In June 2009, the Ministry of Natural Resources (MNR) finalized its Framework for Enhanced Black Bear Management in Ontario (the “framework”) with a goal to “ensure sustainable black bear populations across the landscape and the ecosystems on which they rely for the continuous provision of ecological, cultural, and optimal economic and social benefits for the people of Ontario.” According to MNR, the new framework will consolidate and refine current black bear management in the province, as well as provide guidance to future decision-making. The document includes a set of guiding principles, challenges and objectives for black bear management and research.

There are between 400,000 and 750,000 black bears (Ursus americanus) in North America, and MNR estimates 75,000 to 100,000 live in Ontario. Black bears are intrinsically valuable to Ontarians: as an icon of our wilderness heritage, as a symbol in Aboriginal cultural traditions, and as an economic and recreational resource (see Table 1). They are also an important component of Ontario’s ecosystems; black bears can be considered a keystone and indicator species, predators of juvenile deer and moose, and potentially important competitors for other species.

Black bears have one of the lowest rates of reproduction of any land mammal in North America. Female bears have a very late age of reproductive maturity, having their first litter when they are five to seven years old. Black bears also have low fecundity, with only two to three cubs per litter, and reproduce once every two years at maximum. As a result, the consequences of mismanagement are high: once a bear population is overharvested, it may take a decade or more to recover. As noted previously by the Auditor General of Ontario, harvests of black bears in some areas of Ontario may be occurring at unsustainable levels.

Black bears have large home ranges. In Ontario, the range of adult females averages 15 to 25 km², while male ranges can be up to 10 times this size. They also migrate long distances outside of their regular ranges for seasonal foods, such as sucker spawning runs in the spring and blueberry patches in the summer. Black bear habitat is often limited by human development, fragmented and degraded by roads and construction. Black bears are susceptible to being injured or killed by vehicles as they forage along roadsides and train tracks.

Population Identification and Monitoring

The framework does not introduce any initiatives for harvest-related data collection. Reporting black bear kills has been mandatory for resident hunters in Ontario since 2004 and for non-resident hunters since 1987. Mandatory hunter surveys provide MNR with important population monitoring information, such as the sex and Wildlife Management Unit (WMU) location of the harvested bear. However, in 2008 only 64 per cent of resident hunters returned the mandatory survey; while non-resident hunters had a 99 per cent response rate.

The Nuisance Bear Review Committee report in 2004 suggested the mandatory collection of premolars from all bears harvested, which would allow MNR to determine the age structure of the population. Currently, hunters only provide premolars on a voluntary basis, and MNR had a 44 per cent return rate of molars from hunters in 2008. The framework states MNR will “evaluate the need for additional harvest data such as additional age (tooth) data from harvested bears.”

While harvest mortality data can be useful, it is often skewed to animals targeted for hunting, and does not account for all known bear mortality in the province. It is, therefore, important for any harvest management plan to take into account harvest-independent data.

Requirements for non-hunting mortality data have not been changed in the framework. Although reporting is required for bear mortalities on private land (e.g., in defence of property), reporting rates are low and an unknown number of additional bear kills go unreported every year. The framework aims to “enhance” reporting of non-hunting black bear mortality and to “raise public awareness of the need to report bears killed in protection of property,” but fails to outline specific actions or further reporting requirements. Currently, as has been required since 1998, only the kill, date and location need to be reported for bears killed in defence of property. Age, sex and other data parameters need not be reported.

A Black Bear Population Index Network has collected data annually since the late 1980s, and made permanent by MNR across the province in 1997. This index calculates the incidence of black bears that “hit” baited stations, giving an approximation of how many bears may be present in a given region. However, this population estimate must be used with caution, as it does not account for multiple bears hitting the same station, or behavioural effects. An updated and more precise method of black bear population monitoring was initiated in 2004, after a recommendation for population monitoring improvements by the Nuisance Bear Review Committee. This method, capture-recapture DNA fingerprinting of bear fur, provides a much clearer understanding of the true abundance level of the species within each WMU. Both programs are still in place, although dedicated annual funding for the DNA fingerprinting program has not been secured. It is unclear whether the framework tactic to “Establish and maintain a network of population monitoring stations across black bear range to monitor population trends” will be in addition to the existing monitoring efforts, or characterizes those in place.

Habitat Management

Black bear habitat was not monitored or defined in previous policy; in contrast, the updated framework dedicates one of its six objectives specifically to the management and assessment of black bear habitat.

The framework contains an explicit requirement to “ensure an adequate supply of black bear habitat.” The strategy to “develop habitat assessment approaches to aid in assessing ecological capability for black bears,” has associated tactics to “assess the need to expand” research, including black bear food surveys and habitat suitability modelling.

A recent study has shown Ontario’s current provincial land classification and forestry resource inventory maps do not provide enough detail to guide habitat management for black bears. Additional field research will be necessary to ensure that the specific food and habitat needs of black bears will be met.

Harvest and Socio-Economics

Black bear hunting is central to the management approach presented in the framework. MNR states, “a commitment has been made to develop an enhanced bear harvest management program… to ensure the sustainability of black bear populations and the continuation and/or enhancement of bear hunting opportunities and associated economic benefits.”

While the previous policy explicitly stated the target harvest guidelines as five to eight per cent of the total population, the new framework does not identify any guidelines or maximum yield. There is no explicit mention of a re-evaluation of the current ”sustainable” harvest density guideline of 10 per cent for the province, as noted in MNR’s accompanying backgrounder document on black bears. Moreover, total population estimates for Ontario’s black bears have been extrapolated from a single long-term study (1969-1983) from the Great Lakes-St. Lawrence ecozone, and per cent harvest guidelines were based on this approximation.

While the Nuisance Bear Review Committee report suggested keeping black bear management guidelines at the WMU level, there are several alternative levels discussed in the framework. These include “landscape-level” or “ecological zones,” although boundaries for these areas were not described nor were maps included. As a result, the framework is unclear on how “appropriate scales” for management will be determined.

ECO Comment

The ECO is pleased that MNR undertook a review of black bear management in the province. Ecologically-based population monitoring, independent of harvest data, should be central to any wildlife management framework. As the ECO noted in 2007/2008, in regards to MNR’s approach to mammalian predator management, “concerted attempts should be made to acquire the best possible ecological knowledge to inform decision-making.” Data collection and research are critical components of understanding black bear populations and their long-term ecological sustainability in Ontario.

The ECO is concerned, however, that rather than reflecting a “more enlightened ecological approach” to black bear management, this framework explicitly outlines that MNR has made the commitment to continue and enhance recreational bear hunting opportunities. The ECO notes that in this document, “sustainability” is a term only used in relation to the continued harvest of the species.

While the previous black bear policy explicitly established harvest guidelines of 5 to 8 per cent of the total population, the new framework is vague on harvesting goals. Harvesting guidelines have not been re-evaluated within the framework, and only “ongoing monitoring” and “evaluating” are action items to determine whether harvest needs to be changed. MNR states in the black bear backgrounder that “the provincial sustainable harvest rate is 10% of the population.” It is unclear, however, how this rate was determined and what the scientific basis is for this statement. If “ecologically-based” harvesting targets will be used, as outlined in the framework, ecological zones must first be defined or determined. MNR has indicated that “ecological zones” have been identified; these zones group WMUs together based on ecological similarities, and assist in determining population objectives for the region. However, as of June 2010, the ecological zones have not been made publically available.

The ECO commends MNR for explicitly including habitat monitoring and maintenance as a guideline, as was suggested in the ECO’s 2007/2008 Annual Report. This guideline puts habitat in its proper place as a critical part of managing a species for its long-term survival, as habitat is the leading cause of species endangerment in Ontario.

However, the ECO is concerned the framework will not improve upon the status quo, as much of it is too vague to be action- oriented. The framework’s calls to “assess the need for further long- term research,” “evaluate the need for additional harvest data,” and “consider need for research and monitoring initiatives” do not amount to a clear action agenda for the ministry. Research needs and gaps have been long identified, by the ECO, MNR’s own Nuisance Bear Review Committee, the Auditor General of Ontario and other reports. The ECO does not believe that MNR’s noncommittal language in the framework constitutes an “enhanced” approach to bear management.

No timelines for completion or review process are in place to outline the timing and effectiveness of this framework. As suggested by the Nuisance Bear Review Committee, a five- year review of the framework could provide a guidepost for implementation, as well as an opportunity for public comment and adaptive management to improve the program’s efficacy.

The ECO is troubled by the fact that MNR altered the framework’s guiding principles. A critical conceptual change between draft and final versions of the framework was to remove the proposed reference to the intrinsic value of black bears to the people of Ontario. The first guiding principle now ignores the intrinsic value of black bears to Ontarians and focuses only on socio-economic value, resulting from their “use” as a resource. This does not reflect the spirit of the Environmental Bill of Rights, 1993, which states “the people of Ontario recognize the inherent value of the natural environment.”

Although the ECO notes some technological improvements by MNR in population monitoring and modelling for black bears, the ECO is unsure how the framework will improve on-the-ground management from previous methods. Without understanding how the framework’s vague strategies and tactics will be implemented, it is unclear how effective or “enhanced” management will be. As noted in the final section of the framework, implementation will require discussions and consultation.

The ECO suggests these discussions should be balanced, focused on the ecological sustainability of the species, and open to public comment and review.

Citing This Article:
Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 2010. "Editing Managing Black Bears: Thinking Beyond Harvest?." Redefining Conservation, ECO Annual Report, 2009/10. Toronto, ON : Environmental Commissioner of Ontario. 65-9.