There has been a large increase in the number of attacks in the last 20 years. There are more Black bears precisely because of policies that refuse to manage bear populations.
It seems logical that in some of these areas where the most attacks occur there are many less bears, and lot's more people, than there was 100 years ago.
I agree that there are more people in most areas. I haven't a clue about bear population 100 years ago - I doubt anybody kept records. Modern game management didn't really get started until the 1930's and I haven't seen any data earlier than the 1960's.
What I'm surprised at is the general ignorance of bear populations displayed on this and other backpacking forums. Black bears have had sharp increases in populations in all areas over the last 20-30 years. Some states like New Jersey struggled with what to do as there was considerable resistance to hunting. I don't understand Canada's politics, so I don't understand BC's problem. Even here in Oregon black bears populations have skyrocketed due to banning of hounds and bait hunting.
Predatory attacks have increased simply because there are more bears.
A person can certainly disagree about the motivation for present-day bear management, but not the bear population.
Previous Topic
Index
