The Ojai Post

New wildlife policies must include an overview of water and food habits of bears and other animals -- and how these animals are impacted by fire, drought and urban encroachment. New policies are needed that consider why wild animals need to forage for food and water in residential areas. A balanced wildlife policy includes looking at how these animals have been compromised and what can be done to mitigate problems.

As you are aware, longtime Ojai residents (as well as newer residents) wrote dozens of Letters to express their outrage that the best that seven wardens and several police officers could do to was to kill this thirsty bear. Many who wrote Letters described their regular bear encounters in Ojai's avocado orchards, the mountains of Ojai, etc.

Below is a copy of my Letter to the Ojai Valley News published on November 13, 2009 which questions the official DFG report. Other Letters and articles can be viewed here:

Aliso Street Bear Resource Page for full coverage. http://www.ojaipost.com/ojai-bear.shtml

Whitewashing the death of the Ojai black bear
"Bear story more about humans" (OVN 11/13)

I read with great interest the interview with Roland Takayama of California Department of Fish and Game ("Warden and the Bear," OVN 10/30).

I also read the official DFG report on the bear killing (OVN 10/23) as well as the many editorials, articles and letters published since the October 9 death of the Aliso Street bear.

This story is not only about one individual bear, but about our wider responsibility toward wildlife and nature. It is about changing outdated government policies to reflect the times we currently live in. Fires, global warming, drought, advances of urban growth into wildlife habitat -- all of this is changing the behavior of wild animals.

This is also about whitewashing a black bear's death --- an innocent creature that never threatened to hurt or endanger any member of the public.

Mr. Takayama can spin his justification for his decision however he likes, but the fact remains that there were other options clearly available the day that the bear was in the tree.

Bears climb trees to escape danger, to eat fruits or nuts in a tree, or to rest. Bears are afraid of humans, and usually will run away if they see or smell a person in the vicinity. A bear in a tree is a sign of submission and fear, not of aggression.

The DFG report states "The bear never made any attempt to exit the tree. Because the bear would not leave the tree, it had been in the ‘same’ location for approximately 24 hours and concern for the safety of the public, the bear was tranquilized at 2200 hours (10 p.m.) with telazol. The bear was transported to the Fillmore Fish Hatchery, humanely euthanized, and placed in a freezer pending necropsy."

Missing from the DFG report is any acknowledgement of the fact that the police were trying to keep the bear up the tree during the day ("for the safety of the public."). There is no reference to the Saturday morning carnival atmosphere before the streets were cordoned off. Even when darkness fell, no bear in his right mind would come down from a tree with party music going on nearby, headlights shining, engines running, sirens on Ojai Avenue, and a multitude of other Saturday night noises.

The bear’s life ended when the DFG wardens got the call from Mr. Takayama not to wait any longer, even though the area was never quiet enough for the bear to come down. There was nothing humane about a group of armed men shining flashlights up into the tree, causing the frightened bear to climb even higher and the horrific crash to the ground that followed.

Also missing from the Takayama interview is any explanation as to why he refused the help of Julia Di Sieno, the Executive Director of Animal Rescue Team, who was on the phone with the officials on the scene several times that day. She offered the services of her veterinarian, a large secure trailer, and other services at no cost, to save the bear’s life.

The Ojai Community has a right to know the reasons that were given for not working with her and whether or not these reasons were valid.

Mr. Takayama asks, “How much time, how much money do you allow for a particular animal? As a manager I had to think of these things."

A financial investment had already been made to save the bear, but the window of time when that investment might have paid off was not observed. Does that make sense?

Mr. Takayama is known for organizing adult and youth pheasant hunts. A man in his position should be a steward of the environment. To meet hunter demand, wildlife agencies release hundreds of thousands of birds who have little chance of survival. Many scientists, policy makers and environmentalists question the "sport" of pheasant hunting in humane, ethical and scientific wildlife management.

In 2007, a boy participating in one of the youth pheasant hunts was shot in the eye. He lost most of his vision in that eye. This accident resulted in a lawsuit against the state. (Source: County of Santa Barbara Fish and Game Commission Minutes Meeting of July 24, 2008)

Mr. Takayama's casual claim that bears would be too plentiful if hunters didn’t kill them has been challenged by respected bear biologists. Biologists have not conducted a bear census here, and lack the data to estimate, or even guess, how many black bears roam California's hills, canyons, and wilderness areas.

Hunting is not an effective means of reducing bear-human conflicts and fails to target the so-called "problem" bears who may break into trash cans or trespass near homes. However, removing attractants like garbage and bird feeders and using humane aversive conditioning have proven highly effective at reducing bear/human conflicts.,

Earlier this year the DFG proposed a plan to expand bear hunting statewide. Due to the Humane Society's Wildlife Abuse Campaign the DFG halted proposals that would have expanded the trophy hunting of the state's black bears.

In addition to numerous practical concerns, there are also ethical concerns about how most bears are hunted. California is one of 17 states where trophy hunters are permitted to use packs of dogs to find and chase bears until the animal attempts to escape into the safety of a tree. The trophy hunter can then arrive and shoot the bear down from the tree branch at point-blank range. However, frightened bears, or bears unwilling to be separated from their cubs, will often turn and fight the pack of dogs.

California currently permits up to 1,700 black bears to be killed by hunters each year.

About 33,000 black bears are killed by trophy hunters each year in the United States.

Mr. Takayama did not attend the 10/13 Ojai City Council meeting when the public was given the opportunity to address these questions and concerns. Therefore I'm emailing him a copy of this editorial ( rtakayama@dfg.ca.gov) along with links to videos of the Aliso Street Bear. I hope he looks closely into the eyes of the creature he killed. I look forward to his written response.

Suza Francina is a former Ojai mayor and City Council member. She is a founding member of the Ojai Wildlife League (OWL) www.OjaiWildlifeLeague.com.