Some people enjoy killing other animals for recreation. In the latest example, 21 of more than 7000 applicants who entered a lottery for a permit will soon be allowed to kill grizzly bears near Grand Teton and Yellowstone national parks in Wyoming. It is the result of these magnificent carnivores .
Many bear biologists and others familiar with the bears鈥� behaviour, ecology, reproductive physiology and population dynamics are extremely wary about the hunt, even if not all are anti-hunting. Those supporting the shoot of up to 22 bears are playing a questionable numbers game based on past population gains. They also argue it raises conservation cash, but the money from the permits won鈥檛 go far and is a tiny fraction of what tourism brings in.
At the moment, there are , up from an estimated 136 in 1975 when they were put on the US endangered species list. Many biologists are concerned that 700 is not a sustainable population and so we ought not be killing these animals. In addition, bear numbers aren鈥檛 currently growing because climate change is reducing the availability of food, especially and whitebark pine trees and their nuts.
Advertisement
There will also be 鈥渃ollateral damage鈥� because other bears are likely to be harmed or die, including the cubs of hunted animals and those due to be born this winter. It is also difficult to distinguish a male, the main target of the hunt, from a female unless cubs are present. This lays bare the argument that a hunt removes only older or sicker males to make way for new blood.
Tourism hit
So slaughtering these bears does not qualify as 鈥渒illing in the name of conservation鈥�, and nor is it 鈥渒illing in the name of coexistence鈥�: just since 1980. Rather, it is killing for fun. In addition to being bad biology, the hunt ignores the ethics of killing sentient beings for recreation, animals who will suffer greatly not only when they are shot, but also while they are stalked. Many hunters agree killing for fun is wrong, and so too do compassionate conservationists.
Tourism is also important. Many people travel to Yellowstone to see its amazing animals. Losing even one bear could rob them of the opportunity to see a grizzly. Yet the worry is that bears in the national parks will be drawn to the hunt areas outside. Award-winning wildlife photographer and advocate Thomas Mangelsen notes that the bears consider a gun shot a 鈥渄inner bell鈥� rather than something to avoid, because after elk are shot, bears know there may be remains to scavenge. They may simply be drawn into the hunt zone by the scent.
This could include Grand Teton鈥檚 . She has already , most likely as a result of conflict with people, according to Mangelsen, who has been following her since 2006. Against great odds, Mangelsen applied for and won a permit for the shoot in protest, but of course won鈥檛 be using it. Primatologist Jane Goodall also applied for the same reason.
The virtuous option is to let the bears live. They don鈥檛 belong to hunters and trophy hunting is gratuitous violence. Killing bears to protect bears is inane. It is an immoral and inappropriate conservation practice. The upcoming grizzly hunt is not for conservation nor is it humane. There is no reason to do it.
