| |
Reports and Scientific Papers
Robyn D. Appleton, Michael J. Allen, and Kristina Rothley: Purpose - Population Estimation: Obtain a minimum count and density estimates of black bears in the resort Muncipality of Whistler using non-invasive genetic methods; Evaluate Protected Area Network: To evaluate the effectiveness of the PANS by determining the degree of correlation between the results of this study and the proposed protected areas; Priorities For Future Research: Determine priorities for future black bear research in the Resort Municipality of Whistler.
Scott Nielsen et al., Biological Conservation 130: This paper describes a method of estimating relative habitat states and conditions as surrogates of fitness (i.e. survival) using models of occupancy and mortality risk. Primary sinks or high attractive sinks were evident in the foothills where bears were using forest edges associated with forestry and oil and gas activities on Crown lands, while primary habitats or safe harbour sites were most common to protected alpine/sub-alpine sites.
Jay Honeyman: Jay Honeyman evaluated the effectiveness of aversive conditioning (AC) as a non-lethal management technique to reduce bear-human conflict, and ultimately reduce bear mortality. The conclusion? AC is an effective management tool to reduce human conflicts with grizzly bears and promote bear population stability.
Tom S. Smith, Stephen Herrero and Terry D. DeBruyn, Ursus 16(1):1–10 (2005): We present a new paradigm for understanding habituation and the role it plays in brown bear (Ursus arctos) populations and interactions with humans in Alaska. We assert that 3 forms of habituation occur in Alaska: bear-to-bear, bear-to-human, and human-to-bear. We present data that supports our theory that bear density is an important factor influencing a bear's overt reaction distance (ORD); that as bear density increases, overt reaction distance decreases, as does the likelihood of bear- human interactions. We maintain that the effects of bear-to-bear habituation are largely responsible for not only shaping bear aggregations but also for creating the relatively safe environment for bear viewing experienced at areas where there are high densities of brown bears. By promoting a better understanding of the forces that shape bear social interactions within populations and with humans that mingle with them, we can better manage human activities and minimize bear-human conflict.
MARC CATTET, JOHN BOULANGER, GORDON STENHOUSE, ROGER A. POWELL, AND MELISSA J. REYNOLDS-HOGLAND - Journal of Mammalogy, 89(4):973–990, 2008: These findings challenge persons engaged in wildlife capture to examine their capture procedures and research results carefully. Significant capture-related effects may go undetected, providing a false sense of the welfare of released animals. Further, failure to recognize and account for long-term effects of capture and handling on research results can potentially lead to erroneous interpretations.
Kim Kiel, CPAWS: This paper examines the successes, failures and lessons-learned from several BearSmart or Bear Aware communities in B.C. and the on-going development in Alberta. There seems to be no debate that when communities successfully reduce attractants, such as bird feeders, garbage, fruit, or animal feed, bears are less likely to become food conditioned or habituated. As a result, many communities demonstrated a reduction in the numbers of bear-human incidents and bear mortalities.
N. Caulkett and M.R.L. Cattet, International Veterinary Information Service (www.ivis.org): The pharmacological considerations of anesthetizing bears. Considerations for individual species.
Meredith L. Gore and Barbara A. Knuth, Human Dimensions Research Unit, Department of Natural Resources, Cornell University: This research evaluated attitude and behavior change associated with an outreach intervention designed to change residential bear-related behavior and reduce conflict. Based on the Elaboration Likelihood Model of persuasive communication, the New York NeighBEARhood Watch (NYNW) pilot program aimed to change 6 residential human behaviors (i.e., bird feeding, pet feeding, composting, garbage storage, grill storage,
hobby farming) and reduce human-black bear conflict.
Tom S. Smith, Wildlife Society Bulletin Volume 26, Number 1 Spring 1998: Herrero and Higgins (1998) found that red pepper spray was effective in halting aggressive brown hear behavior in 88% (14 of 16) of incidents studied. However, red pepper spray is not claimed to be a bear repellent when applied to objects. Nonetheless, instances have been reported of people applying red pepper spray to objects and around campsites in order to repel curios bears. The impetus for this study came from an observation I made of a bear rolling vigorously on beach gravels that had been accidentally sprayed with red pepper spray. To further investigate brown bear reaction to red pepper spray residues, I conducted systematic observations of bear responses to spray discharged at selected sites. I discuss those findings and their implications in this report.
Wayne McCrory, RPBio, McCrory Wildlife Services Ltd.: This bear hazard assessment (BHA) was undertaken as one component of the initiative by the Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) to achieve official status as a "Bear Smart Community" under criteria established by the B.C. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection (MWLAP). The aim of any bear riskmanagement project is to minimize human-bear conflicts and the associated risk of injury or fatality to humans. It is important to note, however, that when dealing with bears, risk can be mitigated but never
eliminated.
Solid Waste Services, Town of Canmore: This paper will detail the events, challenges and successes that lead to the elimination of curbside waste collection and the implementation of a complete animal proof waste handling system.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Which offers better protection?: No deterrent is 100% effective, but compared to all others, including firearms, proper use of bear spray has proven to be the best method for fending off threatening and attacking bears, and for preventing injury to the person and animal involved.
Wayne McCrory: This proposed Bear-People Conflict Prevention Plan (or “bear plan”) was designed and completed for the
Resort Municipality of Whistler (RMOW) as part of their ongoing program to maximize public safety
with respect to black bears (Ursus americanus) as well as to maintain the natural behaviour of local bears
in as wild and non-habituated a state as possible. Human conflict prevention for grizzly bears (Ursus
arctos) is also addressed in this plan even though the species has been virtually extirpated in the region.
Susan A. Mansfield and Lynn L. Rogers: People are increasingly moving into black bear (Ursus americanus) habitat, seeing more bears, and often feeding them intentionally or unintentionally. There are many untested beliefs about the effects this supplemental feeding has on bear behavior, food preferences, natural foraging activities, relations with humans, and longevity. This study compares bears receiving supplemental food with those in a nearby study area where bears were not supplementally fed (Rogers 1987;Rogers, unpublished data).
Ocean Alaska Science and Learning Center : The Question: Is increasing human activity affecting the behavior of black bears
along the Park’s coastline?
Black bears (Ursus americanus) are abundant along the Kenai Fjords National Park
coastline. In the springtime, when much of the land is still buried under snow,
black bears leave their winter dens and rely heavily on the intertidal zone and
nearshore meadows, where vegetation emerges the earliest, for food. The same
beaches and meadows are becoming increasingly popular with kayak campers and
other Park visitors. How critical are these meadows to the bears? Does human
presence affect the bears’ use of these areas?
Barbara Bertch and Mike Gibeau: This report provides a 20 year summary of known black bear mortalities in Banff, Jasper, Kootenay, Yoho, Waterton Lakes, Mt. Revelstoke and Glacier National Parks (1990-2009).
Hebblewhite et al., Biological Conservation 112-3: Black bear survival and demography were studied in Banff National Park (BNP) from 1994 to 2000 to test the efficacy of National Park protection. 25 radio-collared bears were monitored an average of 1.9 years each for a total of 51.8 bear-years. Eighty-two percent of all mortality (n=11) was human-caused, composed of highway mortality (36%), management mortality (27%) and management relocation (18%). Survival was influenced by season and management status. Once bears became a management problem, survival (0.66) was lower than several hunted populations. Responsible management agencies should reduce adult female highway mortality and the likelihood of becoming a management problem, while continuing monitoring to refine demographic analyses to adequately protect this population.
Stephen Herrero, Tom Smith, Terry D. DeBruyn, Kerry Gunther, and Colleen A. Matt, Wildlife Society Bulletin 2005, 33(1):362–373: Recently, brown bear (Ursus arctos) viewing has increased in coastal Alaska and British Columbia, as well as in interior areas such as Yellowstone National Park. Viewing is most often being done under conditions that offer acceptable safety to both people and bears. We analyze and comment on the underlying processes that lead brown bears to tolerate people at close range. Although habituation is an important process influencing the distance at which bears tolerate people, other variables also modify levels of bear-to-human tolerance. Because bears may react internally with energetic costs before showing an overt reaction to humans, we propose a new term, the Overt Reaction Distance, to emphasize that what we observe is the external reaction of a bear. In this paper we conceptually analyze bear viewing in terms of benefits and risks to people and bears. We conclude that managers and policy-makers must develop site-specific plans that identify the extent to which bear-to-human habituation and tolerance will be permitted. The proposed management needs scientific underpinning. It is our belief that bear viewing, where appropriate, may promote conservation of bear populations, habitats, and ecosystems as it instills respect and concern in those who participate.
Bear Aware: How to establish bylaws in your community - a step by step guide.
Scott Nielsen et al., Biological Conservation 141: This paper evaluates the long-term (100-year) persistence of a grizzly bear population in Alberta, Canada using forest simulations and habitat modelling. Even with harvesting the same volume of timber, natural disturbance-based forestry resulted in a larger human footprint than traditional two-pass forestry with road densities reaching 1.39 km/km2 or more than three times baseline conditions and suggested maximum levels of security for grizzly bears. Natural disturbance-based forestry is an ill-suited management tool for sustaining declining populations of grizzly bears. A management model that explicitly considers road access is more likely to improve grizzly bear population persistence than changing the size of clear-cuts.
|
|
|
