Spring Bear Hunting Under Attack in Washington
Introduction As many of you have become aware, there has recently been a discussion regarding the necessity for a spring bear hunting season in Washington. This discussion was sparked at an online Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife Commission meeting on December 4th, 2020. The Department’s intent was to hear feedback on some minor proposed changes to the spring season regarding the Long Beach and Skagit spring hunts. These changes were proposed in both cases because access to huntable land has decreased in those game management units (GMU’s). During the public comment period of this meeting, twelve individuals both in representation of their personal opinions or making a statement for an organization discussed fervent opposition to the spring bear hunt or bear hunting in general. It is important to say that during the 35 minute long comment period Marie Neumiller of the Inland Northwest Wildlife Council was the only one to show support for the spring bear hunt. It is important to highlight the arguments given by the dissenting voices so that we as hunters and conservationists can prepare informed arguments to educate the commission on the importance of spring bear hunting and it’s value as a management tool and recreation opportunity.
Why Does Spring Bear Hunting Exist Besides the underlying dissatisfaction that hunters kill bears, some of the commenters prepared arguments that were effective in grabbing the attention of a number of commission members including Vice Chair Barbara Baker, Don McIsaac and Bob Kehoe. One of the most consistent concerns was that the only reason the spring hunt existed was to provide recreation to hunters. While providing recreation to hunters in the spring is one reason for the spring bear hunt the WDFW has stated many other reasons including protecting interests of timber companies by reducing tree damage, reducing pressure on ungulate recruitment during birthing periods in the spring, reduction of negative human interactions(bears eating trash, damaging property), etc. In all of the cases where commenters cited there being no reason for a spring hunt besides recreation they discounted or outright ignored the reasons stated by the department. In Martha Hall’s statement, she disregarded fawn recruitment of whitetail deer as a reason for a spring season in region 1, stating that there is no problem with fawn recruitment. She failed to understand that in 2015 the region 1 whitetail population was hit with a significant outbreak of Epizootic Hemorrhagic Disease or Blue Tongue. This paired with a growing wolf population in the area has resulted in a reduction in a whitetail deer harvest in the past 3-4 years inferring a decline in population. Improving existing recruitment would help recover the suppressed population. She also fails to take into account that despite a positive trend in the moose population, moose calves are also very susceptible to predation in the spring. Although having a hunt purely for recreation is not seen negatively by the hunting community we need to show the public that there are other benefits to hunting.
Commercial Timber Bait Sites Another comment in the meeting regarded commercial bait sites used by timber companies to prevent tree damage. The commenters cited that hunters could potentially use these bait sites knowingly or unknowingly to kill bears in an illegal fashion going against state law. This issue seems easy to fix as all it would take is communication on behalf of the timber companies to create no hunting areas around these sites. Since hunters already have to comply with additional regulations by timber companies when utilizing their land, this addition would not be a difficult change. As hunters we understand that we must work with managing agencies to effectively manage the states resources including bear populations. Bear Vulnerability in the Spring Bear vulnerability in the spring is another talking point. Since bears emerge from hibernation in the spring many public commenters believe this makes them extremely vulnerable to hunting. While this may be true to some degree, a bear is biologically designed to hibernate and emerge in the spring strong enough to seek out food sources available. The amount of spring tags available in Washington only make up about 5-10% of the overall harvest of bears annually. Since the spring hunts last upwards of two and a half months and include at most 100 tags in a single GMU, this means that hunting pressure will be dispersed so that it would not inadvertently kill bears. If these commenters are concerned that it makes bears easier to kill than other times of the year since they are more readily searching for food (including fawns, calves, and cubs) and rutting in the later part of the season, they must not understand the reason for a spring hunt in the first place. Since killing bears is the ultimate goal of a hunt as a management tool the ease of success for hunters is of minor importance. Managers use this to determine how the success rate will affect the overall harvest not to determine if the hunt should exist. This may be the reason that hunters are excited to draw a spring bear tag. High success of a hunt usually represents a higher quality of experience for hunters, the same reason that “limited entry” hunts are more appealing than general over-the-counter hunts in most cases. Cub Orphaning If I were to address each individual who spoke out against a spring bear hunt and all of their concerns this article would be entirely too long. The last of the comments that stood out is the concern for the possibility of cub orphaning since roughly 32-38% (10 year avg.) of the bear harvest are sows. The WDFW recently implemented a new reporting requirement to determine what percentage of sows harvested were lactating indicating the presence of potential cub orphaning. The requirement is as follows:“All successful bear hunters must notify the department within 72 hours of kill (excluding legal state holidays) by calling 844-992-7266 to provide the hunter’s name, date and GMU of kill, and sex of animal. The raw pelt, with evidence of sex, and skull must be presented to an authorized department employee for sealing within 5 days of kill. Failure to comply with the submission of biological samples is a misdemeanor pursuant to RCW 77.15.280.” This system was set to begin in 2020 but was postponed due to COVID 19. Once this data is formally submitted it is likely that the commission will revisit whether sow’s with cubs will be legally protected. Currently the WDFW strongly urges hunters not to kill sows with cubs. It is important to point out however, that it is a possibility that cubs are killed by boars right before a sow is killed by a hunter. This would appear as if the hunter orphaned cubs when in reality the hunter could have made sure that the sow was solo before shooting. Why this may not skew data sufficiently to be representative, it is a factor that biologists should take into account and try to correct for when processing bears this coming spring. It is also important that the commission and the public understand that the majority of hunters do not kill sows with cubs and would never do so intentionally. However, this issue cannot be fully avoided under the current regulations. I also believe that hunters could be open to legally protecting sows with cubs in order to address the public’s concern. Idaho and Oregon both restrict the harvest of sows with cubs and have a more in depth reporting process. The legislation would have to be designed to protect hunters who unintentionally killed a sow with cubs and self reported the mistake. This would stress the importance of passing on sows with cubs while at the same time protecting hunters from a situation that could likely occur. For those hunters who draw a bear tag this spring or hunt this fall, it is more important than ever that we be diligent in our efforts to not shoot sows with cubs. 
Conclusion Before diving into the problems with our wildlife commission it is necessary to highlight those during the meeting who support hunters and our wildlife management system. Anis Aoude WDFW Game Division Manager, did his best to respectfully explain the benefits of spring bear hunting and its role in the game management plan. He also made it clear that the WDFW was never looking to remove the spring season. It is clear that he understands what hunting means to our community and will do his best to prevent seasons from being removed. Kim Thorburn, the Spokane Commissioner also clearly understands the benefits of the spring bear season in terms of management and recreation opportunity. In her words. “The main reason hunting is carried out by the department is to provide opportunity to people who still enjoy that sport. Yes they are the minority but as we’ve heard in other testimony they are very dedicated to conservation and they are an important constituency, and the reason that we hunt is to provide them the opportunities that they enjoy.” As welcomed as commissioner Thorburn’s statements are, it is unsettling that only one of commission members is outspokenly supportive of hunting. After all we provided 38.2% of user fee revenue in 2019 totalling 45.9 million dollars. Undoubtedly, many hunters are fishermen and those license sales combined contribute to 92.9% of all user fee revenue. Those who disagree with hunting would only realistically purchase discover passes to recreate in Washington. These passes only account for 3% of user fee revenue for the WDFW. The fact of the matter is that a huge portion of operating costs that benefit Washington's wildlife are generated by recreational parties that harvest our state's wildlife. If you remove this funding, wildlife as a whole would most certainly suffer. The reason this issue has become more than just animal rights activists speaking out at a public meeting is because our commissioners showed interest in removal of the spring hunt. First, I will give them the benefit of the doubt. Being a wildlife commissioner is an inherently difficult job. They have to balance what biologists and managers are reporting to them with the public’s input and make the right decision. Since the individuals who spoke out against bear hunting have a right to make their opinions known, it is a commissioner's job to hear their concerns without immediate dismissal. This would be the same for us as hunters bringing up concerns at a public commission meeting. It is our job as hunters to be present at these meetings and be prepared to address the arguments in a way that shows the commission our engagement in hunting activities is justified by science and ethical practices. However, it becomes concerning that Barbara Baker, Don McIsaac and Bob Kehoe are so quick to dismiss professional biologist decision making, to entertain ideas that would completely defy their recommendations due to the concerns of twelve uninformed individuals. The thought that the WDFW commission doesn’t understand and support hunting is widespread in the Washington hunting community. The fact that these commission members would potentially remove our spring season makes hunters feel attacked and is reminiscent of the banning of hound hunting and baiting for predators in 1996. The fear is that we will eventually lose all of our hunting rights slowly over time rather than all at once. Removal of a spring season is just 1 of 1000 cuts that could spell the end of a vibrant and diverse culture represented at its core by individuals who truly care about the animals we hunt and feed our friends and families with. Predator management is an important part of wildlife management and will not be easily disrupted by those who disagree with its methods. If we communicate effectively, the commission will hopefully be dissuaded from making such drastic changes to game management. In the past week there has been a notice to hunters purchasing applications that states, “Please be aware that the spring bear rule that governs this hunt is currently being challenged through litigation. The pending litigation could result in cancellation of this hunt. If this occurs, we will notify hunters accordingly and identify next steps” I spoke to Staci Lehman a media contact for the WDFW and she clarified that the notice is just to educate hunters about something that is possible, rather than the department from having to legally be forced to close the hunt mid season with no warning. If you are interested in learning more about these issues, the video of this commission meeting is published online at the following link. The topics discussed in this article take place between 1:41:04 - 2:47:51. https://www.tvw.org/watch/?clientID=9375922947&eventID=2020121047