
‘Barbaric': wildlife advocates criticize Florida bear hunt proposal
Then came a controversial new law that allows anybody to shoot and kill any bear perceived as a threat without fear of consequences, which animal advocates say could be bad news for any creature that inadvertently wanders into a back yard.
Now wildlife officials have advanced plans for a three-week hunt in December that could see the slaughter of almost 200 black bears, close to 5% of Florida's estimated total.
It is a proposal opponents are calling a trophy hunt based on bloodlust, not science, that would reintroduce long outlawed 'barbaric' practices including bear baiting, chasing and cornering the animals with packs of dogs, and killing them with bows and arrows.
'It's open season. It's just 'let's use everything we have against the bears now'. It completely blows my mind,' said Adam Sugalski, founder of Bear Defenders, a member of an alliance of wildlife and environmental groups urging members of the Florida fish and wildlife conservation commission (FWC) to reverse course ahead of a final decision in August.
'They already pulled every protection. You can't get in trouble for killing a bear, it seems, and now there's this unregulated hunt. I just kind of feel for these poor souls in the woods with no protections any more, and then they're about to release the hounds on them.'
For Sugalski, and other groups including the Sierra Club's Florida chapter, the Animal Legal Defense Fund, and Defenders of Wildlife, there is more to the story than just emotion. The FWC, they say, is using outdated and incomplete data of bear numbers to justify the hunt and falsely insist the killings are necessary as a conservation measure.
By the commission's own admission, the most recent tally of Florida's black bear population – an estimated 4,050 – took place more than 10 years ago, and the FWC has never put a cap on numbers beyond noting how many bears would be too many for available habitat and other resources.
'This is a rich man's hunt. It's not science-based conservation,' said James Scott, former chapter chair of the Sierra Club of Florida and campaign coordinator of the advocacy group Speak Up Wekiva.
'If we got to where bear populations were clearly exceeding the carrying capacity of any given unit, with the negative effects that come with that, that would be justification, a science-based, conservation-based approach to hunting. But they haven't got anywhere near justifying that.
'Instead you have some characters who have worked really hard framing hunting as a conservation tool, and some folks who have ingratiated themselves with commissioners. You also have a commission appointed by the governor, and most of them are land developers.
'So there are powerful interests that have a financial interest in limiting the growth of the bear population.'
Scott noted that the FWC's existing bear management plan, updated in 2019, did not propose the reintroduction of hunting, and stated that bears were still listed as a threatened species in Florida as recently as June 2012.
'Fortunately, the Florida black bear population is growing. We have more bears now than at any time in the last 100 years, but our conservation efforts are not finished,' the document said.
Also fresh in campaigners' memories is the debacle of the most recent Florida hunt in 2015, a planned week-long event that ended prematurely when more than 3,200 hunters descended on the state and massacred almost 10% of the state's bear population within two days.
The eventual death toll of 305 included mothers, cubs and numerous bears below 100lbs, all of which were supposed to be off-limits. Some hunters were found to have illegally baited their targets, and 112 bears were killed in 24 hours in a region of the Florida panhandle where the cap was set at 40.
FWC abandoned plans for hunts in subsequent years, until the proposal came up again this year for a 23-day event in December. The hunt, which was given preliminary approval in a 4-1 vote at a commission meeting earlier this month, seeks to 'remove' 187 bears across four zones, and hunters will pay $300 for a permit ($100 for a Florida resident), plus a $5 application fee.
A petition launched by Bear Defenders to oppose it has more than 40,000 signatures.
Commission officials point to a frequently answered questions page on the FWC website that says why a new bear hunt is required.
'There is a finite amount of suitable bear habitat, so if bear populations continue to grow unchecked, at some point bears will have to start living in more marginal habitats, like neighborhoods,' it said.
'Regulated bear hunting adds a positive value on bears by providing people with additional economic and recreational opportunities. Hunters can use the meat, pelt, fat and other parts of the bear they harvest. In contrast to all other current management action options, regulated hunting generates funding for conservation.'
Scott said that the meat argument in particular is spurious. 'That's bullshit. Nobody eats bear meat, it's greasy and not a fun meat to eat,' he said.
'You've got to think about the money and power of the folks that want to hunt bears. They're trophy hunters, the kind of guys that can afford to go to Africa and mow down cheetahs and giraffes and lions and stuff. Let's not kid ourselves here, these guys just want to have a head on a wall.'
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Independent
8 hours ago
- The Independent
Hulk Hogan's sex tape lawsuit had a lasting effect on cases involving celebrity privacy
Famous for his fearless bravado as a pro wrestler, Hulk Hogan won one of his most notable victories in a Florida courtroom by emphasizing his humiliation and emotional distress after a news and gossip website published a video of Hogan having sex with a friend's wife. A 2016 civil trial that pitted the First Amendment against the privacy rights of celebrities ended with a jury awarding Hogan a whopping $140 million in his lawsuit against Gawker Media. Though both parties later settled on $31 million to avoid protracted appeals, the case put Gawker out of business. It also ensured Hogan, who died Thursday at age 71, and his legal team would have a long-term impact on media law. The case showed that, in certain circumstances, celebrities could persuade a jury that their right to privacy outweighs the freedom of the press — even when the published material was true. The case put media outlets on notice that 'the public doesn't necessarily like the press,' especially when reporting intrudes into intimate details of even public figures' private lives, said Samantha Barbas, a University of Iowa law professor who writes about press freedoms and First Amendment issues. She said it also emboldened celebrities, politicians and others in the public spotlight to be more aggressive in suing over unflattering news coverage — as seen recently in President Donald Trump 's pursuit of court cases against the Wall Street Journal, ABC and CBS. 'I think the lasting effect of the Hulk Hogan case was it really started this trend of libel and privacy lawsuits being weaponized to kind of take down these media organizations,' Barbas said. Hogan wept hearing the verdict in a case that was 'real personal' Hogan, whose given name was Terry Bollea, sued Gawker for invading his privacy after the website in 2012 posted an edited version of a video of Hogan having sex with the wife of his then-best friend, Florida-based radio DJ Bubba The Love Sponge Clem. Clem gave his blessing to the coupling and recorded the video that was later leaked to Gawker. Hogan insisted he was unaware the intimate encounter was being filmed. The former WWE champion testified that he was 'completely humiliated' when the sex video became public. Hogan's lead trial attorney, Ken Turkel, recalled Thursday how his muscular, mustachioed client cried in court as the jury verdict was read. 'To him the privacy part of it was integral. It was important,' Turkel said. 'Eight-year-old kids were googling 'Hulk Hogan' and 'Wrestlemania,' and they were getting a sex tape. That was hurtful to him in a real personal way.' The three-week trial was closely followed far beyond the courtroom in St. Petersburg, Florida, as thousands of wrestling fans, First Amendment watchers and others stayed glued to their screens as the trial was streamed live online. Salacious details emerged about Hogan's sex life as jurors and spectators viewed. images of him in thong underwear. Other testimony focused on how New York-based Gawker practiced journalism differently than traditional news outlets. And Hogan explained to the jury about the difference between his wrestling persona and his private life. Jury rejected that First Amendment protected publishing sex tape The jury ultimately rejected arguments by Gawker's attorneys that Hogan's sex tape was newsworthy and that publishing it, no matter how distasteful, was protected speech under the First Amendment. 'Now more people, including judges, understand that it's possible to sue someone for revealing something truthful, as long as that something is deeply personal and its publication is highly offensive,' said Amy Gajda, a Brooklyn Law School professor who followed and wrote about the case against Gawker. News outlets still have broad legal protection for publishing information about public figures, even things that would generally be considered private, Gajda said 'As long as there is news value in what is published and the media can argue that effectively, they can get a privacy case dismissed very early on,' she said. ___ Bynum reported from Savannah, Georgia.


The Independent
12 hours ago
- The Independent
Where to watch the ‘One Night in Idaho' documentary
On 13 November 2022, the tight-knit community in the Idaho town of Moscow were left reeling after the murder of four college students. University of Idaho undergraduates Kaylee Goncalves, 21, Madison Mogen, 21, Xana Kernodle, 20, and Ethan Chapin, 20, were stabbed to death at their home in the middle of the night. Their two other roommates, Bethany Funke and Dylan Mortensen, were the only people in the house to survive. After a seven-week manhunt, the now-convicted mass murderer Bryan Kohberger was found at his family home. For three years, he professed his innocence before switching his plea to avoid the death penalty, just weeks before he was due to stand trial. The police revealed little about the investigation owing to a gag order in place, which was lifted by the judge ahead of the sentencing. But many questions remain unanswered, including the motivations behind his attack. In a bid to put the victims and their families front and centre, directors Liz Garbus and Matthew Galkin have made a four-part documentary titled One Night in Idaho: The College Murders. It follows the family and friends of the victims in the aftermath and explores the impact of social media sleuths during high-profile cases. Here's everything you need to know about it, including where to stream. What is 'One Night in Idaho: The College Murders' about? The four-part series recounts the night of the murders, where four students were stabbed in their off-campus house in the quiet town of Moscow. Exploring the aftermath of the killings, it features the grieving family, friends and wider community. The documentary features exclusive interviews with Stacey and Jim Chapin (parents of Ethan Chapin), and Karen and Scott Laramie (parents of Madison Mogen), none of whom have previously been interviewed about the murders. The directors of the series – Liz Garbus and Matthew Galkin – wanted to shake up the true crime format by putting the victims at the forefront, rather than the suspect. Across four episodes, One Night in Idaho also explores the impact and damage of internet sleuths who became obsessed with the case, some of whom attempted to sneak into the University's classes and dorms, and others even into the roped-off house. Where to watch 'One Night in Idaho' in the UK All four episodes of One Night in Idaho are now available on Amazon Prime Video. If you're not already a member, you can sign up for a 30-day free trial. After that, a Prime membership costs £8.99 per month or £95 per year. Alternatively, you can subscribe to Prime Video alone for £5.99 per month.


The Independent
12 hours ago
- The Independent
Massive spike in threats against Obama after Trump team claims he committed ‘treason'
Threats made online against former president Barack Obama spiked over the weekend after Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard accused him of a years-long coup attempt against President Donald Trump. Gabbard has claimed Obama and his top officials ran a 'treasonous conspiracy' by insinuating they manufactured an investigation into Russia's interference in the 2016 election to undermine Trump's first election. Hours after she made the claim, on July 18, violent rhetoric about Obama surged on platforms such as Truth Social, Telegram, and Gab, with some calling for his arrest, imprisonment, and execution. That rhetoric was intensified after the president posted an artificial intelligence-generated video of Obama being arrested and continued to re-post Gabbard's claims throughout the weekend. By July 19, threatening comments targeting Obama rose from three to 56 – a more than 1,700 percent increase, according to the Global Project Against Hate and Extremism. Truth Social users posted rhetoric calling for a 'firing squad,' a 'public hanging,' and 'streaming' his execution live – all while decrying Obama for the alleged treason. One user called for Obama's execution by using memes of a guillotine, electric shock chair, and public hanging platform. For years, Trump has blamed Obama and other Democrats for abusing power to facilitate investigations or indictments into himself. Since taking back the White House, Trump has promised to conduct a campaign of retribution against those he believes have targeted him. The documents Gabbard referred to as evidence of Obama's meddling show that the Obama administration wanted a review of the allegations against Russia before leaving office and pressured intelligence agencies to work quickly. spokesperson for Obama denied Gabbard's allegations, calling them 'bizarre,' 'ridiculous,' and 'a weak attempt at distraction. The Independent has asked the White House for comment. The Global Project Against Hate and Extremism said similar violent rhetoric increased on Gab, a platform known for platforming right-wing extremists. Between July 17 and July 20, comments targeted Obama as treasonous and deserving punishment rose from nine to 48, a more than 400 percent increase. A review of targeted comments made on Telegram in the same timeline revealed that threats against Obama rose from zero to 12. A White House spokesperson told Newsweek that, "President Trump and the entire administration strongly condemn all forms of violence. The Trump administration also believes in accountability and that individuals who participate in criminal activity should be held to the fullest extent of the law.