elsewhere.


I'm actually on the same track as you. I know where I'm at, the population is thriving.

As for home range expansion, I don't really feel that they'd be losing habitat. Northern MI really hasn't seen much sprawl in the last 10-15 years. Economy doesn't support it. There are a lot of properties that are becoming vacant and blights...and let's not forget that bears seem to adapt to human presence very well. 

Plus most of these bears that they're finding way down south tend to be 2-3 yo juvenile males that are more than likely getting kicked out of their home ranges and forced to really travel long distances.


----------



## nesquik (Mar 4, 2011)

That math is 100% correct i see it more and more every year


----------



## Musket (May 11, 2009)

That math is garbage. Whats that matter boy's, not enough action at crybabybear.com or are you just getting tired of responding to your own posts?


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

Of course it's not my math. Musket, did you get picked on when you were in school?:lol:


----------



## Gary A. Schinske (Jul 10, 2006)

hubbarj said:


> Bottom line they have more bear and issue fewer tags which means a higher success rate. By issuing fewer tags and increasing the population we could greatly improve the quality of the hunting. Personally I wouldn't have a problem with waiting longer for a tag if it improve the quality of my hunt. I'm sure everyone would like to see more animals as well as better quality in the animals they see. I would rather have one good hunt in 10 years than 3 crappy ones.


You are correct. My only point is that if all the tags issued in Michigan had the same season like Wisconsin, we would see a pretty good increase in success rate. The down side is that the population would have a bigger decrease across the board with this additional harvest. Success rate by itself does not tell the entire story.


----------



## Mickey Finn (Jan 21, 2005)

Rooster Cogburn said:


> With this kind of nominal bear management bear hunting in Canada is becoming a much better option.


Or Wyoming. Now, there's some mountains.


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

Michigan hunters have more days to hunt. Although it's true seasons are staggered. There are more hunting days, more tags, and far less bear harvested. I have run my dogs in Wisconsin and here. There are far more bear there. Bear in Wisconsin seem to be bigger as well.... Like it was here not to many years ago. The MDNR says there are half the the bears as there was a few years ago... I just pointed it out and agree.


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

*Is Michigan DNR Exploiting Black Bears?*

March 9, 2011


According to a recent press release from the Concerned Citizens Against Resource Exploitation (CCARE), the Michigan Department of Natural Resources (MDNR) is issuing too many hunting tags to kill bear.
CCARE, a watchdog organization whose primary concern is for a stable Michigan black bear population, says the bear population in that state has been cut in half since 2008 and that the issuance of bear tags exceeds the current population of bears.
The 2008 Michigan Bear Management Plan (page 10, 4.2 Current Population Status and Range in Michigan) sets the bear population at 19,000 bears.
Bear populations in Michigan have been steadily increasing since at least the 1990s (Figure 1). An estimated 19,000 bears (including cubs) occupy approximately 35,000 square miles of suitable bear habitat in the UP and NLP. Greater than 85 percent of the bear population resides in the UP where large tracts of state, federal, and private commercial forest lands contain good to excellent bear habitat. Bear populations in both Peninsulas are believed to be stable to increasing, and an increasing number of bear observations in southern Michigan suggest that bears are expanding from the NLP into the SLP.​It certainly appears, according to documents, that the Michigan bear population is shrinking but there also exists conflicting statements and comments made that should leave sportsmen with doubts about just how well black bears are being looked after.
In an email document to members of CCARE, dated January 28, 2011, Adam Bump, MDNR Bear and Furbearer Specialist, placed the bear population at 11,100.
In February 2011, an article in the Daily Tribune, says that Adam Bump puts the current bear population at between 9,000 and 11,000 bears. Puzzling for me is the explanation leading up to the revelation of the current bear population.
Michigans bear population has risen for the past two decades and is estimated at 9,000 to 11,000, DNRE bear program specialist Adam Bump told The Grand Rapids Press.​Puzzling because the 2008 Michigan Bear Management Plan put the number of bears at 19,000. I consider going from 19,000 to 9 or 10 thousand a substantial decline and would tend to agree with CCARE that the population has been cut in half.
So, now becomes the question of why. Is it because of over harvest or exploitation as CCARE calls it? Or something else?
CCARE claims that tags being issued by MDNR for bear harvest exceeds bear population.
It is deplorable that the 2011 license quota exceeds the total estimated bear population in Michigan, said Markham [Charles Markham, spokesman for CCARE].
We have repeatedly asked DNR officials to cut harvest quotas, instead the Natural Resource Commission raised the number of tags​We know that in 2010 the total bear license quota stood at 11,742. We also know that in 2008, bear harvest was 2,346 and in 2009, 2,026 (lower than projected).
If MDNR population estimates are accurate, 2008 had 19,000 bears. One would think a harvest of 2,346 was within tolerable ranges, i.e. approximately 12% of the population (This percentage of tolerance can vary greatly from state to state). The state of Maine fish and game states that that state can tolerate a harvest of about 15% annually. 
According to Adam Bump, Wisconsin, by statute, can only issue bear tags that do not exceed 18% of the bear population. In 2009, Wisconsin issued 7,310 black bear permits that resulted in a harvest of 4,585. Thats a success rate of about 60%. 
I dont know what Michigan bear hunters success rate is. If it was anything close to Wisconsins, soon the black bear population would disappear. At question is whether MDNR has a good knowledge of bear population data. With conflicting information where on one hand we are told bear populations are on the rise and yet given data that shows it isnt, is troublesome to say the least. The bottom line is that if the bear population is dropping that quickly in such a short period of time, Michigan sportsmen need to get answers now.
Tom Remington


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

The email document was actually January 28, 2010 not 2011- Charlie


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

The information in Tom Remington's article along with the highlighted documentation from MDNR included in the article exposes...roughly 23% of the state's estimated bear population (excluding cubs) was harvested in 2010....thanks to the excessive number of kill tags allocated by MDNR and the NRC. And in their wisdom the same number of kill tags will be issued for the 2011 bear season. 

I did not make this up...In MDNR's own press release they claim a statewide population (excluding cubs) to be roughly 10,000 bears. The 2010 bear harvest was about, 2,300 bears equals a 23% reduction in the states estimated population of bears (old enough as to be legally harvested).

Michigan is in bad need of a professional bear population census in all BMU's so we have a reasonable measurement of what our bear numbers are.


----------



## youp50 (Jan 14, 2011)

I hunt bear in the Bergland Unit every other year, my wife hunts every other year opposite of me. I usually make a trip in the summer to Taylor/Rusk Counties in NW Wisconsin. About every 8 years I get a kill tag in Wisconsin. A non resident in Wisconsin has the same rights to the draw as a resident. None of this 2% BS.  Meaning every one in that Wisconsin unit has to wait approximately 8 years for a tag.

The area that I hunt in Wisconsin has a decreasing opportunity for a trophy bear. 2002 I took a 380 pound book bear and 2010 a 250 pounder. Both years I hunted hard for a week. My hosts claim the hunting has been decreasing in quality for the last 5 years. Primarily due to increased hunting pressure. 

If one needs 8 years to get a tag, one will hunt much harder. There are many years my wife will hunt once or twice. 

The bear hunting opportunity Michigan offers is a good buy, offering a decent chance at a mature bear. No bear population in the upper midwest is as under hunted as the population in Canada. I am advantaged to many of you as I have hunted bears for over thirty years. I will say this, most persons that hunt bear in Michigan have too high of an expectation and too poor of a work ethic to be successful.


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

I think the point of hunting hard is well taken. I hunt hard and find a bear to run. Shooting a bear is not my main focus, it's the dogs. I did not stop any that I would have shot last season. Funny thing about bear is that their fall hunger makes them kind of easy to find even as numbers have declined. Just look at Drummond. Two bear killed has DNR biologists bragging about the harvest. That's funny. If you look at the numbers provided by the state, it's disturbing. Being able to shoot a "bear" in a declining population is not a difficult task. The state bear experts say we have far less bear than we did a few years ago. The lack of mature bear killed is alarming in my opinion. If you think the bear population is fine at 10,000 and shrinking, I don't. If your only measure of population is the fact that you can kill a bear, that's fine as well. I just don't think killing down a population is "Sound Management". So what will the acceptable number be? Less than 600 moose in the state and some think that's a good number? JMO


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

I think the point of hunting hard is well taken. I hunt hard and find a bear to run. Shooting a bear is not my main focus, it's the dogs. I did not stop any that I would have shot last season. Funny thing about bear is that their fall hunger makes them kind of easy to find even as numbers have declined. Just look at Drummond. Two bear killed has DNR biologists bragging about the harvest. That's funny. If you look at the numbers provided by the state, it's disturbing. Being able to shoot a "bear" in a declining population is not a difficult task. The state bear experts say we have far less bear than we did a few years ago. The lack of mature bear killed is alarming in my opinion. If you think the bear population is fine at 10,000 and shrinking, I don't. If your only measure of population is the fact that you can kill a bear, that's fine as well. I just don't think killing down a population is "Sound Management". So what will the acceptable number be? Less than 600 moose in the state and some think that's a good number? JMO


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


----------



## Nimrod1 (Apr 26, 2004)

Who is Tom Remington?

Not trying to be a smart alec, but I have never heard of him. I was wondering what his credentials are?


----------



## youp50 (Jan 14, 2011)

Of course there are more bears in Wisconsin thanin the western UP. At least in the area of Wisconsin I go to. It is all about the better habitat and year round baiting.


----------



## Bearboy (Feb 4, 2009)

Scott, I guess if you bait lots and you have good habitat it don't matter how many bear get killed. Does that make sense? 


_OutdoorHub Mobile, the information engine of the outdoors._


----------



## Todd Barden (Jun 6, 2009)

Guys, I own property in Ogemaw county and 10 years ago started seeing bear sign, no bear had ever been seen before that. Then we started getting pictures and seeing tracks. Over the years we started seeing many different bears on our motion cameras. It would seem the little guys would usually stick around more and we would only see the big bears every so often. Just for fun I started applying for a bear tag. For me it was more fun to bait and check the pictures. Never did bag a bear. But I learned a lot from observing the pictures taken. But my main question is: Don't they use den checks during the winter to help determine the population?


----------



## Slider (Feb 6, 2006)

I haven't seen any discussion as to whether or not wolf predation of cubs has any impact on the overall bear population. Admittedly, I don't know much about the relationship between the two in the wild....just wondering as I know it has had a significant impact on the UP deer herd over the past few years.


----------



## bounty hunter (Aug 7, 2002)

Wow, maybe I picked the wrong year to use my points? Bergland guys please fill me in on the numbers


----------



## Rooster Cogburn (Nov 5, 2007)

Slider,

Someone asked about wolf predation on bear at one onf the bear user group meetings. As I recall it was at the Crystal Falls meeting in 2009. 
None of the MDNR Wildlife Division folks at the meeting had an answer. Joe Hudson, president of the U.P. Bear Hunters Association held up some photos of wolf predation on bear that had been denned. So, it seems reasonable to believe it does happen. We also received some second hand information from an individual who contracts with MDNR doing aerial wolf counts in the winter months. He claimed he had seen sign of cubs that had been preyed upon during times there was snow on the ground, but there is nothing documented far as I know.


----------

