Oct. 14, 2004
IN
THE NEWS | ART BEAT | GARDEN | PREVIEW | THE
HUM | CALENDAR
2004 CNPA
Award
Environmental Reporting - First Place
On the cover: Bark stripped
tree photo by Emily Gurnon.
Maxine, one of the resident black bears of the Sequoia Park Zoo,
poses for the cover.
Photo by Bob Doran.
by EMILY
GURNON
Mark Higley [photo
at right] was a 30-year-old Humboldt
State graduate when he started his job as wildlife biologist
for the Hoopa Valley tribe's forestry department in 1991. His
first day there was like most first days at work: introductions
to new co-workers, papers to fill out, directions to the bathroom.
Then he met the tribe's silviculturist, or forest scientist,
who was not much for small talk that day.
"Hi, my name is Paul Abbott,"
the man said, holding out his hand to Higley. "We have a
problem."
The tribe had begun seeing a
phenomenon it hadn't encountered much before, Abbott told his
new colleague. Black bears were coming out of their winter hibernation
and dining on the Hupas' bread and butter: the Douglas fir trees
whose sales generate about 90 percent of the tribe's income.
Higley now estimates that the bear damage will cut the tribe's
timber revenues by at least $1 million to $2 million a year --
about 15 percent -- within 10 years.
Just next door, to the west
of the Hoopa reservation, are 100,000 acres of redwoods and Douglas
fir trees owned by Green Diamond Resource Co., formerly Simpson
Resource Co. It, too, is finding the bears a major headache,
as are Pacific Lumber Co. and many smaller foresters.
"We've been concerned about
it for a long time, and finally got our [company's] resources
together to take a hard look at it," said Dan Opalach, timberlands
investment manager for Green Diamond.
The problem is not exactly new,
and it is not limited to California. Timber producers in Oregon
and Washington have been struggling with it for decades. Companies
here and elsewhere have tried various approaches to stopping
it -- from hunting the bears to feeding them.
But it's getting worse, Higley said. And
there's a reason.
"We've converted the habitat,"
he said. Before large-scale forestry, all the trees grew unimpeded,
so that the North Coast was covered in old growth. In recent
decades, timber companies have worked on growing trees as quickly
as possible to get the most profit. That means pruning and thinning
out the weaker trees. Those remaining get more sun and more root
space.
"The trees that they're
maximizing growth on are the ones that the bears love to eat,"
because they tend to be sweeter, Higley said. "We've made
the entire landscape into these fast-growing young stands, and
then you wonder why the bears are eating it."
Steve Horner agreed. Horner
is a silviculturist and manager of sustainable forestry for Pacific
Lumber Co. "We're creating salad bars for these bears,"
he said.
LEFT: Bear-damaged
tree. Photo courtesy Hoopa Tribal Forestry
Sweet-tooth tradition
Black bears have historically
made their home throughout North America, and are still present
in at least 40 of the 50 states, according to the Web site of
the U.S. Department of the Interior, National Biological Service.
Scientists have noted the tree-stripping
behavior since as far back as the turn of the 20th century, Higley
said. And in Humboldt County, foresters have seen it for decades,
although the bears themselves seemed much more scarce in bygone
days.
"I've talked to a lot of
old-timers [who were loggers] about bears," said Horner.
"Back in the `30s and `40s, it was very rare for anybody
to see a bear. If they were to see a bear, it was a big deal."
Today, foresters say, it's not unusual to see two or three bears
a day.
Numbers from the state Department
of Fish and Game confirm that the black bear population is rising;
today the department estimates there are at least 25,000 to 30,000
black bears in California. About half of those live in the region
north and west of the Sierra Nevada mountains, including the
North Coast, and ours is the region with the greatest number
of bears per square mile.
Though they may have kept out
of sight, the bears of earlier days nevertheless made their presence
known. Beginning in the late 1940s, the Hammond Lumber Co. had
enough stripped trees that it began to do surveys of bear damage
on its property, said Jim Able, a private forestry consultant
who has worked on the North Coast for 35 years, starting with
Georgia-Pacific, which had by that time bought Hammond.
Researchers have found that the tree-stripping
behavior occurs in the spring, when the bears emerge hungry from
their winter torpor, and their main sources of food, such as
berries and acorns, are in short supply. It is a learned behavior,
usually taught from mother to cub, but not all bears do it. The
ones who do may sample a number of trees, stripping off a piece
of bark and scraping their teeth over the sweet cambium layer
underneath, before they find one they really like. The tastiest
trees may be completely denuded.
The effect on the tree can be
catastrophic. A missing piece of bark opens the tree to infestation,
disease and rot. A tree that is stripped all the way around in
one place, or girdled, will die, because the sap cannot travel
up the trunk.
"Driving along [Highway]
299, if you look out, you can see a bunch of red trees,"
Horner said. "Those are the trees that have died after being
girdled by a bear."
The ones that have been partially
stripped may still lose a good deal of their sales value, Horner
said. "It creates a wound in the tree, and they're doing
it to the biggest and most valuable part of the tree."
With profits at stake, timber
producers throughout the Pacific Northwest have tried for years
to combat the problem. Hammond Lumber experimented with a number
of things in the 1950s to stop the bears -- including slaughtering
300 of them in one year, Able said. "A hew and cry went
up" when word of the killings reached the public, and the
company had to stop. It had achieved its goal; few trees were
damaged in the next three years or so, Able said. But the victory
was only temporary. "Within three to five years, it built
right back up again."
Timber companies may invite
hunters onto their land during the fall bear season, but there's
no guarantee that any bears killed were those doing the damage.
Companies in Oregon and Washington
reasoned that, if the bears had other food available to them,
they might stay off the trees. To try a feeding program here,
where the animals are more plentiful, might amount to "welfare
for bears," Opalach of Green Diamond said. It might only
make them dependent on the new food source and risk inflating
the population. Or the alternative food provided might not be
enough to make a difference for such a large number of bears.
In any case, it's illegal in California to feed wildlife.
Trees killed by bark-stripping bears. The tree at the right has
been girdled.
Photos courtesy of Hoopa Tribal Forestry
`That's your grandma'
When he was assigned to tackle
the bear problem in Hoopa, Mark Higley found that the tribe's
special relationship to the animals demanded some creative thinking
on his part.
The Hupa people consider the
bears their ancestors. "We can't just go out and kill them,
because that's your grandma," said Lyle Marshall, tribal
chairman. When Higley went before the tribe's Cultural Committee
to explain the problem of the trees being stripped, he was met
with a lot of questions. "They didn't want to just willy-nilly
kill bears," Higley said. "They wanted to get a real
handle on which were the problem bears -- at no small expense."
So Higley and his staff, including HSU graduate
student Jaime Sajecki [photo
at right] , embarked on a painstaking
two-year study to try to identify the bears that were doing the
damage. They took hair samples from the stripped trees and sent
them to a lab for identification. Then, they captured and anesthetized
240 bears and compared hair samples from them with the hair from
the trees. The genetic tests turned up 78 "bad" bears.
Of these, 25 were killed.
For her master's thesis, Sajecki
also studied dental patterns of the captured bears. The study
seemed to confirm her hypothesis: that the tree-eating bears
would have more tooth decay than the bears who weren't doing
the damage. Now, Higley's staff can continue to trap the bears
and decide, with reasonable certainty, whether a particular bear
is a trouble-maker or not -- just by peering inside its mouth.
[Photo below left: Sajecki
studies dental evidence in bear's mouth]
"It looks like it's going to be valuable,"
Sajecki said.
The tribe has spent about $400,000
on identifying problem bears, Higley estimated. It is also altering
its basic forest practices -- which may turn out to be the most
effective measure of all. "We've changed our management
tremendously," Higley said. With no more clear cuts, and
more of the older trees left intact, new trees will grow more
slowly. The bears will be less likely to attack them.
The new pest
Dan Opalach [photo below right] remembers
talking about forest pests when he was an undergraduate in the
forestry department at HSU. Pests were things like fungus and
insects. What he doesn't remember -- even through his master's
and doctoral study -- is any discussion of tree-eating bears
threatening timber. But as he took a visitor on a tour of the
company's Crannell Tree Farm, a vast area just east of Clam Beach,
it was clear that the problem was now impossible to miss.
In some places, "if you
look closely, you can see damage on every other tree," he
said. "It's really amazing.
"In this region right here
[in Humboldt County], most of what gets damaged is redwood and
Doug fir, sometimes red cedar," he continued. "Oregon
says hemlocks will get hit."
It's only in the last two years
that Green Diamond has begun to do some serious analysis of the
tree-stripping, Opalach said. The company has started by asking,
among other things, why the bears are stripping the trees --
and why some trees and not others. "Sometimes they'll taste
a redwood and they'll walk away, and other times they'll just
strip the whole tree top to bottom," he said. "That's
the other thing we need to learn: Why are some redwoods more
tasty than others?"
The fledgling research has led Opalach to
do some things he never thought he'd do. One day, he was out
in the woods with Lowell Diller, a wildlife biologist for the
company. "We're looking at this redwood, and he pulls out
a knife and he starts hacking away at it," Opalach said.
"He said, `Taste it.' And I tasted it. And I thought, it's
not so bad." The many cloned trees in the company's nursery
may include one or more that the bears don't like, Opalach is
hoping. But that finding is likely a long way off.
And the company is nowhere near
putting a dollar amount on the bear damage. "It's going
to be extremely hard to quantify," Opalach said.
Palco is also studying the issue.
"We know that there's a problem; we don't know how much
of a problem it is yet," said Horner, the silviculturist.
"The conventional way of dealing with any pests is to go
out and kill the thing. But we want to understand more about
what's going on there before we start to do anything about it."
Bear photos courtesy of Hoopa Tribal Forestry
IN
THE NEWS | ART BEAT | GARDEN | PREVIEW | THE
HUM | CALENDAR
Comments?
© Copyright 2004, North Coast Journal,
Inc.
|