Humans threaten bears in San Bernardino National Forest

When a bear decides it's a fine idea to hop onto a picnic table surrounded by people, something clearly has gone wrong. But officials say it's not the bear that is to blame.

In fact, the bear that forced the closure of a picnic area next to San Bernardino National Forest's busiest trailhead on July 7 had simply adapted to a quick and easy food source: hot dogs and other human fare left out -- sometimes intentionally -- by picnickers and area residents. 

"People were leaving a lot of food unattended; they weren't properly throwing it away in the bear-proof cans. There was even reported cases where people were intentionally feeding the bear," said John Miller, deputy public affairs officer for the U.S. Forest Service. "What we have is ... a human behavior problem."

Once bears learn to associate human scent with easy food sources, they are more likely to venture into picnic areas, according to Jeff Villepique, associate wildlife biologist at the California Department of Fish and Game.

Picnickers have reportedly enforced the behavior by tossing food at the bear and getting up close to take photos.

"The bear has pretty much lost its fear of humans," Villepique said. 

Although the bear is only about a year and a half old and weighs about 110 to 120 pounds, Villepique said, it could still pose a threat to picnickers who refuse to surrender meals or to infants who happen to be sitting too close to food.

American black bears have been known to attack humans to eat them. A 74-year-old woman in Colorado who had been leaving food out for bears was killed outside her house Friday. Her body had been partially consumed by bears, authorities said.  

If the San Bernardino bear doesn't learn to stay away, Villepique said, officials most likely will have to euthanize it.

The Forest Service and Department of Fish and Game plan to patrol the picnic area near the Vivian Creek trailhead until after Labor Day. Officials have set up two new bear-proof dumpsters, posted warning signs and made attempts to educate the public. The area reopened Saturday, and the bear has not turned up again. Villepique said that's a good sign.

"Both species are happier if there's some space between us," he said.

-- Amy Littlefield

Photo: A young black bear foraging in the Falls Picnic Area caused the closure of parts of San Bernardino National Forest in July. The area reopened Saturday, but officials fear the bear may return, having lost its fear of humans after being fed by picnickers. Credit: California Department of Fish and Game

Comments

[wildbiologist]

The culprits here are obviously ignorant people. No quantity of signs deters the committed numbskull, such as the Beavis & Butthead crew in the photo (shown with the brown colored black bear [Ursus americanus] from Forest Falls) , but signs and flyers are the best tools we have. The victims are the bears.

To those who say, "move the bear (somewhere)," that is a misguided statement. If the bear decided to stay where it was dumped (they don't; and try to return, frequently winding up as road-kill), it would not know where to find food, water, denning structures, etc. that its mother taught it about its home range. Further, suitable habitat is already the territory of another bear, which is likely to attack the interloper. Studies show that the outcome of translocations is usually mortality within 3 months -imagine being dropped into an unfamiliar, hostile environment, where you suffer until you die! "Out-of-sight, out-of-mind" is an untenable ethical position.

For those who would decide for the bear that it would rather be imprisoned for life (though there are not enough zoos), I'd say that decision would best be made by someone who understands the behavior of wild bears. How would you like to be "renditioned" without trial (or explanation) to live your live in a cage?

The AVMA will be surprised to hear that euthanasia (definition: painless death) does not include gunshot to the head, as this organization lists exactly that as an acceptable and humane method of euthanasia. That said, the individual bear that has repeatedly crossed the line by approaching picnickers would be chemically immobilized (i.e., darted) and euthanized elsewhere.

Those who must weigh public safety against the welfare of our wildlife face the most difficult of decisions and are familiar with playing lighting-rod to the ignorant; I can only hope that more people understand who the bad guys are.

[Dewey]

This picture could not have been taken in San Bernadino. Grizzleys have been extinct in California for about a century.

[milt]

euthanize??????????? what are you kidding me? its not the bear thats the problem its the humans. move the bear elsewhere!

[Yogi bear]

Hey, Yogi bear isn't just your average bear...

[Steve G]

I think it was in Bill Bryson's "A Walk In The Woods" that I read about a family who coated their baby's arm with honey so they could get a picture of a bear "licking" the baby's arm. No more baby arm...

[mike]

So because humans are acting stupidly (leaving bears food in public areas), they may have to euthanize the bear? How fair is that? It would be much better (for both species) to transport the stupid humans out of the area and let it revert to the bears.

[thekid]

The best thing to do would be to post very specific signs that state...to the people that use the park

IF YOU FEED THE BEARS YOU HELP KILL THE BEARS

Explain what happens to a BEAR when they lose their fear of humans......
Park officials may try relocation but most often the BEAR is killed.

Spell it out for these people so they are REAL CLEAR on what the cost is
for their stupid behavior!

[Karl]

Maybe we should take to pepper spraying the idiots instead of the bears. Or maybe just make each of these cityots watch faces of death.

[Torr Melling]

the individual(s) feeding or leaving food out for this (or any) bear should be cited!

[Eric]

Can we shot the idiots instead of the bears?

[BruceAlmighty]

Maybe if pictures of the partially eaten Colorado idiot were posted people would think twice

[GM Owner]

It's pretty simple, here, folks. The bears and other wildlife were here first. Developers want to put houses so deep into these canyons and other mountainous regions, then the people complain that the animals are coming from the forests looking for a food/ water source. Where would you like the native wildlife to look for their meals when the creeks are dry, their food sources decimated by development? I don't blame the animals, I blame greedy developers and ignorant humans for not treating the native wildlife with respect. The animals weren't asked if it was okay for their land to be encroached on. They weren't told, "Hey animals, developer ABC is claiming eminent domain of your land, courtesy of county XYZ, so too bad for you, just deal with it." Yeah, the animals are exacting their revenge, so I say, GO ANIMALS!

[Ted Bear]

We need to train humans to be afraid of bears. Let the bears attack some humans, then they might learn to be afraid.

Should we post signs all over San Bernardino mountains that bears are dangerous?

[Perry de Havilland]

"Villepique said, officials most likely will have to euthanize it."

Euthanize? Shoot it you mean in order to protect humans, you cannot 'euthanize' a healthy bear. Shooting it is an unfortunate consequence of people training the bear to regard humans as nothing to avoid but it is also completely justifiable, so why does he use unsuitable euphemisms?

[Dewey]

The picture of the bear on the picnic table at the beginning of this story suggests that this is the bear that is the subject of the story. It most certainly is not. It is a Grizzley bear, which has been extinct in California for about a century.

[oooh noooooo]

The people in that photograph make me sick. One part of me tells me that I hope they get mauled. On the other hand, what worries is that my own safety on the trails is now threatened by these kinds of ignorant fools.