Trails closed for grizzly bears

[artie]

Went to Kananaskis country this morning for hiking and fishing. Got to the Chester Lake parking area to do head wall lakes but all trails in that area are closed for grizzly activity. So decided to go to Elbow lake where the trail is not closed but signs warning of bears in the area. Lots of fresh bear scat just up the trail. Had the dog with me so decided to go elsewhere. Saw a blackish colour grizzly near King Creek. Went to the Delta hotel and the Kananaskis centre and had two small breakfasts that cost us $50.00 plus tip. Never go back there as it is out of my budget. Most of the bike trails around the hotel and golf course are closed because of bear activity. So went home to cut the grass. A good day to stay in the city.

[Jimmyjjj]

Man that sucks. I feel bad for you. I hope you at least like the smell of fresh cut grass?

[pickrel pat]

"trails closed for grizzly bears" Probably too much human activity, so they dont want grizzlys walking on them.

[Jiminy]

Originally Posted by artie

bike trails around the hotel and golf course are closed because of bear activity. So went home to cut the grass. A good day to stay in the city.

Good grief you really need to explore Kananaskis a little better. There are a ton of trails and hikes that are always open, even when the village area trails are closed because of bears. Those trails are often closed. Just down the road is boundary ranch. The restaurant there has cheap food. There's countless of trails that you missed. Canyon trail hike. Troll falls, etc. The Peter Lougheed info center is great for kids. To say the city is preferable to ANY day in Kananaskis is insane. Breakfast at Dennys is over $35 for a family. If that's out if your budget pack a lunch. You really need to learn how to enjoy the outdoors more.

[TreeGuy]

Sorry to hear the day didn't work out for you, Artie.

Lot's of trail closures this year with the late spring and deep snow. Either the powers that be are more proactive than ever or the grizzly population is abundant and thriving.

My personal view is that it's less about protecting humans than it is about protecting weak politicians and a flawed study. Heaven forbid that the general public begins to notice loads of bears out there and starts asking questions........

[artie]

Originally Posted by Jiminy

Good grief you really need to explore Kananaskis a little better. There are a ton of trails and hikes that are always open, even when the village area trails are closed because of bears. Those trails are often closed. Just down the road is boundary ranch. The restaurant there has cheap food. There's countless of trails that you missed. Canyon trail hike. Troll falls, etc. The Peter Lougheed info center is great for kids. To say the city is preferable to ANY day in Kananaskis is insane. Breakfast at Dennys is over $35 for a family. If that's out if your budget pack a lunch. You really need to learn how to enjoy the outdoors more.

thanks for all the good info. I have often drove by the boundary ranch and wondered what it was like in there. The sign said it was closed yesderday morning when we drove by. Any one else try the food there and was it good?

[Headwaters]

So far this year I've seen a mother with 2 last-year cobs near Mist Creek, a mother with one last-year cub near north end of Little Highwood Pass, a mother with 3 young-of-year near Mt Kidd campground, a single male in the same area, and photos in the paper of a mother with 2 cobs near Barrier Lake. The Hwy 40 corridor through Kananaskis country appears to be a reproductive engine for the regional grizzly population. Surprising, given the volume and speed of highway traffic. But it likely helps explain this buffalo berry season's trail closures.
None of this calls into question the province-wide DNA-based population estimate which seems to generate a lot of opinions from people who have never read it. It's the most unbiased and comprehensive study ever done on grizzly numbers. I think the point a lot of people are missing is that it's the ONLY study ever done on bear numbers - everything previous was just an estimate. I suspect that the 750 or so grizzlies in Alberta is more than we've ever had since the early 20th century. There is no question in my mind that there are more grizzlies than in the 1970s and 1980s, but that doesn't make the current population estimate inaccurate. It makes the old ones inaccurate.

[walking buffalo]

A serious issue with the listing of AB Grizzly bears as threatened is the expansive road and trail closures being planned by the Gov. You'll see this info show up soon, unfortunately it will be after the decisions have been made.

The sooner the bear's population is thoroughly counted, then properly recognized as healthy and stable, the better it will be for all people who enjoy the outdoors.

Originally Posted by Headwaters

So far this year I've seen a mother with 2 last-year cobs near Mist Creek, a mother with one last-year cub near north end of Little Highwood Pass, a mother with 3 young-of-year near Mt Kidd campground, a single male in the same area, and photos in the paper of a mother with 2 cobs near Barrier Lake. The Hwy 40 corridor through Kananaskis country appears to be a reproductive engine for the regional grizzly population. Surprising, given the volume and speed of highway traffic. But it likely helps explain this buffalo berry season's trail closures.
None of this calls into question the province-wide DNA-based population estimate which seems to generate a lot of opinions from people who have never read it. It's the most unbiased and comprehensive study ever done on grizzly numbers. I think the point a lot of people are missing is that it's the ONLY study ever done on bear numbers - everything previous was just an estimate. I suspect that the 750 or so grizzlies in Alberta is more than we've ever had since the early 20th century. There is no question in my mind that there are more grizzlies than in the 1970s and 1980s, but that doesn't make the current population estimate inaccurate. It makes the old ones inaccurate.

Headwaters,

It doesn't sound like you actually read the AB Grizzly Bear Survey. Pretty hard to miss that every area DNA sampled was concluded with an Estimated population. Several Bear Management Units were never sampled, just estimated based on guestimates of bear habitat and road densities. There have been several other Grizzly bear population studies done in parts of Alberta previous to the cencus, including DNA sampling. These studies DNA identified more individual Grizzly Bears that the cencus. The 2010 AB Grizzly Bear Cencus is incomplete, biased, and innacurate.


The Ab Gov is not interested in knowing the true number of Grizzly Bears in Alberta.

By the way, Montana is about to apply for having the Grizzly Bear REMOVED from threatened status in the Norther Continental Diveide Ecosytem, which includes part of Southern Alberta's Grizzly bear population. There are now 941 confirmed individual Adult Grizzly Bears in this area. This follows the de-listing of the Yellowstone Grizzly Bear population from threatened status in 2007.

Montana knows how to do a DNA study. It puts Alberta's effort to shame, makes them look like amatuers.

[dewalt18]

A good day to stay in the city? such a day never has nor ever will exist. just my opinion.

[Headwaters]

Walking buffalo, there will never be a grizzly bear population number that isn't an estimate. The Alberta and Montana studies both produced a minimum count, based on unique individual animals identified through the DNA, but they both also base their conclusions on an estimate based, essentially, on mark-recapture statistical modeling.

One thing is certain: the old, much-bandied about alberta population number of 1000 grizzlies had absolutely no science or counting of any kind behind it. It was a political number. Any number derived by anecdotal sightings accumulated at different times in different places by different individuals with widely varying skills will be even worse and will simply be another political number. Neither truth nor conservation are served well by political numbers.

If someone wants to fund another, more intensive DNA hair-snagging study, maybe we can find a population estimate you like. But it will still be an estimate. You simply cannot find every bear that is out there when they are always on the move and most don't want to be found. IMO, the current Alberta population estimate is as good as science and the money available to support science will ever produce. Nobody is going to find 250 more grizzlies even if they are there to be found. Especially if they aren't.

[Kingfisher]

A quick stop at the Barrier Lake information center would have saved you plenty of gas and time. They have daily reports on bear closures on all trails throughout Kananaskis Country. Or even check on their website. http://www.tpr.alberta.ca/parks/kana...es_barrier.asp

Bear in mind?
http://www.tpr.alberta.ca/parks/kana...mart_Ebook.pdf


Rob

[fat cat]

Told you all in an earlier thread, that this was going to happen. First start taking away black bear hunting in areas, then next is hiking, fishing,camping. People better get onboard soon or we will soon be not even able to cut our grass.