• Version
• Download 12
• File Size 220.88 KB
• Create Date 1 January 1999
• Download

We mailed surveys to landowners in east-central Minnesota to evaluate their perceptions of black bears (Ursus americanus), crop damage caused by bears, and management strategies to mitigate damage. The survey area had more bear-related crop damage than any other part of the state. Respondents (n = 281) indicated that crop damage from white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) exceeded that from bears, but they tolerated bear damage less. Fifty-five percent of the respondents growing field corn, oats, and sweet corn, the crops most frequently damaged by bears (in that order), said they previously experienced crop loss from bears and 50% reported having bear-damaged crops in 1991, the year prior to our survey. Respondents estimated an average annual bear-related loss of 11% of their corn and oats, valued (in total for all respondents) at $63,000. Direct measurements of damaged fields indicated that survey respondents accurately reported the percent of farms with damage, but they overestimated the amount of damage. Respondents who had experienced damage were more likely to perceive an increase in bear numbers and bear-related crop loss. In actions aimed specifically to reduce bear populations and hence crop damage, the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR) abolished a quota on bear hunting licenses in this area in 1987 and established a means for hunters to kill nuisance bears before the bear hunting season. Targeted hunting of depredating bears was viewed by survey respondents as the most effective damage control measure, especially among those who had experienced crop loss. Most respondents who said they had previously reported damage to a management agency were satisfied with the help that they received, even though agency assistance was generally limited to finding a hunter to kill the bears or to a discussion about bear ecology and the inefficacies of dealing with crop damage.