Editor:
Laws for people recognize a difference between property crime and assault. If you attack a person, it is considered a more serious crime than theft or vandalism.
This also applies to pets. If a dog runs into my house and damages it or even chases and kills my cat, that dog is not destroyed. Dogs aren't put down for looking or acting "dangerous." Dogs are only killed if it can be proved they have attacked and harmed a human being.
So why is the standard different for bears? Admittedly it is frightening and a very great nuisance if a bear tears apart your car or your kitchen, but despite all the bears we've had in the Gibsons area lately, none have attacked a human being. Meanwhile, dogs do attack humans, sometimes viciously.
Black bears are vilified with little cause. They are so unaggressive that a small dog can usually chase them away. When mother bears are threatened, they send their cub up a tree and - if they can - they follow it.
Nobody knows why there are suddenly so many bears in town. Is there a bear population boom, or are they being forced out of remote areas due to habitat damage or a lack of food? Nobody is studying the problem - we're just reacting.
Mama bear and her cub were our neighbours in Area E. They ambled through our yard frequently - not for garbage or compost, but to eat dandelions and blackberry shoots and grubs. They were less of a nuisance than neighbourhood dogs and cats, but they had no human to defend them.
We are killing bears simply for causing a nuisance or seeming scary or being in the wrong place. That isn't good enough. Surely we humans are smart enough to find ways to respect and live alongside bears.
Donna McMahon
Clint Budd, Elphinstone
