Bear Hunting Reduces Conflicts, Connecticut’s Numbers Show Why It Matters
Before the 1980’s, it was acknowledged by wildlife professionals that hunting animals made them less likely to associate with humans. In particular, hunting bears made bears, or in general, bear populations, less likely to tolerate human contact. This reduced the number of human/bear conflicts.
It is not difficult to follow the logic. Hunted bears become fearful of humans. Fearful bears recognize humans as dangerous and avoid them.
In the Federal Register, VOL. 40, NO. 145, Monday, July 28, 1975, p. 31735, the director of the Federal Fish and Wildlife Service stated the (then) obvious truth:
By contrast, a regulated sport hunt, will create an adequate fear of man. In a seasonal sport hunt, bears are exposed to relatively large numbers of humans for a limited period of time, and so learn to avoid all areas where humans are encountered. It is this avoidance of man which will reduce numerous depredations and threats to human safety.
The above statement was attributed to Lynn A. Greenwalt, Director of the Fish and Wildlife Service, dated July 23, 1975. The statement was not controversial at the time. Such effects had been established by hundreds of generations of hunters. When humans hunt animals, the animals learn to avoid humans. Animals which are not hunted have little fear of humans. When hunted, those animals which do not fear humans are quickly removed from the population.
At least one academic has claimed no peer reviewed papers exist showing hunting bears reduces human/bear conflicts more than the reduction which would be expected by the reduction in the bear population. It sounds plausible at first glance. If the bear population is reduced by 10%, human/bear conflicts would be reduced by 10%. A recent paper published by the Department of Energy and Environmental Protection in Connecticut (DEEP), in March of 2026 “The State of the Bears, A Briefing on Bears in Connecticut” shows the numbers of conflicts and the number of conflicts per 100 bears.
The number of human bear conflicts in nearby states where hunting is allowed is a small fraction of the human bear conflicts in Connecticut, where bear hunting is not allowed. The number of human/bear conflicts where hunting is allowed is a small fraction of the expected conflicts if hunting only reduced conflicts by the proportion of the bear population which was harvested.
Hunting bears appears to reduce the number of human/bear conflicts many times greater than the mere percentage of bears harvested. The numbers show in this chart created by DEEP. The numbers show home invasions per 100 bears by state from 2012 through 2024. The contrast between Connecticut and other states is remarkable.
The chart below compares the number of human/bear conflicts per 100 bears for the Northeast states. Most of the data is from the DEEP report mentioned. Data for Maryland and Pennsylvania were collected separately from internet sources.
A paper published in the Journal of Applied Ecology showed human/bear conflicts were reduced far in excess of mere population reduction of bears when New Jersey instituted legal bear hunts. When the hunts were halted, the human/bear conflicts increased. As can be seen in the chart where states are compared, New Jersey has the second highest level of human/bear conflicts of those shown.
In an official New Jersey government report published in 2022, there is clear correlation between bear hunting and lower human/bear conflicts. When the bear population was reduced 13% from 2016 to 2017, the number of human bear conflicts was reduced by 50% from 2016 to 2018.
The changes to the bear hunting season structure implemented by Council in 2015 allowed harvest rates to increase, resulting in a population reduction in 2016 and 2017 (Figure 2). This decrease in bear population resulted in a 50% decrease in complaints between 2016 and 2018 (Figure 2).
The New Jersey numbers appear to show a much greater reduction of complaints than estimated by population reduction alone.
Four mechanisms can explain how hunting reduces human/bear conflicts:
- The population of bears is reduced. Fewer bears, fewer human/bear conflicts.
- Problem bears are selectively removed. They have less fear of humans and are harvested more easily.
- Bears learn to fear humans. When a bear is unsuccessfully hunted, they learn to associate humans with danger. Bears have powerful noses. When a bear is harvested, the association of human scent left at the scene with bear remains creates a strong association with human scent and danger. When dogs are used to hunt bears, many bears are not harvested when treed. These bears learn to associate dogs and humans with danger. Bears which fear humans avoid humans, reducing human/bear conflicts.
- Bold bears are removed from the bear population gene pool. Famous bear researcher Stephen Herrero in Fatal Attacks by Black Bears, speculated:
Part of the answer may be that bears that try to or do prey on people are usually killed and removed from a population’s gene pool, decreasing the frequency of any genes the individual might have had that could contribute to predatory attacks on people.
Highly respected wildlife biologist Valerius Geist explained the details of how human hunters engender respect:
There is a great Public Good that hunters give to society at large, which I may call here the “freedom of the woods.” It is based on the fact that an armed person acts quite differently from an unarmed one when meeting predators, and we have reason to believe that the predators notice the difference via sight, sound and smell. A confident person is quite intimidating to carnivores, while a fearful one merely encourages predators to confront people.
To hunters and others who have observed the behavior of animals when they are hunted, the common understanding of millennia is simple: animals hunted by humans will avoid humans. Bears can and do learn. They learn to avoid humans when humans are dangerous. When not hunted, they learn humans are no threat and need not be feared or respected. When humans are not feared or respected, human/bear conflicts increase.
About Dean Weingarten:
Dean Weingarten has been a peace officer, a military officer, was on the University of Wisconsin Pistol Team for four years, and was first certified to teach firearms safety in 1973. He taught the Arizona concealed carry course for fifteen years until the goal of Constitutional Carry was attained. He has degrees in meteorology and mining engineering, and retired from the Department of Defense after a 30 year career in Army Research, Development, Testing, and Evaluation.
