Monday, March 17, 2014

The Minnesota DNR Declares War Against Research Bears

Some new and shocking information has come to light in the legal battle between black bear biologist Lynn Rogers and the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (DNR). If you haven't kept up with the case, Lynn attained worldwide recognition for installing a webcam in a bear's den in 2010 and broadcasting the live birth of a cub all across the internet. A massive following on Facebook and the placement of several more den cams have come about in the years since...including a falling out with the DNR, who seem just a wee bit jealous to me.

The Minnesota DNR's primary concern is that Lynn gains the trust of his bears by feeding them and, with the old mantra that "a fed bear is a dead bear" still alive and well, they fear these animals could become dangerous to people. I'm not going to go too deeply into the subject of feeding since I've already done that extensively on this blog and in my book, but I will recap one very important point: the "fed bear is a dead bear" mantra was coined  by a couple of campground owners and applies more to that situation than it does to wildlife management. Bears who obtain food from campsites or roadside handouts from dozens of people never make a personal association with anyone and thus never develop a sense of respect or kinship with any one person and can become dangerous, whereas a bear fed by a specific individual makes a personal association with that person and typically does not carry that to anyone else. How else could so many people spend so much time (decades in some cases) feeding bears in their backyard without the animals ever posing a threat to them or anyone else? This is a radical notion and one not widely accepted, though it certainly should be, and this lady could benefit from learning a thing or two about it and about a bear's natural sense of curiosity: http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_25216729/bear-researchers-controversial-methods-trial

Lynn was denied a renewal of his permit and told to stop broadcasting his den cams online (that really sounds like jealousy) and now a court battle has begun to determine if what Lynn is trying to do could create dangerous bears. The primary testimony against him was from the woman in the above article, though her claims don't hold much water in light of this: http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_25275752/rogers-neighbors-deny-problems-bears

It quickly became apparent during the court proceedings that the DNR did not have as strong of a case as they had hoped. None of the department officials had ever even bothered to visit the North American Bear Center or the Wildlife Research Institute to observe firsthand what Lynn was doing, yet they seemed to have so much insight into what was "really" going on at those facilities. When it was revealed that the DNR was exaggerating the number of bear complaints - and attributing them to residents who later testified they had not made those complaints - it seemed to be the lowest point the DNR could possibly stoop to. That is, until this recent, stunning revelation: http://timberjay.com/stories/Bear-study-in-doubt,11395#comments

Lynn has lost several of his research bears to hunters over the years. Some were accidents and some appear to have been out of spite. Who can forget the eerie comments boasting of bear jerky when Hope (the cub whose online birth made headlines in 2010) was shot and killed, or the bloody radio collar that was placed in the mail after the disappearance of a research bear? But to think the Minnesota DNR is assisting hunters in deliberately targeting and killing Lynn's bears is about as sick as sick gets. The article above states that Lynn lost roughly 30 percent of his study animals this past hunting season (5.5 is the annual average) and Lynn and his assistant Sue Mansfield have found reason to believe that June, the latest radio-collared bear to be lost, was intentionally targeted. Lynn fears that this could mark the end of his research, though the court has not yet made a final ruling.

I don't think this is simply about misguided fear of bears. While it's true that old dogmas about feeding bears are still being thrown around, I think this has more to do with simple spite. The department has never been on equal footing with Lynn and they've finally taken it too far. At this link, you can find all the contact information for the Minnesota DNR: http://www.dnr.state.mn.us/contact/index.html  Write to them and let them know exactly what you think about this. Show them there is no evidence indicating that Lynn's bears pose a threat to anyone and that, in fact, the opposite should be true. Probably their minds are already made up, but that doesn't mean we have to be silent about it.

10 comments:

  1. your site would be useful if you didn't clobber it with background crap - please have a thought for people with vision troubles - there's nothing wrong with black text on a white background

    ReplyDelete
  2. I'm not sure what you mean by "background crap". The format I use is simple white text on plain black background, nothing else added. That's viewing it on a PC using Firefox; my android displays a white background with black lettering. I've seen it published overseas with a different design. Maybe it's all dependent on where you're located and what you're viewing it on.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Chris - Your Blog shows up as white text on black background on my PC (w/ Google Chrome). I do know that due to certain medical eyesight problems, some people do have difficulty reading your Blog in the white on black layout. Perhaps there is a way they can reverse the typeface and background in their page display settings or by changing some other setting before they read it.

      Delete
    2. Maybe there is a way. I'm not all that technologically-minded, so I'm not 100% sure.

      Delete
  3. Hi Chris, I really like your site. Thank you for your well written article about the struggle Dr. Rogers is facing. There seems little doubt the DNR in his state is corrupt.
    Mike McIntosh/Bear With Us

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Mike, thank you so much for reading! This post is spreading like wildfire. I hope it will help build enough public support to at least bring to light the DNR'S doings if not get them off Dr. Rogers' back. Keep up all your great work at Bear With Us!

      Delete
  4. I think you've written a great article here. I am a biologist, and I agree with your assessment. I also think that saying that Rogers and Mansfield could have den cams but could not broadcast them showed that jealousy is really what underlies this.

    I have to admit that I have a lot of trouble with the white type on the black background. I have frequent ocular migraines, and reading it feels like it's going to trigger one. That's just meant to be friendly feedback.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi, if you want to change the white on black, you just need to go to your dashboard and change the 'live blog' template to one that is black on white.

    Or you can also follow these instructions: https://support.google.com/blogger/answer/176245?hl=en&ref_topic=3339243

    ReplyDelete
  6. I am sure that most are aware of the hate Dr Rogers page on facebook call Lily a bear with a bounty. Well the manager of that hateful load of garbage now is after a friend of Dr Rogers. His name is Joel Rosenthal and he is a wildlife rehabber in West Virgina and has a site called Point of View farm, Inc. The hate manager opened a facebook community page called Wrong Point of View Farm West Virginia and was attacking everything about Mr Rosenthal. The upside is that Mr Rosenthal is not sitting still and taking it. He has filed suit against hater man for libel and defamation. The hate filled character has removed/deleted much of what he said as though that makes it go away. :) The now is that Dr Rogers will sue those on the hate pages also.

    ReplyDelete
  7. I actually spoke to Joel over the phone a couple weeks ago and he told me he was filing suit against that guy. Serves him right. The comments he's made over the years have been childish and despicable.

    ReplyDelete