The Florida Senate
BILL ANALYSIS AND FISCAL IMPACT STATEMENT
(This document is based on the provisions contained in the legislation as of the latest date listed below.)
Prepared By: The Professional Staff of the Committee on Environment and Natural Resources
BILL: SB 632
INTRODUCER: Senator Simon
SUBJECT: Taking of Bears
DATE: January 9, 2024
ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR REFERENCE ACTION
1. Carroll Rogers EN Pre-meeting
2. AEG
3. FP
I. Summary:
SB 632 may be cited as the “Self Defense Act.” The bill allows the use of lethal force to take a
bear without a permit or other required authorization if a person feels threatened and believes
that using such force is necessary to protect himself or herself on his or her private property. The
use of lethal force to take a bear for this reason does not apply if a person intentionally lures a
bear with food or attractants for an illegal purpose or provokes a bear to incite an attack.
The bill provides that a person who uses lethal force to take a bear for this reason:
Is not subject to any administrative, civil, or criminal penalties.
Must notify the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) within 24 hours after the
taking.
May not possess, sell, or dispose of the taken bear or its parts.
The bill provides that any bear taken under this section must be disposed of by FWC. It also
authorizes FWC to adopt rules to implement this section.
II. Present Situation:
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission
The Florida Constitution grants the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC)
the authority to exercise the regulatory and executive powers of the state with respect to wild
animal life, freshwater aquatic life, and marine life.
1
The Legislature is constitutionally prohibited from adopting statutes in conflict with rules
adopted by FWC to execute its authority. However, all licensing fees for taking wild animal life,
1
FLA. CONST. art. IV, s. 9.
REVISED: BILL: SB 632 Page 2
freshwater aquatic life, and marine life and all penalties for violating FWC’s regulations are
prescribed in statute. The Legislature may also enact laws to aid FWC that are consistent with its
constitutionally-conferred powers, except for special laws or general laws of local application
relating to hunting and fishing.
2
Florida Black Bear
The Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) is the only bear that lives in Florida.
3
The
Florida black bear is a subspecies of the American black bear (U. americanus) that historically
ranged throughout Florida, southern Georgia, and southern Alabama.
4
Loss of habitat,
persecution, and unregulated hunting prior to the mid-20
th
century caused a severe reduction in
the Florida black bear population and range, with an estimated 300-500 bears remaining in the
1970s.
5
As a result of the population decline, FWC classified the Florida black bear as a
threatened species in 1974.
6
After more than 35 years of strict statewide protection and
management, FWC conducted an evaluation and determined that the Florida black bear was no
longer facing a high risk of extinction and removed the Florida black bear from the state
threatened list in 2012.
7
Florida black bears are an ecologically significant species. They are recognized as an umbrella
species, because conserving large areas of diverse habitat for bears also conserves habitat for
many other species under the “umbrella” of bear conservation.
8
Florida black bears have been an
instrumental species in conserving natural habitats and the presence of bears has been cited as
justification for land protection efforts in this state. Florida black bears also have a significant
impact on plant distribution through seed dispersal and they play an important ecological role as
scavengers.
9
Population
Today, the Florida black bear population is comprised of seven distinct sub-populations within
the state, including Apalachicola, Eglin, Osceola, Ocala/St. Johns, Chassahowitzka,
Highland/Glades, and Big Cypress.
10
During 2014 and 2015, FWC conducted a statewide
population assessment for Florida black bears and found that bear populations increased
substantially in certain sub-populations and increased by approximately 53 percent statewide.
11
Although the Florida black bear population is growing and its occupied range is expanding, the
2
Id.
3
FWC, Bear Facts, https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/bear/facts/ (last visited Jan. 4, 2024).
4
FWC, Florida Black Bear Management Plan (2019), 1, available at https://myfwc.com/media/21923/2019-florida-black-
bear-management-plan.pdf.
5
Id. at 16-17; FWC, Black Bear Research, https://myfwc.com/research/wildlife/terrestrial-mammals/bear/ (last visited Jan. 5,
2024).
6
FWC, Black Bear Research.
7
FWC, Florida Black Bear Management Plan at 25.
8
Id. at 8.
9
Id.
10
Id. at xix.
11
FWC, Bears by the Numbers, https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/bear/numbers/ (last visited Jan. 5, 2024). BILL: SB 632 Page 3
populations still only occur in seven relatively disconnected sub-groups across the state.
12
The
current state-wide population estimate is 4,050 Florida black bears.
13
For management purposes, each sub-population is separated into a bear management unit
(BMU). A BMU is a geographic location bounded by county or state borders containing one of
the seven Florida black bear sub-populations.
14
The goal of establishing BMUs is to provide a
defined area within which FWC can have a community-focused effort to effectively manage and
conserve Florida black bears.
15
FWC manages each BMU to meet specific goals related to bear
sub-population size, potential habitat, human-bear conflicts, and potential threats, such as
vehicle-related mortality.
16
Florida black bears range from
the northeast to the southwest
of the state.
17
Some of the sub-
populations are small and are
impacted by habitat
fragmentation, which restricts
movement and genetic
interchange among sub-
populations.
18
The Florida black bear is
adaptable and inhabits a variety
of forested habitats but thrives
in habitats that provide an
annual supply of seasonally
available foods, secluded areas
for denning, and some degree
of protection from humans.
19
The optimal bear habitat in
Florida is a thoroughly
interspersed mixture of
flatwoods, swamps, scrub oak
ridges, bayheads, and hammock
habitats.
20
Self-sustaining and
12
FWC, Black Bear Research.
13
FWC, Bear Facts.
14
FWC, Bear Management Units, https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/bear/bear-management-units/ (last visited Jan.
5, 2024).
15
Id.
16
FWC, Florida Black Bear Management Plan at 28-29.
17
FWC, Current Florida Black Bear Range, https://myfwc.com/research/wildlife/terrestrial-mammals/bear/current/ (last
visited Jan. 5, 2024).
18
FWC, Florida Black Bear Management Plan at 45-46; FWC, Current Florida Black Bear Range,
https://myfwc.com/research/wildlife/terrestrial-mammals/bear/current/ (last visited Jan. 5, 2024) (Map: black bear range
2020).
19
Id. at 8.
20
Id. BILL: SB 632 Page 4
secure sub-populations of bears are typically found within large, contiguous forested tracts that
contain understories of mast
21
or berry-producing shrubs or trees.
22
Human-Bear Conflicts
As the populations of both humans and bears have expanded in the state, there has been an
increase in human-bear conflicts, particularly in residential areas, where bears often search for
food.
23
Between 2009 and 2018, FWC euthanized an average of 38 bears annually due to public
safety risks.
24
FWC found that a majority of the mortalities were associated with bears seeking
out unsecured garbage or other human-provided food sources.
25
In 2022, FWC received 5,907
calls relating to bears,
26
of which 36 percent were considered core complaints.
27
Bears in close proximity to humans create a range of issues from perceived threats (e.g., seeing a
bear on the edge of the forest) to potential threats to public safety (i.e., food conditioned and
habituated bears). FWC has attempted to capture and relocate bears; however, this practice was
ineffective as there are few remote places where relocated bears will not encounter humans and
that are not already occupied by other bears.
28
Additionally, FWC found that 70 percent of
relocated bears do not remain in the area to which they are moved, and over half repeat conflict
behavior even after they are moved. As a result, FWC’s policies place an emphasis on the
public’s personal responsibility for eliminating attractants and thereby reducing or eliminating
conflicts with bears.
29
In 2015, FWC adopted a statewide resolution highlighting the importance of securing
attractants.
30
That same year, the Legislature increased the penalties for feeding wildlife, with
enhanced penalties for repeatedly feeding bears and certain other wildlife.
31
Specifically, the law
provided penalties for:
Feeding wildlife with food or garbage;
Attracting or enticing wildlife with food or garbage; or
Allowing the placement of food or garbage in a manner that attracts or entices wildlife.
32
21
The term “mast” is a general term for edible fruit when eaten by wildlife. Hard mast includes acorn, hickory, pecan, and
other nuts while soft mast includes fleshy berries such as palmetto berries, blueberries, and grapes. Id. at xvii.
22
Id. at 8.
23
Id. at 29.
24
Id. at 21.
25
Id.
26
FWC, Bears by the Numbers.
27
“Core complaint” refers to a subset of all the bear-related calls received by FWC that are classified as complaints. Core
complaints consist of the following categories: apiary, in building/tent/vehicle, in crops, in feed, in feeder, in garbage, in open
garage, in screened porch/patio, property damage, threatened/attacked/killed animal, and threatened/attacked/killed human.
Categories of calls related to human-bear interactions that are not classified as core complaints include: animal
threatened/attacked/killed bear, dead bear, general question, harvest/hunt, human threatened bear, illegal activity, in area, in
hog trap, in tree, in unscreened porch/patio, in yard, misidentified, research, sick/injured bear, unintentionally approached
human, and other. FWC, Bear Management Plan at xvi.
28
Id. at 55.
29
Id.
30
See FWC, Resolution, available at https://myfwc.com/media/7072/11b-blackbearresolution.pdf.
31
Chapter 2015-161, s. 12, Laws of Fla.
32
Section 379.412, F.S. BILL: SB 632 Page 5
FWC also updated its bear feeding rule to allow law enforcement officers to issue notifications to
people who have been in contact with FWC regarding securing their garbage or other attractants
and have failed to do so.
33
The notification serves as a formal reminder that the person’s actions
could be in violation of the law.
34
Taking of Bears
Through its constitutional authority to regulate wildlife, FWC has adopted rules to regulate the
taking of bears. Generally, under FWC rule, a person is prohibited from taking, possessing,
injuring, shooting, or selling a black bear or its parts or attempting to engage in such conduct.
35
Such conduct is authorized in certain limited circumstances when FWC issues a permit granting
such authorization. Pursuant to its rules, FWC may issue a permit authorizing the intentional take
of a bear when it determines such authorization furthers scientific or conservation purposes
which will benefit the survival potential of the species or reduce property damage caused by
bears.
36
The rules specifically state that activities that are eligible for a permit include the collection of
scientific data needed for conservation or management of the species, as well as taking bears that
are causing property damage when non-lethal options cannot provide practical resolution to the
damage, and FWC cannot capture the bear.
37
Members of the public may use non-lethal means to
scare away bears that may be in a person’s yard or rifling through trash. Black bears are not
considered nuisance animals that can be taken by a property owner.
38
Under current law, the defense of necessity is the only applicable defense to an illegal take or
attempted take of a Florida black bear. The defense of necessity is limited to the following
circumstances:
The defendant reasonably believed that his or her action was necessary to avoid an imminent
threat of death or serious bodily injury to himself or herself or others;
The defendant did not intentionally or recklessly place himself or herself in a situation in
which it would be probable that he or she would be forced to choose the criminal conduct;
There existed no other adequate means to avoid the threatened harm except the criminal
conduct;
The harm sought to be avoided was more egregious that the criminal conduct perpetrated to
avoid it; and
The defendant ceased the criminal conduct as soon as the necessity or apparent necessity for
it ended.
39
33
Chapter 68A-4.001, F.A.C.
34
Dr. Thomas Easton, Director, Division of Habitat and Species Conservation, FWC, Black Bear Program Update, slide 23
(April 2017), available at https://myfwc.com/media/18754/3b-bearplanupdate.pdf.
35
Rule 68A-4.009(1), F.A.C.
36
Rule 68A-4.009(2), F.A.C.
37
Rule 68A-4.009(2)(a)-(b), F.A.C.
38
Rule 68A-9.010(1)(b)1., F.A.C.
39
Jess Melkun, FWC, Bears (email on file with the Senate Committee on Environment and Natural Resources); McCoy v.
State, 928 So. 2d 503, 506 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006). BILL: SB 632 Page 6
Bear hunting in Florida was first regulated in 1936 and continued through 1994 in certain parts
of the state. The most recent bear hunt occurred in October 2015, during which FWC authorized
bear hunting in four of the seven BMUs.
40
Each BMU had an established harvest objective,
which was based on taking 20 percent of the estimated BMU population and subtracting the
annual known mortality.
41
The table below depicts the harvest objectives and actual harvest
numbers.
42
The hunt was authorized to begin October 24, 2015 and FWC had the ability to close the season
using a daily cut-off mechanism both within each BMU and statewide. The hunt was spread
across 26 counties and 78 percent of bears were taken on private lands. The East Panhandle and
Central BMUs were closed beginning October 25, 2015, while the North and South BMUs were
closed beginning October 26, 2015.
43
According to FWC, hunting is used as a tool to meet wildlife population objectives, such as
slowing population growth rates, rather than to resolve human-bear conflicts, which are better
managed by securing items that attract bears.
44
III. Effect of Proposed Changes:
Section 1 provides that the act may be cited as the “Self Defense Act.”
Section 2 creates s. 379.40411, F.S., to provide that the use of lethal force to take a bear without
a permit or other required authorization is justified if a person feels threatened and believes that
using such force is necessary to protect himself or herself on his or her private property.
The bill clarifies that this does not apply if a person intentionally:
Lures a bear with food or attractants for an illegal purpose, including, but not limited to,
training dogs to hunt bears; or
Provokes a bear to incite an attack.
40
FWC, 2015 Florida Black Bear Hunt Summary Report, 1, available at https://myfwc.com/media/13669/2015-florida-
black-bear-hunt-report.pdf.
41
Id. at 2.
42
Id. at 3.
43
Id.
44
FWC, Florida Black Bear General Hunting FAQs, https://myfwc.com/wildlifehabitats/wildlife/bear/plan-faqs/hunting-
faqs/ (last visited Jan. 5, 2024). BILL: SB 632 Page 7
The bill provides that a person who takes a bear because he or she feels threatened and believes
that using such force is necessary to protect himself or herself on his or her private property:
Is not subject to any administrative, civil, or criminal penalties.
Must notify the Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) within 24 hours after the
taking.
May not possess, sell, or dispose of the taken bear or its parts.
The bill provides that a bear taken under this section must be disposed of by FWC. It authorizes
FWC to adopt rules to implement this section.
Section 3 provides an effective date of July 1, 2024.
IV. Constitutional Issues:
A. Municipality/County Mandates Restrictions:
None.
B. Public Records/Open Meetings Issues:
None.
C. Trust Funds Restrictions:
None.
D. State Tax or Fee Increases:
None.
E. Other Constitutional Issues:
Article IV, section 9, of the Florida Constitution establishes the Florida Fish and Wildlife
Conservation Commission (FWC) and grants FWC the regulatory and executive powers
of the state concerning wild animal life, freshwater aquatic life, and marine life. The bill
may implicate this provision because it specifies that the take of a bear is justified under
certain circumstances.
V. Fiscal Impact Statement:
A. Tax/Fee Issues:
None.
B. Private Sector Impact:
None. BILL: SB 632 Page 8
C. Government Sector Impact:
None.
VI. Technical Deficiencies:
None.
VII. Related Issues:
None.
VIII. Statutes Affected:
This bill creates section 379.40411 of the Florida Statutes.
IX. Additional Information:
A. Committee Substitute – Statement of Changes:
(Summarizing differences between the Committee Substitute and the prior version of the bill.)
None.
B. Amendments:
None.
This Senate Bill Analysis does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill’s introducer or the Florida Senate.