Not sure if black bears are the best bears, but here’s your chance to weigh in on the decision by state environmental police to shoot and kill a bear in a tree over the Massachusetts Turnpike yesterday.
[polldaddy poll=”7147241″]
POLL: Did police do the right thing when they killed a bear in Newton Sunday?
by Greg Reibman | Jun 3, 2013 | Newton | 27 comments
I was not there, and I don’t know a whole lot about black bears, but as with the coyotes in Newton, I believe that contact between humans and black bears is increasingly likely. I do know from experience living in the ex-urbs that black bears can be a real nuisance, particularly when they are looking for food after the winter. They get into the garbage and will break into sheds and houses in pursuit of a meal. They are also really cute, so people may underestimate how dangerous they can be especially mothers protecting cubs. As with coyotes, some people may actually like having them around because they are wildlife.
Before people start weighing in on whether the shooting was justified, I think we need to hear from wildlife experts concerning the risks of contact between humans and bears in a suburban environment, behavior patterns, state and federal laws protecting wildlife and what residents can do to avoid contact and incidents like what happened this weekend.
From the votes here, the comments on the earlier thread and man on street reports on TV, I know many folks have formed an opinion about this.
But I don’t see how any one could be anything but “undecided” about this, given that there remain but unanswered questions and conflicting information.
The news reports from last year suggested this is the time of year young male bears get pushed away to search for a mate.
I don’t suggest using “your mothers voice” but it has been effective:
The shooting of this bear was an outrage, and did nothing but display the complete ineptness and poor judgement of the Department of Environmental Affairs Police. Is that their mission, to shoot and kill wildlife? Who was in danger from a bear that had already run up a tree? If the DEAP can’t handle a situation like that with more sensitivity and skill, Newton should really rethink getting them involved with future wildlife encounters in our city.
My brain hurts. http://blogs.wickedlocal.com/newton/2007/01/30/coyotes-ugly/#axzz2VAVxhbdk
According to the Globe report — http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2013/06/02/police-shoot-and-kill-bear-newton-near-mass-pike/enlH6zzoWaFgvAnNmpFvUL/story.html — the bear was given to “a local sportsmen’s club, ‘so the meat could be salvaged.'”
Am I mistaken, or does that meat belong to the taxpayers?
Point of Information, Greg: The bear that was shot and killed by the Environmental Police was at least a “yearling”, not a “baby bear” as your poll question indicated. Otherwise, his Mama would have been near and likely would have posed more of a headache to Newton while she was protecting him. (Since I perceived your question as a “trick” question, I did not vote!) Ted is right, we need to learn about the wildlife experts’ strategies for suburban living in the midst of bears, coyotes, hawks, diseased raccoons, and other “wild” animals. We also need to respect these animals for what harm they can cause to us. If that bear had fallen, unseen, on the MBTA tracks and died there, a commuter train would likely have been derailed and people might have endured serious injuries. Or, he might have caused a serious accident on the Mass Turnpike. In addition, since he was near neighborhoods with young children he might have mauled a toddler playing in his/her own backyard. Certainly tranquilizer darts are the first line of defense and the experts should know to carry a reasonable arsenal of those darts to be effective. But, while we should learn to create non-attractive environments for wildlife by keeping our garbage cans clean and closed tight and our bird feeders and pets’ foods closely monitored and contained, we still have a right to live in our cities without having to keep our guns holstered on our hips to avoid harm from bears or saber-toothed tigers. Perhaps the MBTA could post signs along their tracks saying: “Bears Keep Out!” Seems those tracks provide travel routes to our cities for coyotes as well as bears. In an ideal world, the coyotes would eat the wild turkeys and the bears would eat the coyotes and the bears would then move to New York where they could eat the Yankees! How ’bout them Sox?
@Mike, I tend to agree with Greg. My neighbors on Eddy Street and Washington Street were all sad that the bear was killed but also a little concerned about having a bear in a densely populated neighborhood. Personally, I am more than a little concerned that my daughter walks right past where the bear was killed every morning on the way to school. This isn’t a wooded area. This is a neighborhood that is hard up against the railroad tracks and the MassPike, where people wait for the bus to Boston within spitting distance of the tree where the bear was shot and killed. There is no need to pull out the torches and pitchforks, but I believe we all need to understand a lot more about contact between black bears and human beings in a suburban environment before we cast judgment.
@Ted– In this specific instance, I believe the video of the incident speaks for itself. There was no reason to shoot that bear. If the bear had continued to pose a public safety threat by remaining on the ground, I’d take no issue with shooting it. But it seems to me that a far better result would be capture and relocate. If the Department of Environmental Affairs Police is not capable of dealing with a treed bear in a non-letahl way, they are either poorly trained or a waste of taxpayer money. I share your concern about children in the area, but I don’t see the DEAP out there shooting coyotes in Newton, who by their numbers alone pose a much greater threat to children.
@Mike, one of the things I learned with the coyote problem is that the laws intended to protect wildlife also prohibit capture and relocation. So even if the wildlife poses no immediate risk, the police have very limited options in an urban area where they cannot easily wait it out and hope the bear or coyote will wander back into the woods. We have been through all this before with the coyotes, but I think it will be useful to have a community meeting to make sure we all understand the choices involved. I am exploring this option with the Mayor’s office now.
@Ted– The spokesperson for the DEAP said they made an initial attempt to tranquilize the bear. I’m assuming that was done to relocate the animal, rather than kill it. So while I can’t [and don’t care to] explain the policy of the so-called experts at Mass Wildlife prohibiting relocation, it appears to me that’s what DEAP was initially attempting to do. Again, we’ve had coyotes in this city for at least 10 years now, without a single one being shot, despite the fact that they pose a much greater danger to the public than one treed bear.
It is never a good thing to see a beautiful animal put down. But in this case, it may have been the best thing. Not just for public safety but for the bear as well. It would have been great if we could have waited the bear out and he came down on his own. But the reality is that as long as the crowd was gathered, the longer this avenue would take. Additionally, this bear was probably quite stressed by the all the commotion around him. And then there was the building heat of the day. This poor guy was going to get no relief from the heat which would stress him even more.
EPO’s dont get into this kind of work with the desire to kill wildlife. In fact, is is their job to protect wildlife whenever possible. I have no doubt this was the only and BEST decision made for the welfare of the bear. Sad yes, but necessary.
Mike, when the DEAP came to Newton to talk about the coyotes, we learned that even the wildlife that are captured are either kept in captivity or euthanized. It is the law and not policy that wildlife cannot be relocated for the reasons described at the link I provided. Briefly those reasons are:
I wish there were an easyier solution, but it is clear that capturing and relocating a bear is not necessarily doing that animal any favors.
Last year a bear wandered the length of Cape Cod and kept us all entranced for a week or so following his progress. Eventually, on his way back from P’town, he was caught and tranquilized in Wellfleet.
The authorities announced that they had released him in central MA. Some days later it was widely reported that it was the same bear that ended up in Brookline.
If all that’s true, it seems to contradict the info above (against the law to relocate bears).
@Ted– Setting the relocation law aside… Why shoot the one bear who wandered into Newton, but not the dozens of coyotes that have taken up residence here? I’m not trying to make a case for shooting coyotes. Just trying to understand the distinction that others are making. Okay to shoot a bear, but not coyotes?
@Mike, my understanding with the coyotes is that by the time the police respond to a complaint, the coyote is usually long gone. Moreover, discharging a firearm in a densely populated neighborhood when chasing after an animal poses a risk that an innocent person could be shot. Contrast that with the bear in a tree, which has effectively no place to go and cannot escape. Even then, police do not take lightly discharging a firearm with 100 feet or so of a residence and people (as in this case) and try to use a tranquilizer dart instead. Only when that option does not work will the police use a firearm to bring the bear down. Again, I want to emphasize that there are no easy answers here, only tough choices.
It’s also the law that one can’t shoot animals in an urban location. Authorities have an exception for the protection of people. Jerry’s information is interesting but the opportunity didn’t exist to capture this one. Forty feet in a tree is pretty high, and they said if the dart missed it could be lethal to a person. This example doesn’t seem to give any facts about policy because we don’t know what they would have done if the bear was sleeping on the City Hall lawn. It was a situation that needed to be resolved, and they did.
Woops, sorry Ted, I posted as you did.
I think if William F Buckey were writing, he’d find this the definitive use of gov’t.
@Hoss, I think if William F. Buckley were writing, it would be a miracle since he has been dead for five years.
The bear was caught in a tree. If the tranquilizer system wasn’t working, you have plenty of time to get it right. Someone got trigger happy. You never forget shooting your first bear. This was absolute bush league.
The always sensitive Michael Graham weighs in here.
The Globe has just posted an update.
If only former Congressman David Crocket (Whig-Tennessee) were still available to stare him down, things could have been so different./ Though it’s unknown what range Mr. Crocket’s bear staring had, perhaps this unfortunate end to the incident was inevitable.
I don’t know how to link, but Trevor Jones has an excellent article in the Tab explaining how the environmental police arrived at the very difficult decision to euthanize the young bear. It’s the most informative, objective article I’ve read about this sad incident.
The video shows the bear in the tree, but it doesn’t show how densely populated this area is, or how close to the Mass. Pike it is. At a certain point, you have to have some faith that people who become part of an environmental police force don’t go into this line of work to kill animals. I can’t imagine how difficult this decision must have been for them.
I agree Jane. Well done story and convincing explanation. I’ve started a new thread here.
Jane, I think we can judge just how difficult a decision this was by just how little it took to make. A travesty plain and simple. Driven more by a desire to get the Pike up and running for the commute than any sincere concern for the animal.
The decision was likely driven by trigger-happiness. I don’t buy that it needed to be shot. Nonetheless it’s not an endangered animal, so its not really a big deal. Some of you guys need a dose of reality, what the heck do you think you eat everyday? I know it’s Newton, but you aren’t ALL vegetarians…
Mike