|
NOTE: This section is geared toward
professional wildlife managers. It is not intended for the
general public.
Aversive conditioning of black bears has been used as an
effective management tool to resolve human-bear conflicts
since the early 1970s. It was first developed and applied
in the national parks of Canada and the United States. Over
time, this traditional technique has evolved into bear aversion,
combining improved methodologies and tools with proactive
bear management strategies.
Bear Aversion uses negative conditioning to modify undesirable
bear behaviour in an attempt to avoid the destruction of
animals. Utilizing human dominance, by demonstrating the
body posture and vocalizations that speak the language of
the bear, officers can command the bear's respect and reinstate
its natural wariness for humans. Non-lethal tools, such
as rubber bullets, pyrotechnics and bear pepper spray, are used
to reinforce the message. This type of conditioning makes
use of the bear's ability to learn from negative and positive
experiences - whenever a bear exhibits undesirable behaviour,
a negative experience is delivered to the animal. Thus,
the bear learns to associate undesirable behaviour with
a negative experience, and will be more likely to avoid
conflict in the future.
Urban wildlife can be taught that certain behaviours are
unwanted and will not be tolerated by people. The bear aversion
program re-establishes human territory and boundaries which
bears must be taught to respect - this is a trait that they
have lost over time through poor management strategies and
a generally submissive reaction by humans.
We have baited bears with a food reward into human settlement areas and then punished them with death for accepting an easy meal. Communities need to decide their level of tolerance toward bears and establish a clear set of rules - when the bear crosses the line, it must be taught to respect these rules through negative conditioning.
Through bear aversion, bears learn to stay away from people
and their property. This approach capitalizes on the bear's
innate tendency to avoid conflict and fit into the natural
dominance hierarchy. The bear is not physically hurt; instead,
it is presented with a psychological experience which serves
to reinforce its respect for humans and avoid conflict situations.
The advantages of bear aversion over the more traditional
methods of relocation and destruction become apparent when
we find that it is possible to avoid the removal of bears,
limit individual displacement and offer the potential for
the elimination of nuisance behaviour, rather than having
it passed on from generation to generation.
This approach has met with huge success in areas like Mammoth
Lakes and Yosemite National Park, CA, and Whistler, BC,
where the number of human-bear conflicts has dropped significantly.
As a result, there has been a notable reduction in the number
of bears being destroyed and considerably fewer resources
are required to deal with problem situations.
Currently, aversive conditioning techniques are being used
as part of bear management programs in many areas including
Alberta, British Columbia (Manning Provincial Park, Whistler,
North and West Vancouver), Ontario, California, Louisiana,
New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and Maryland. National parks
in both Canada and the United States have used ingestives,
as well as noise and physical deterrents on bears.
Destruction of a bear can never be the answer. By removing
a "problem" bear, we are merely creating an opportunity
for another bear to move into the newly available habitat
niche. Consequently, the problem is not solved, and wildlife
officials commit to a perpetual cycle of removal, public
outrage and negative press. It is imperative to keep an
open mind and make room for new alternatives. There are
benefits to be drawn from such a healthy attitude - once
a community has invested in 'training' the resident bear
population to a manageable level, only occasional retraining/reminders
are required.
We can save bear lives, create positive public relations and improve safety for people living and recreating in bear country. Most importantly, we can create an environment in which people and bears can coexist in harmony! Communities can choose to be porous to bear activity, so that bears pass through but are not tempted to stop and get into trouble with people and non-natural attractants.
However, it must be stressed that bear aversion should
be seen as an aid, not a substitute for preventive measures
that eliminate or reduce the potential for human-bear conflicts.
In our struggle to conserve the lives of bears, preventative
actions must prevail as the primary focus of any bear management
strategy, while the use of repellents and deterrents should
be considered a second line of defence against bear problems.
Contact
us for a copy of the Bear Aversion Background Report.
|
