In Nevada, encounters with bears dip sharply

Nature has filled the larders for the black bears of the Sierra, making a repeat of last year’s surge in conflicts with people unlikely, experts said.

A report into the precedent-setting summer of 2007 shows a combination of conditions that had bears raiding trash containers and breaking into homes in dramatic numbers and wildlife officials scrambling to respond.

“It was incredible,” said Carl Lackey, a biologist and bear expert for the Nevada Department of Wildlife.

The numbers show that since the late 1980s, there has been a “remarkable and steady increase” in bear complaints in Nevada, according to a recent report Lackey prepared on bear activity.

Virtually all of it occurred at Lake Tahoe and along the Carson Range from Reno south to the Carson Valley. It was associated with an increasing number of bears becoming dependent on garbage and other human sources of food, Lackey said.

Complaints trended steadily upward over the years but remained below 200 each year until 2006, when 350 were reported, the report states.

But in 2007, the number of complaints exploded, with Nevada wildlife personnel responding to 1,531 complaints -- an increase of more than 337% from the previous year.

Another surprise: For the first time in a decade, the majority of bear complaints did not come from Lake Tahoe. Instead, nearly 30% of complaints were in the Minden-Gardnerville area, followed by Tahoe at 19% and the Reno area at 17%.

Bears caused some $10,800 in property damage, according to Lackey’s report. Most of that was attributed to bears breaking screens or tearing off window moldings in an effort to get at food. Other times, damage was more significant. Such was the case with Douglas County resident Ernie Kolbe, who returned one day to find his place “ransacked” by an intruding bear.

“We were left with the stove and the sink, and that was about it,” Kolbe said.

The number of bears captured by Lackey and colleagues, some repeatedly, steadily increased over the last decade, spiking at 157 last year, up from 89 in 2006. State wildlife personnel spent nearly 1,200 hours dealing with last year’s bear troubles, the report states.

Last year was deadly for Nevada bears. Sixty-three were killed, nearly twice the number in 2006. Thirty-six bears were hit by cars and 11 were shot due to public safety concerns, including one put down under a new “three strikes” policy initiated by the Department of Wildlife.

Last summer’s soaring number of bear complaints, also experienced in California and other Western states, was associated with drought conditions that dried up water supplies and shriveled the berry bushes that wild bears depend upon for food.

“There was absolutely nothing for them to eat in the back country. The drought conditions kept any of that food from being available,” Lackey said.

So hungry bears accustomed to human-supplied food and those that previously had never left the wilderness began wandering into neighborhoods in search of grub.

Lackey theorizes that a growing number of Tahoe residents are becoming, as his department’s slogan goes, “bear aware.” They are better securing garbage and other food sources, possibly forcing bears to wander into lower elevations in search of easier pickings, he said.

In the first half of 2008, bear complaints are lagging far behind last year, with roughly 130 recorded.

Lackey attributes the decrease largely to a week of steady rain in May. That much-needed moisture, he said, has bushes such as manzanita “loaded” with berries to provide a natural food source for bears.

“That was great for most wildlife in general, including bears,” Lackey said. “I’m sure we’ll be getting busier soon but I don’t think we’ll see anything like last year.”

But the next time weather conditions line up like they did in 2007, Lackey suspects another spike in bear problems.

During the 2009 legislative session, the Nevada Department of Wildlife plans to seek legislation establishing a steady funding source to deal with problem bears, said Russ Mason, the department’s game division chief.

Bear encounters cost the department $150,000 per year -- money that is diverted from other important wildlife programs, Mason said.

“We’re burning our money out, basically,” Mason said.

The situation offers something of a paradox and it has everything to do with humans. Even as people continue to destroy habitat bears need to survive, the bear population could be maintained by people-supplied sustenance, Lackey said.

“As habitat decreases due to urbanization and fires, and that habitat is being depleted every single day, the bear population should decrease accordingly,” he said. “What may be happening is that because of this altered food source, human food, that bear population is being kept at an artificial high.”