Protection of Radio-Collared Bears May Warn and Prevent Significant Mine Damage~1

These are my most recent submissions to legislators in Minnesota. My first submissions seemed to fall on deaf ears!

October 21, 2010

Dear Legislative Representative,

Request: Protection of radio-collared bears in St. Louis County, Minnesota.

Obviously, from the comments 3 weeks ago made by Minnesota DNR Commissioner, he has continued to ignore important research and all attempts by the Wildlife Research Institute to reduce bear-human conflict and ensure public safety (1) and is “truly in the dark” about Rogers’ research and educational programs presented regularly to wildlife professionals and the public. This is a recent statement made by the Deputy from the MN DNR Fish and Wildlife Department,  "we will be looking at his permit to see if there is a need for additional restrictions, to limit the potential impact on hunters and the local community.'' (2) Clearly it demonstrates the DNR has little interest in the needs and regard of the public and enjoys using verbal intimidation and threats targeting Dr. Rogers in the media. It appears to be a consistent pattern of behavior of the Minnesota DNR to purposely incite negative comments and further discredit the researcher. Coming from a researcher’s perspective, it is very apparent the DNR’s motives have nothing to do with “protecting the rights of hunting” but restricting “animal research” and promoting the interests of mining. 

Interestingly, in the Minneapolis Star Tribune article, “The bear whisperer: Scholar plans to expand educational empire”, dated October 16 2010, one commenter (at about #87 username: thewildtruth) provided proof of what sounds like impropriety when he stated, {he sits on two company boards and said, “If the MNDNR fails to strip Rogers of his permit, the DNR WILL restrict the number of bears that he can collar. Hopefully, to six (6) or less. Of course, we can always set up our own “research facility” and lay claim to the same bears that Rogers’ allegedly studies….and then pursue legal action to bar him from “socializing” with those bears, as it will interfere with our studies. If you do not think that will happen, it has already started.} (2) Of course, anyone that has this verbosity to say this – must have open ended “license” with the Department of Natural Resources which suggests something else…that is NOT LEGAL!  Since when does a company tell state government what to do?  Considering that there have been issues before with Governor Pawlenty’s supervision of the Minnesota DNR and who is now running for federal office…as a citizen of the United States, this has me very concerned. It should also concern anyone that is a voter or reading this and believes health and security of the people of this land is of the utmost importance.

So what is the motive the negative statements from state officials and what does it have to do with bears? What this has to do with are the monetary and exploratory interests of mining companies and secondary interests in the same general area where the research study takes place (see below). It also explains why there was obvious “forced” support from the state and so many negative Internet comments about Bear Head State Park winning the 100,000 grant. The real issue is these mines have a poor history of meeting "pollutant and emissions standards” and can disperse toxic particulates, metal dust and “odor” emissions that can cause acute or sub-acute poisoning to people and wildlife that can alter gene expression. Such gene changes have been demonstrated in humans and animals and can result in illness or cognitive deficiencies that may precipitate, at least in animals, disruptive or displays of “nuisance-type”.  Dr. Rogers’ research includes bio-monitoring and close observations of bear behavior which poses a significant “matter of concern” to mining managers. Of course with his experience he will be the first to identify any health or environmental “issues” from pollutants and emissions and also, I am sure, be the first to report it.  For the area in question, wildlife that could be affected will include federally protected animals including birds of prey, wolves, lynx, and other species including pets like “hunting dogs” and amphibians and not just research and non-research bears.  Past experience already has shown federal intervention where the lynx were concerned and other situations demonstrate poor handling of animals (ie. Solo Bear) and therefore, does not promote assurances against future abuses of the rights of the exposed that become ill or cognitively deficient from pollution emissions that lead to disruptive or displays of “nuisance-type” behavior.

Ethically and legally it is not right that Dr. Rogers’ valuable research and bears should suffer because of the political him-hawing going on at the state level. These radio-collared research bears need protection because state officials are proving they lack regulatory control and are allowing too much “license” to mining interests in St. Louis County, Minnesota. What really underlies the need for protection of these bears has nothing to do with “protecting hunting rights”, nor is it just about the bears and the hazard posed by them because they are wild animals. From past events, it is apparent the interests of the mining industry and political maneuverings by state leadership take precendence over protecting the health and welfare of the people and the environment in St. Louis County. In Minnesota it seems the DNR enjoys playing hardball with a bunch of bears while jeopardizing important scientific research and people's health, security and safety just to appease the interests of the mining corporations. That is a shame!

Thanks for your consideration and your time.

Kimberly Kramer

Health Educator and Researcher

4000 E Bristol Street

.

Elkhart IN 46514

contact@heirs-online.com

PS A copy of this will be sent by email and hardcopy.

(All research support is open access at http://www.heirs-online.com/ and www.heirsresearch.blogspot.com and citation library at http://www.citeulike.org/user/HEIRS

Important tags include mining, metals, neuroinflammation, animal health and others.

The sources used and cited in this document include:

1.      Wildlife Research Institute 2008 Research Plan and Public Safety Assessment. http://www.bearstudy.org/website/images/stories/papers/WRI-Response-to-DNR-April-2008-Part-I.pdf 

2.      The Bear Whisperer: Scholar Plans on Expanding Educational Empire. Minneapolis Star Tribune. October 16, 2010 http://www.startribune.com/local/105081984.html

3.      Ely Lease Sale Map – Information from Minnesota DNR http://www.sosbluewaters.org/Ely_Lease_Sale_Map.htm