Acadiana Sierra Club fighting Black Bear delisting

quote:

---

 "Of the 23,000,000 acres where the bear lives, we only have two million acres left"

---

This is an argument against coastal erosion more than population numbers

more like urbanization and the past conversion of forest to agriculture

that was one of the reasons for the wetland reserve program to reforest areas to provide a corridor for the three subpopulations of bears

bad thing about most of those wrp easements is that depending on the term of the contract once it expires the landowner can cut down the trees and do whatever

but that's a topic for another day

quote:

---

very large and stable population

---

meh I would have to read more about why the Sierra club believes this (the article linked is very short) but they likely have some valid points

I seem to remember in the recovery plan where they wanted the subpopulations to not be isolated

and also one of the past secretary of LDWFs (Barham) main goal was to delist the bear under his tenure not saying some corners were cut, but

quote:

---

the three subpopulations were supposed to be able to connect

---

that's per the recovery plan for the black bear

if only two are connecting them they are not meeting the standards for the recovery plan that may be the gripe from the Sierra club they may have modified the recovery plan also I dont know

doesn't matter to me I've been around quite a few bears and never felt threatened hopefully we will get a hunting season on them it a bear is something I have no desire to kill

Without knowing when the lawsuit was filed, I have to wonder at the motivation here. Two months ago, the results of a survey on public opinion of a controlled bear hunt were presented to the LWFC. The results showed that 69% of respondents supported a state-regulated hunting season on bears, as long as it does not impact the overall population numbers.

While I don't think LDWF has moved forward with any plans for a season, it is obvious they are exploring the idea.

Maybe the Sierra Club does have valid points, but let's face it, these environmental groups will fight tooth and nail to keep any species that could be hunted on the Endangered Species List. There was nothing in that article that suggests they are arguing this based on scientific data. He's pointing out lack of habitat and how "treasured" the animal is. The latter is not a valid reason. The former may be, but I'd have to see what they are arguing. If the populations are sustainable, the amount of habitat is irrelevant. I mean, should elk be on the endangered species list? They only occupy, what, 10% of their historic range?

I'd have to see what they are arguing as well, but to say I'm skeptical is an understatement.

LINK

A shitty video, but a bear on Hwy 90 in Berwick.

Here's a link to another story on NOLA.com that actually has the link to the lawsuit:

NOLA.com article

They have some potentially valid points, but they also play the BS about historic population and historic range. In my opinion, that is a bogus argument. Elk occupy less than 10% of their historic range, IIRC, and they are hunted annually. The historic range and populatiom argument has no bearing on this, especially when, as the plaintiffs admit, the habitat no longer exists.

In my eyes, the lawsuit makes it clear that for some of these plaintiffs, it has nothing to do with the black bear itself and everything to do with the loss of critical habitat designation. They lost a critical protection for the Atchafalaya Basin, and are now fighting to get it back.

To be quite honest, if they succeed, I'd be surprised if the bear ever comes off. And then how many bears are we going to see getting shot because people are tired of 300 lb raccoons in their trash?

quote:

---

Last September, I had 8 bear sightings from when I turned off I-20, spent night at my camp in Madison Parish, and came back to I-20. That was about a 26 hour period and I was asleep for some of that. Time for a hunt.

---

I'm all for a bear hunt if it's recommended by LDWF and they have a sound management plan but seeing 8 bears in one area doesn't mean the overall population can support a hunt, make sense?


How do y'all think they would manage a hunt? Tags or lottory?

Man you might want to tighten down on some stuff before you get too far into presenting your arguments.

All but a very small minority of WRP easements are perpetual, with a very few being 30 year.

They weren't paid NOT to farm, they were paid to return their property into bottomland hardwood habitat. You might as well say they were paid not to build condominiums and strip malls, or horse ranches or whatever.

If you want to present a compelling argument, don't be overbroad with your statements.

If that property was enrolled in CRP and the contract has been fulfilled, there is a window in which the property can be cleared and returned to production, at a rather significant cost. Usually somewhere between $1,500 and $2,000/acre.

As for waiting a few more years for a hardwood harvest providing "good money", try something like 20 more years, and probably like 30 more, before there are any hardwood sawlogs. And thats on the best ground that drains. Much of these plantings are in low ground with poor drainage, poor survival and relatively poor growth rates. And THATS if its CRP and not WRP.

As for the peoples dime, the people got everything they paid for.

Harold Scheoffler is a pain in the arse about everything in this area.