[HN Gopher] One pioneering grizzly and her two cubs appear on Va...
       ___________________________________________________________________
        
       One pioneering grizzly and her two cubs appear on Vancouver Island
        
       Author : abscond
       Score  : 108 points
       Date   : 2024-10-04 23:36 UTC (1 days ago)
        
 (HTM) web link (hakaimagazine.com)
 (TXT) w3m dump (hakaimagazine.com)
        
       | AlbertCory wrote:
       | I've been up REAL close to grizzlies, on Kodiak Island [1].
       | However, that has a population of 13,000 [2], whereas Vancouver
       | has 840,000, according to that article.
       | 
       | That means on Kodiak, the bears have the land mostly to
       | themselves, and humans aren't much of a threat to them. You
       | wouldn't try this in Yellowstone, where fatal bear-human
       | encounters happen regularly. And probably will on Vancouver, too.
       | 
       | [1] https://albertcory50.substack.com/p/travel-disasters
       | 
       | [2] https://usafacts.org/data/topics/people-
       | society/population-a...
        
         | wk_end wrote:
         | It's important to distinguish "Vancouver" (a city on the
         | mainland) and "Vancouver Island" (an island off the coast).
         | 
         | Vancouver Island has a population nearing a million, but half
         | of it live in the greater Victoria area, which occupies a tiny
         | little peninsula and change on the southern tip. Most of the
         | island - which is huge, approximately four times the size of
         | Kodiak Island, for what it's worth - is pretty wild and
         | untamed.
        
           | AlbertCory wrote:
           | I'm sure, but the question is, do the populations intersect?
           | Looking at the map, I see three Provincial Parks up in the
           | north, plus towns and roads. That will mean vacationers will
           | encounter them.
           | 
           | Whereas on Kodiak, there is nothing on one side of the
           | island.
        
             | WillyWonkaJr wrote:
             | I think it's time that we start to make room once again for
             | the animals we almost drove to extinction. This would be a
             | good, controlled setting to see if we can do this
             | responsibly.
        
               | AlbertCory wrote:
               | How is Vancouver "controlled"? The grizzlies can
               | obviously swim back to the mainland if they don't like
               | it.
               | 
               | > we almost drove to extinction
               | 
               | In the Lower 48, yes. Not in Canada and Alaska.
        
               | fbarred wrote:
               | Some of them can, if they are in good physical condition.
               | There's a reason why there haven't been any females who
               | swam across until now.
        
               | tastyfreeze wrote:
               | For good reason. Brown bears eat people. You are no more
               | than a slow meal to them. Coexistence means accepting
               | that people will be eaten by bears or bears will be
               | killed by people defending themselves. I think it is
               | worth noting that native tribes prepared for war if the
               | needed to kill a brown bear.
        
               | mistrial9 wrote:
               | > Attacks on humans, though widely reported, are
               | generally rare.
               | 
               | Brown bears prefer salmon to geezers who talk big, for
               | certain.
        
               | tastyfreeze wrote:
               | Says somebody that has never lived where brown bears do.
               | They can and will gladly eat you if you are the best meal
               | around. Salmon are only around for maybe 1/4 of the year.
        
       | LilBytes wrote:
       | Might make for an interesting development on future seasons of
       | Alone if Grizzles become a common presence on Vancouver Island.
       | 
       | My understanding of read materials so far is the amount of work
       | gone into the program to risk profile danger was incredible, the
       | change in risk profile of the addition of Grizzles on top of
       | wolves and black bears would be quite an adjustment.
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | My Yukon buddy was the safety officer/local guy when they did
         | alone up on great slave lake in the NWT.( near Yellowknife)
         | 
         | He hung around all the time with his hunting rifle and a 12
         | gauge loaded with slugs to make sure nobody got eaten.
         | 
         | He got in trouble for sharing smokes and giving fire to the
         | contestants a few times.
        
           | dyauspitr wrote:
           | Apparently the great slave lake was named after the
           | indigenous dene people, who were called the slave tribe by
           | their enemy tribe the Cree.
        
             | scooke wrote:
             | No need for the word "tribe" here. They are the Dene. They
             | are the Slave. They are the Cree. we don't say "the German
             | tribe" (of Europe), or the Swiss tribe. This term typically
             | is used to describe a smaller group belonging to a larger
             | group. In this case, the larger group is subconsciously
             | thought of Indians, or even First Nations, or Aboriginals.
             | But the Cree, Slave Dene and any other number of nations
             | are not tribes . They are nations. So, the Cree... The
             | Slave.... The Dene....
        
           | arcticfox wrote:
           | The smokes don't seem like that big of a deal but the fire
           | seems like it is a complete disaster for fairness. That's
           | actually pretty horrific - the other contestants out there
           | working and suffering their asses off to survive and he gave
           | a huge leg up to arbitrary competitors? I should hope he got
           | in serious trouble - can you imagine an official in a sports
           | competition casually messing with the game w/ $1M on the
           | line???
        
             | jvanderbot wrote:
             | I regret to say that the show is probably only concerned
             | with the appearance of fairness, as viewed by edited
             | footage post-hoc. Not the experience of the contestants so
             | much.
             | 
             | For example, I previously believed the contestants to be
             | truly _alone_ , in that each potential encounter with bears
             | would be hugely risky. But now I know that was a minimal
             | risk because a bodyguard was close enough to intervene, and
             | was probably monitoring grizzly activity in the area.
             | 
             | The mental changes that happen to a contestant when they
             | can even _see_ someone nearby kind of invalidates the whole
             | premise a little.
        
             | grecy wrote:
             | I think you're thinking this show is a lot more real than
             | it actually is. It is scripted reality TV, not serious, not
             | real.
             | 
             | He said he and the camera crew talked to the contestants
             | all the time, despite them being shown to be "alone"
             | 
             | I think he said he gave fire to people that already had it
             | anyway and theirs just went out.
        
         | dghlsakjg wrote:
         | They have done at least one season in Interior BC where
         | Grizzlies are present. They have also done seasons in northern
         | Canada where within range of those predators as well.
        
       | pvaldes wrote:
       | They will need to watch very carefully for any negative
       | relationship with the endemic Vancouver Island Marmot, that only
       | lives in a couple spots in the Island. In this case, those bears
       | will need to be captured and moved out of the Island again.
       | Grizzlies have the rest of N America to live.
        
         | steve_adams_86 wrote:
         | The marmots are in so few locations and in such small numbers,
         | it seems exceedingly unlikely that it would become an issue. It
         | would be awful if it was a problem though. The marmots have
         | been having record years, and their recovery is really just
         | beginning.
        
           | pvaldes wrote:
           | 1) Grizzlies are known to ear marmots if they can catch them.
           | Those bears are able to move big stones. One bear that would
           | specialize on open the tunnels and chase the rodents on their
           | nests, could trigger the demise of the wild population in
           | months or weeks. Even before we could notice it.
           | 
           | 2) Bears will compete for the same fruits and resources in
           | autumn and have big appetites. Marmots need those fruits to
           | survive winter.
           | 
           | 3) Vancouver Marmot societies can collapse suddenly if the
           | number is reduced, because they need a minimum number of
           | watchers for protection while the other eat.
           | 
           | The risk simply doesn't worth it at this moment. Professional
           | advice should be relocation of the bears until the marmot
           | situation improves and creates a minimum number of
           | individuals that would act as a safety buffer. Those bears at
           | least should be radiotracked ASAP and followed by Biologists
           | and specialized workers. That would be the minimum action
           | required. If they enter on the area with marmots they must
           | go. Prioritizing safety of the critically endangered animals
           | over the common species is the correct decision.
        
             | steve_adams_86 wrote:
             | I agree they should be tracked, absolutely. I should have
             | specified that I wouldn't expect it to be an issue in the
             | short term. Eventually they would almost certainly
             | interact, though at that point hopefully the marmots will
             | be established with stable populations.
             | 
             | I also agree that prioritizing endangered species is the
             | right decision here. We have more than enough bears on the
             | island. We don't really need to ensure grizzlies stay in
             | the mix at the moment, haha.
        
             | AlbertCory wrote:
             | I have kinda mixed feelings on this. Protecting an
             | endangered species against human hunting, habitat
             | reduction, or other unnatural dangers makes total sense.
             | 
             | But what's unnatural about grizzlies? Were they introduced
             | onto the island by man? Nope. For that matter, the bears on
             | Kodiak -- how did they get there in the first place? They
             | have plenty of salmon so they probably don't need to eat
             | marmots, if there are any. But maybe they wiped out other
             | species we don't know about.
             | 
             | What are you going to do to protect them against other
             | natural predators? And why not introduce them into other
             | suitable habitats, like we've done with wolves in the US?
             | Then we wouldn't be so dependent on one island.
             | 
             | Edit: this is in marked contrast to New Zealand trying to
             | eliminate the stoats and other introduced mammals who are
             | not native and are wiping out the bird species who are. The
             | bears got there on their own.
        
         | Keysh wrote:
         | Are a few brown bears more dangerous to marmots than the many
         | black bears that already live there?
        
           | pvaldes wrote:
           | Yes, They are much more strong and need more meat to survive.
           | Being able or not to lift a heavy rock can be the difference
           | between an entire colony of marmots wiped or not. With such
           | small populations of gregarious animals, losing 10 or 20
           | marmots by three bears in a couple of nights is a serious
           | issue. Is close to the number of survivors in the wild before
           | the rewilding projects started.
           | 
           | Black bears must have _some_ effect on marmots. Both species
           | compete for the food, but the effect can be difficult to
           | study (Black bears eat lots of ants for example, and ants eat
           | surprisingly big amounts of plants also). Ecology is so
           | complex that must be managed by trained professionals, able
           | to see the whole picture, not for companies driven toward
           | selling more newspapers (In the same way as computer
           | security, hospitals, or any other issue important to us; that
           | would cause disasters if not addressed sensibly).
        
       | skwb wrote:
       | My wife and I went to Tofino (on Vancouver) this last summer
       | where you can rent a boat for a tour of the coastal black bears.
       | Very highly recommend it.
        
         | jacobaul wrote:
         | (As a local) it sounds weird to say "on Vancouver" without the
         | island part. Vancouver means the city. If you want to sound
         | cool you can say "the Island".
        
         | vavooom wrote:
         | Super cool! I love Vancouver island - normally visit Campbell
         | River where I used to have family. Always wanted to make it to
         | the west side for Tofino or the West Coast Trail.
        
         | grecy wrote:
         | I hope you made a stop in Hot Springs Cove.
         | 
         | That place is magical.
        
       | blindriver wrote:
       | How would they avoid inbreeding and genetic mutations if only a
       | single bloodline existed there?
        
         | AlbertCory wrote:
         | I think the grizzlies will take care of that on their own.
         | Either some bears from the island will swim to the mainland, or
         | vice versa.
         | 
         | Note: don't ask for a link on that. I just suspect animals
         | prefer not to mate with their siblings.
        
           | pentamassiv wrote:
           | The article says "As the first known female grizzly on
           | Vancouver Island, she could be the progenitor of an entirely
           | new, self-sustaining grizzly population--the first in as many
           | as 12,500 years".
           | 
           | They might be waiting for a long time for other bears to come
        
             | AlbertCory wrote:
             | The authorities could always bring over some other ones, if
             | that's really what they want.
             | 
             | In any case, the drive to mate is pretty powerful. I would
             | think a female in heat would swim back to the mainland if
             | that was the only way to find a male.
        
           | fbarred wrote:
           | From the article:
           | 
           | 'On Vancouver Island--about 10 times closer to the mainland--
           | the genetic diversity of any future grizzly population
           | shouldn't be a problem. As we've seen, "there'll be males
           | coming over to mix up the genes," McLellan says. And now,
           | perhaps, the odd female too."'
        
         | t-3 wrote:
         | Inbreeding tends to solve itself in cases of problems. If the
         | offspring aren't viable, they'll die.
        
         | goodcanadian wrote:
         | From the article, males swim over fairly frequently, but
         | usually leave again when they find no females. So, there is a
         | regular opportunity to add to the gene pool. What is newsworthy
         | is that there is now at least one female there (sexes of the
         | cubs are unknown). I think it is still a big leap to assume
         | that a sustainable population is inevitable, however, as the
         | occasional visiting male still has to find the female(s) and
         | the resulting population will still be quite inbred.
        
       | hi-v-rocknroll wrote:
       | Note that Vancouver Island has absurd numbers of black bear but
       | pretty much or at zero brown bears until now.
       | 
       | I'm wondering if they're u. a. stikeenensis, gyas, dalli, or
       | merely the terribly-named horribilis.
        
       | BurningFrog wrote:
       | So are these Grizzlies now an "invasive species" on Vancouver
       | Island?
       | 
       | Explain why or why not you think so!
        
         | karaterobot wrote:
         | If they swam there, no. Invasive species have to be introduced
         | by humans, by definition! The effect of grizzlies on the island
         | ecosystem is unknown, and that may be more of what you're
         | talking about.
        
           | derefr wrote:
           | > If they swam there, no. Invasive species have to be
           | introduced by humans, by definition!
           | 
           | So what do you call it if humans introduce a species to an
           | island A that's _really close_ to another island B -- and
           | then the species happens to make the short hop to island B on
           | its own? In a causal sense, that species would not have made
           | it to island B if not for us introducing it to island A.
        
             | tempestn wrote:
             | Yes, when an invasive species spreads from where it was
             | first introduced, it remains an invasive species.
        
             | karaterobot wrote:
             | The article says they probably swam across the Johnstone
             | Straight, from the mainland. There's no mention whatsoever
             | of introducing grizzlies to any nearby island.
             | 
             | If you're asking hypothetically, I'd guess it comes down to
             | whether the islands were separate ecosystems, but Wikipedia
             | would be a much better source than me.
        
           | cco wrote:
           | By what definition? Humans being involved didn't seem common
           | in definitions I found.
        
             | morsch wrote:
             | An _invasive species_ is an introduced species that harms
             | its new environment.
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Invasive_species
             | 
             | An _introduced species_ , alien species, exotic species,
             | adventive species, immigrant species, foreign species, non-
             | indigenous species, or non-native species is a species
             | living outside its native distributional range, but which
             | has arrived there by human activity, directly or
             | indirectly, and either deliberately or accidentally.
             | 
             | https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Introduced_species
        
               | cco wrote:
               | > The term "invasive" is poorly defined and often very
               | subjective.
               | 
               | I too read the Wikipedia article and this sentence
               | prompted me to survey a few other places. Federal law in
               | the US for instance.
               | 
               | Your quoted definition doesn't appear in the article
               | covering _invasive_ species, only in "introduced species"
               | which of course implies a human introduced them.
        
               | morsch wrote:
               | The first paragraph is Wikipedia's definition for
               | _invasive species_ as _a kind of introduced species_ with
               | additional attributes. It 's the first sentence in the
               | article.
               | 
               | US federal law might be different, I wouldn't know.
        
         | dagmx wrote:
         | The article says that grizzlies did use to exist on the island,
         | so they'd not be invasive
        
           | fbarred wrote:
           | By that definition, horses that were introduced to North
           | America by humans in 16th century are not invasive because
           | they existed in North America 10,000 years ago.
        
             | pvaldes wrote:
             | So they fill a niche in a place that evolved with extinct
             | horses and can sustain another species of horse. If they
             | pass a threshold where they drink all the water for example
             | (desert pools on Australia with endemic desert fishes),
             | they became invasive and must go.
        
             | dagmx wrote:
             | The article also does say that Grizzlies come and go, that
             | the significance here is it's a female with cubs. So it's
             | not like grizzlies aren't present at all on the island.
             | 
             | Of course there could be a boom but apex predators tend to
             | not be super boomy since they'd outstrip their own
             | resources first.
        
         | pvaldes wrote:
         | Not. Grizzlies aren't invasive here. A species is invasive
         | basically if:
         | 
         | 1) has been introduced directly or indirectly by man actions (a
         | mosquito carried on a plane, a lost exotic pet). If arrived by
         | its own means is not invasive.
         | 
         | 2) is not a previous part of that ecosystem so it didn't
         | evolved here; There are exceptions to this rule [1][2]
         | 
         | 3) is reproducing in the new area (often explosively by lack of
         | predators and diseases), also with some exceptions [3]; and
         | 
         | 4) Will modify the ecosystem substantially (displacing or
         | wiping other species in the process).
         | 
         | Wolves on Yellowstone fulfill all points except 2. They aren't
         | invasive. Apples on America don't fulfill points 2 and 4 so
         | they are more healers than destroyers, and reproduce but not
         | exponentially.
         | 
         | ------------
         | 
         | [1] Can be ignored when the new species fill a niche from an
         | extinct one, "Healing" the ecosystem. Gray wolves proven to be
         | solid healers for example. Turkeys on Mauritius island could be
         | the only birds able to spread the seeds of some trees unable to
         | reproduce since Dodo went extinct. In this case we can do an
         | exception to save dozens of native species from going extinct.
         | 
         | [2] Creating deliberately a sanctuary of a non native species
         | to reduce the risk of being extinct in their own place, is also
         | allowed.
         | 
         | [3] neutered domestic cats, gone feral, are invasive, because
         | there is still a constant supply from other areas.
        
         | sandworm101 wrote:
         | No. Species are not static. Large predators like grizzlies and
         | wolves move in and out of areas over decades as they alter prey
         | relatioships. It is hard to describe how vast and unmonitored
         | this part of BC actually is. It is comparabke to the empty
         | parts of alaska, but without the roads. Nobody believes that
         | this is the first, or last, mother grizzly on the island. It
         | may be the first known, or first recorded in the last century,
         | but it will have happened before multiple times. It will be
         | nothing new to nature, not in the long run.
         | 
         | Another island near vancouver (bowen) is said to have no black
         | bears. But given the population density of bears surrounding
         | the island, Bowen could have black bears instantly. All it
         | takes is one pregnant female getting scared enough to make the
         | swim. If they arent there now, they likely were there in
         | centuries past.
        
       | Tiktaalik wrote:
       | > It's also possible that people perceived grizzlies as more
       | threatening and drove them away from food sources, perhaps even
       | killing them.
       | 
       | Kinda funny that this is framed as a less likely theory.
       | 
       | If it was somewhat uncommon for bears to swim across the strait
       | and there weren't too many, I think it's enormously likely that
       | First Nations would have actively seeked to rid themselves of
       | rare problem bears.
        
       | alephnerd wrote:
       | Ofc it's Sayward /s
       | 
       | Vancouver Island is beautiful. If only the people's personalities
       | were just as beautiful as the nature, but stuff may have changed
       | since the mid-2000s.
       | 
       | That said, Richmond was worse.
       | 
       | Is the antique car and hot rod show still a thing in Comox?
        
         | jdougan wrote:
         | > If only the people's personalities were just as beautiful as
         | the nature,
         | 
         | Matthew 7:3
         | 
         | > Is the antique car and hot rod show still a thing in Comox?
         | 
         | Looks like it is: https://crownisle.com/event/hot-august-
         | nights-classic-car-sh...
        
       | steve3242 wrote:
       | The specific location was kept out of publications for a while
       | but unfortunately the cat is now out of the bag. It looks like an
       | earlier story from near the end of August also divulged that
       | info. Hopefully they are given space next year but there is a
       | real risk that many people will now drive to that spot for a
       | sighting. It was quite impressive that the location was kept out
       | of publications for as long as it was but eventually someone had
       | to ruin that.
        
       | yowayb wrote:
       | I think Vancouver is the best city in North America.
        
         | brabel wrote:
         | This is about Vancouver Island, which is NOT where Vancouver
         | City is located.
        
       | xrd wrote:
       | I'm sad this magazine will be ending soon. They do such great
       | writing.
       | 
       | I was at orcas Island recently. I wanted to have my kids hear
       | some good stories about the place, so I started asking anyone I
       | met, "tell me a story about a dangerous animal attack here!"
       | 
       | Everyone would just say, "hmm, there aren't any dangerous
       | animals..."
       | 
       | Then, one person said. "Well, there was that person that died
       | from a bee sting."
       | 
       | Then someone said "Sometimes the elk swim across the sound and
       | come on the island." I decided I would tell my kids they came
       | over to attack people but I had no evidence that was true.
       | 
       | There were reports of bears getting confused and swimming over
       | and they are quickly relocated.
       | 
       | The most dangerous animal apparently is the mink. In the
       | seventies a rogue employee at a mink farm released a bunch of
       | them, and now they have overrun the place. And they can be
       | vicious hunters. The person that told me that said he had a
       | recent picture in the local newspaper of a mink that went into
       | the ocean and captured an eel. His picture is of the mink rising
       | from the waters with that eel in its mouth.
        
         | ianbicking wrote:
         | The mink story is interesting... presumably they are native,
         | but had disappeared locally due to overhunting. But probably
         | many of their competitors also disappeared (martins, weasels,
         | etc) so there's an opening.
         | 
         | Though even that wouldn't seem sufficient... it's not like
         | minks are undergoing natural population booms elsewhere. Which
         | makes me think that there's simply a critical mass advantage,
         | like maybe mink are too anti-social for their own good.
        
       ___________________________________________________________________
       (page generated 2024-10-06 23:02 UTC)