Arguments Against Animal Feeder

By enacting the ordinance, it will be placing a cost on their citizens, and forcing them to do extra work to enjoy their bird watching hobby. There are some more effective ways that could help repel the bear (if it was a black bear). For instance, the citizens could invest in noisemakers or an electrical fence. These suggests are given, because they provide a negative feedback which is more effective in correcting the bear (Bear deters for your property, 2016). The suggestions of taking the bird feeders down or investing in bear-proof containers just are not that effective ideas to protect against the bears desire to feed on the black oil sunflower seeds and suet. Polly Hessing (wildlife biologist) states, "They’ll tear down an empty feeder, investigate empty boxes and empty pet food bowls. They are nosing around, looking for something to eat, and if they don’t find food, they’ll still look around. If they do find food, it’s a reward and really increases the chances they’ll return." Therefore, the bear-proof containers will just be looked at as a fun challenge. Instead of taking the bird feeders down every night the council may choose to decide to have all bird feeders come down during the summer months, since at that
However, there may be an over population of the bear that could be creating a food shortage in that area for the bear. Bear feeding locations could be designated, or a certain number of hunting permits could be granted to control the bear population. Therefore, by this thought I am choosing to solve this issue by the Harm Principle (Van Camp, 2014). I believe that this will allow the bird feeders to keep their feeders, not harm the bird population, and keep the bear population from taking over. This plan will work if followed as directed. I cannot produce an idea that would provide the community or the town a with financial free