Bear Report About How Many Fawns They Eat - Where?

[pianoman9701]

About a month ago, someone posted a study which shows that black bears eat something like 43 fawns in a month during the spring. Can someone find that for me please? Thanks,
Pman

[Blacktail Sniper]

Here ya go, I think this is what you are looking for:

https://hunting-washington.com/smf/index.php/topic,237377.0.html

[pianoman9701]

Thanks BTS, that's the one. 

[Bango skank]

Lots of good data on IDFG website.  Here is a screenshot, and a pdf link to the entire study.  https://collaboration.idfg.idaho.gov/WildlifeTechnicalReports/W-160-R-33-31%20Completion.pdf

[Bango skank]

That study shows bears killing more calves than lions.  This is why ne elk numbers suck so bad.  This is why we needed our new fall bear regs, and why we need more liberal spring hunting especially.  If you care about deer, elk, moose numbers, go out and kill 2 bears this fall.

[HillHound]

I am picking my second tag up this week. First one I see that’s big enough to not be with his mom is hitting the dirt. I might be more selective with my second tag, but the smaller ones sure do taste good. Shot a 2 1/2 year old boar that might have weighed 120lbs a couple years ago that was super tender and tasted awesome.

[Bango skank]

First one I see that’s big enough to not be with his mom is hitting the dirt. I might be more selective with my second tag,

We are on the same page

[Bango skank]

That study shows bears killing more calves than lions.  This is why ne elk numbers suck so bad.  This is why we needed our new fall bear regs, and why we need more liberal spring hunting especially.  If you care about deer, elk, moose numbers, go out and kill 2 bears this fall.

The study goes on to address compensatory vs addative mortality.  In short, it says in areas where elk are near the carrying capacity of the habitat, predation mortality is pretty much compensatory.  But in areas where the elk population is well below carrying capacity (like ne wa) the predation caused mortality is additive, and increasing predator harvest coincided with increased calf survival, while decreasing predator harvest coincided with decreasing calf survival.
  Gee, whoda thunk it? 

[Stein]

Several studies have shown that bears kill about four times the amount of elk that wolves do in Yellowstone and you can't get a more established wolf population in the west than there.  The one report I saw tracked 50 elk calves and:

Bears killed 19
Wolves 5
Coyote 3
Lion 1
Wolverine 1
Undetermined 2

No reason to believe it isn't the same for deer and moose.

[ThurstonCokid]

First one I see that’s big enough to not be with his mom is hitting the dirt. I might be more selective with my second tag,

We are on the same page

Same same!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Bango skank]

Several studies have shown that bears kill about four times the amount of elk that wolves do in Yellowstone and you can't get a more established wolf population in the west than there.  The one report I saw tracked 50 elk calves and:

Bears killed 19
Wolves 5
Coyote 3
Lion 1
Wolverine 1
Undetermined 2

No reason to believe it isn't the same for deer and moose.

The beauty of the idaho study i linked is that it is specifically black bear, where yellowstone certainly includes grizz, and idiots will use that as an argument, claiming that maybe grizz are predatory, but black bears arent, so no need to increase black bear harvest.  People actually believe black bears just eat grass and berries.

[Stein]

True.  In the Yellowstone study, grizz killed 10, blacks 5 and 4 were unidentified bears.  Assuming at least one of the unidentified were black that is still more than wolves and there are a ton of wolves in Yellowstone.

The morale of the story is that black bears are a bigger problem for calf and fawn mortality than any other predator (except possibly grizz if they are thick).  We know we don't have thick grizz here, so black bears kill more calves and fawns in WA than anything else.  I wouldn't be surprised if state wide they killed more than all other predators combined.

[Bango skank]

True.  In the Yellowstone study, grizz killed 10, blacks 5 and 4 were unidentified bears.  Assuming at least one of the unidentified were black that is still more than wolves and there are a ton of wolves in Yellowstone.

The morale of the story is that black bears are a bigger problem for calf and fawn mortality than any other predator (except possibly grizz if they are thick).  We know we don't have thick grizz here, so black bears kill more calves and fawns in WA than anything else.  I wouldn't be surprised if state wide they killed more than all other predators combined.

Purely speculation on my part, but i cant help but think if the grizz werent there, black bear predation would have been higher, and compensated for what the grizz took.  After all, if i was a black bear, i wouldnt be creeping around calving grounds that were being patrolled by grizz.  Im sure grizz kill a decent number of blackies too.

[KFhunter]

Lions kill more yearlings and subadult elk

 wolves kill more adults

Bears kill more calves

Each has their niche

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Bango skank]

Lions kill more yearlings and subadult elk

 wolves kill more adults

Bears kill more calves

Each has their niche

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

Yup, but our bear population is way higher than lions and wolves combined