Bear in Mind Conference at Rutgers

On Saturday, I attended and spoke at "Bear in Mind," a one-day conference about bears and bear protection at Rutgers University, in New Jersey.

My talk, titled, "Why the 2005 New Jersey Bear Hunt Was Illegal," was about the New Jersey bear hunt lawsuit that I handled on behalf of New Jersey Animal Rights Alliance (n.k.a. Animal Protection League of NJ) and the Bear Education and Resource Group. In a unanimous decision by the NJ Appellate Division, the court held that the NJ Fish and Game Council's 2005 bear management policy was invalid and that the 2005 New Jersey bear hunt was illegal because of ten violations of the state Administrative Procedure Act. Although the court based its decision on the procedural flaws in the adoption of the policy, the policy also contained many substantive flaws and outright fabrications. In NJ, as in many (if not all) states, wildlife is managed by hunters, for hunters. In their zeal to hold a bear hunt, the Council fabricated scientific information, because the facts did not support their pro-hunt position.

Another speaker on Saturday was Alice Ng, from Animals Asia Foundation, a group that rescues bears from bile farms in Asia and raises public awareness about the issue. Ng's presentation included horrific photos of bears in cages barely larger than their bodies, with catheters inserted into their abdomens to drain the bile. The bile has medicinal properties, but there are now herbal and synthetic substitutes for ursodeoxycholic acid, and some pharmacies in Asia now proudly display stickers that proclaim that they do not sell bear bile or bear parts.

I was especially intrigued by the talk by Dr. Edward Tavss, a chemistry lecturer at Rutgers University who authored a report titled, "Synopsis of National Research on Effective Bear Management." The report showed that over and over again, in the U.S. and Canada, non-lethal black bear management was effective for reducing human/bear conflicts, while hunting was not. Tavss is neither a hunter nor an animal rights activist, but the conflicting information from the two sides inspired him to look deeper into the issue. Although I'd read the report and used information from it in my brief for the bear hunt lawsuit, I didn't realize until Saturday that Tavss had begun his research with the opposite hypothesis: that hunting would be more effective for reducing conflicts. But being a true scientist, Tavss kept an open mind when he analyzed the data, and found the opposite to be true.

My sincere thanks to bear advocate and conference organizer, Prof. Carole Allamand!

Don Farrall / Getty Images

Suggested Reading:

• Living with Black Bears
  
• Black Bears Looking for Fast Food Choose Minivans from the Guide to Environmental Issues
  
• What is Deer Overabundance?
  

Add to Technorati Favorites
Share on Facebook
Follow Me on Twitter