Contrasting Activity Patterns of Sympatric and Allopatric Black and Grizzly Bears

ABSTRACT The distribution of grizzly (Ursus arctos) and American black bears (U. americanus) overlaps in western North America. Few studies have detailed activity patterns where the species are sympatric and no studies contrasted patterns where populations are both sympatric and allopatric. We contrasted activity patterns for sympatric black and grizzly bears and for black bears allopatric to grizzly bears, how human influences altered patterns, and rates of grizzly-black bear predation. Activity patterns differed between black bear populations, with those sympatric to grizzly bears more day-active. Activity patterns of black bears allopatric with grizzly bears were similar to those of female grizzly bears; both were crepuscular and day-active. Male grizzly bears were crepuscular and night-active. Both species were more night-active and less day-active when ≤1 km from roads or developments. In our sympatric study area, 2 of 4 black bear mortalities were due to grizzly bear predation. Our results suggested patterns of activity that allowed for intra- and inter-species avoidance. National park management often results in convergence of locally high human densities in quality bear habitat. Our data provide additional understanding into how bears alter their activity patterns in response to other bears and humans and should help park managers minimize undesirable bear-human encounters when considering needs for temporal and spatial management of humans and human developments in bear habitats.     

Landscape partitioning and spatial inferences of competition between black and grizzly bears

Population effects of competition between large carnivore species may be evident by contrasting actual distributions of putative competitors against predictions of inherent landscape quality for each species. Such comparison can be insightful if covariation with external factors known to influence the occurrence, density, or persistence of each species over space and time can be controlled. We used systematically‐distributed DNA hair‐trap stations to sample the occurrence of black bears (Ursus americanus) and grizzly bears (U. arctos) across 5496 km² in southeastern British Columbia, Canada. We describe interspecific landscape partitioning according to terrain, vegetation and land‐cover variables at 2 spatial scales. We developed multivariate models to predict the potential distribution of each species. At sampling site‐session combinations that detected either species, we then investigated whether the expected or actual occurrence of each influenced the likelihood of detecting the other while controlling for human influence and inherent landscape quality. Black bears were more likely than grizzly bears to occur in gentle, valley bottom terrain with lower proportions of open habitats. Each species also was detected less frequently with the other species than predicted by their respective models; however, the strength of this relationship decreased as landscapes became more characteristic of black bear habitat. As landscapes showed higher inherent potential to support grizzly bears, black bears occurred more than model prediction in areas with higher human access and proximity to major highways but less in national parks. As potential to support black bears increased, grizzly bears occurred more than model prediction only in national parks and less with increasing human access and proximity to major highways. Results suggest that competition is occurring between the species, and that the differential response of each species to human disturbance or excessive mortality may influence the outcome and hence landscape partitioning. Moreover, black bears are more likely to benefit from human encroachment into landscapes of high inherent value for grizzly bears than vice versa. Conservation implications relate to potential mediating effects of habitat and human influence on competitive interactions between the species.     

Spatial variation in density of American black bears in northern Yellowstone National Park

The quality and availability of resources are known to influence spatial patterns of animal density. In Yellowstone National Park, relationships between the availability of resources and the distribution of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) have been explored but have yet to be examined in American black bears (Ursus americanus). We conducted non-invasive genetic sampling during 2017–2018 (mid-May to mid-July) and applied spatially explicit capture-recapture models to estimate density of black bears and examine associations with landscape features. In both years, density estimates were higher in forested vegetation communities, which provide food resources and thermal and security cover preferred by black bears, compared with non-forested areas. In 2017, density also varied by sex, with female densities being higher than males. Based on our estimates, the northern range of Yellowstone National Park supports one of the highest densities of black bears (20 black bears/100 km²) in the northern Rocky Mountains (6–12 black bears/100 km² in other regions). Given these high densities, black bears could influence other wildlife populations more than previously thought, such as through displacement of sympatric predators from kills. Our study provides the first spatially explicit estimates of density for black bears within an ecosystem that contains the majority of North America's large mammal species. Our density estimates provide a baseline that can be used for future research and management decisions of black bears, including efforts to reduce human–bear conflicts.     

Land tenure shapes black bear density and abundance on a multi‐use landscape

Global biodiversity is decreasing rapidly. Parks and protected lands, while designed to conserve wildlife, often cannot provide the habitat protection needed for wide‐ranging animals such as the American black bear (Ursus americanus). Conversely, private lands are often working landscapes (e.g., farming) that have high human footprints relative to protected lands. In southwestern Alberta, road densities are highest on private lands and black bears can be hunted year‐round. On protected lands, road densities are lowest, and hunting is prohibited. On public lands under the jurisdiction of the provincial government (Crown lands), seasonal hunting is permitted. Population estimates are needed to calculate sustainable harvest levels and to monitor population trends. In our study area, there has never been a robust estimate of black bear density and spatial drivers of black bear density are poorly understood. We used non‐invasive genetic sampling and indices of habitat productivity and human disturbance to estimate density and abundance for male and female black bears in 2013 and 2014 using two methods: spatially explicit capture–recapture (SECR) and resource‐selection functions (RSF). Land tenure best explained spatial variation in black bear density. Black bear densities for females and males were highest on parkland and lowest on Crown lands. Sex ratios were female‐biased on private lands, likely a result of lower harvests and movement of females out of areas with high male density. Synthesis and application: Both SECR and RSF methods clearly indicate spatial structuring of black bear density, with a strong influence based on how lands are managed. Land tenure influences the distribution of available foods and risk from humans. We emphasize the need for improved harvest reporting, particularly for non‐licensed hunting on private land, to estimate the extent of black bear harvest mortality.     

Population-level resource selection by sympatric brown and American black bears in Alaska

Distribution theory predicts that for two species living in sympatry, the subordinate species would be constrained from using the most suitable resources (e.g., habitat), resulting in its use of less suitable habitat and spatial segregation between species. We used negative binomial generalized linear mixed models with fixed effects to estimate seasonal population-level resource selection at two spatial resolutions for female brown bears (Ursus arctos) and female American black bears (U. americanus) in southcentral Alaska during May–September 2000. Black bears selected areas occupied by brown bears during spring which may be related to spatially restricted (i.e., restricted to low elevations) but dispersed or patchy availability of food. In contrast, black bears avoided areas occupied by brown bears during summer. Brown bears selected areas near salmon streams during summer, presumably to access spawning salmon. Use of areas with high berry production by black bears during summer appeared in response to avoidance of areas containing brown bears. Berries likely provided black bears a less nutritious, but adequate food source. We suggest that during summer, black bears were displaced by brown bears, which supports distribution theory in that black bears appeared to be partially constrained from areas containing salmon, resulting in their use of areas containing less nutritious forage. Spatial segregation of brown and American black bears apparently occurs when high-quality resources are spatially restricted and alternate resources are available to the subordinate species. This and previous work suggest that individual interactions between species can result in seasonal population-level responses.     

Dietary adjustability of grizzly bears and American black bears in Yellowstone National Park

Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and American black bears (U. americanus) are sympatric in much of Yellowstone National Park. Three primary bear foods, cutthroat trout (Oncorhynchus clarki), whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) nuts, and elk (Cervus elaphus), have declined in recent years. Because park managers and the public are concerned about the impact created by reductions in these foods, we quantified bear diets to determine how bears living near Yellowstone Lake are adjusting. We estimated diets using: 1) stable isotope and mercury analyses of hair samples collected from captured bears and from hair collection sites established along cutthroat trout spawning streams and 2) visits to recent locations occupied by bears wearing Global Positioning System collars to identify signs of feeding behavior and to collect scats for macroscopic identification of residues. Approximately 45 ± 22% ( ± SD) of the assimilated nitrogen consumed by male grizzly bears, 38 ± 20% by female grizzly bears, and 23 ± 7% by male and female black bears came from animal matter. These assimilated dietary proportions for female grizzly bears were the same as 10 years earlier in the Lake area and 30 years earlier in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. However, the proportion of meat in the assimilated diet of male grizzly bears decreased over both time frames. The estimated biomass of cutthroat trout consumed by grizzly bears and black bears declined 70% and 95%, respectively, in the decade between 1997–2000 and 2007–2009. Grizzly bears killed an elk calf every 4.3 ± 2.7 days and black bears every 8.0 ± 4.0 days during June. Elk accounted for 84% of all ungulates consumed by both bear species. Whitebark pine nuts continue to be a primary food source for both grizzly bears and black bears when abundant, but are replaced by false-truffles (Rhizopogon spp.) in the diets of female grizzly bears and black bears when nut crops are minimal. Thus, both grizzly bears and black bears continue to adjust to changing resources, with larger grizzly bears continuing to occupy a more carnivorous niche than the smaller, more herbivorous black bear. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.     

Seasonal habitat use and selection by grizzly bears in Northern British Columbia

We defined patterns of habitat use and selection by female grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in the Besa-Prophet watershed of northern British Columbia. We fitted 13 adult females with Geographic Positioning System (GPS) radio-collars and monitored them between 2001 and 2004. We examined patterns of habitat selection by grizzly bears relative to topographical attributes and 3 potential surrogates of food availability: land-cover class, vegetation biomass or quality (as measured by the Normalized Difference Vegetation Index), and selection value for prey species themselves (moose [Alces alces], elk [Cervus elaphus], woodland caribou [Rangifer tarandus], Stone's sheep [Ovis dalli stonei]). Although vegetation biomass and quality, and selection values for prey were important in seasonal selection by some individual bears, land-cover class, elevation, aspect, and vegetation diversity most influenced patterns of habitat selection across grizzly bears, which rely on availability of plant foods and encounters with ungulate prey. Grizzly bears as a group avoided conifer stands and areas of low vegetation diversity, and selected for burned land-cover classes and high vegetation diversity across seasons. They also selected mid elevations from what was available within seasonal ranges. Quantifying relative use of different attributes helped place selection patterns within the context of the landscape. Grizzly bears used higher elevations (1,595 ± 31 m SE) in spring and lower elevations (1,436 ± 27 m) in fall; the range of average elevations used among individuals was highest (500 m) during the summer. During all seasons, grizzly bears most frequented aspects with high solar gain. Use was distributed across 10 land-cover classes and depended on season. Management and conservation actions must maintain a diverse habitat matrix distributed across a large elevational gradient to ensure persistence of grizzly bears as levels of human access increase in the northern Rocky Mountains. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.     

Grizzly bear responses to restrictions of recreation in Yellowstone National Park

Avoiding humans will be more difficult and energetically costly for animals as outdoor recreation increases and people venture farther into wildland areas that provide high-quality habitat for wildlife. Restricting human access can be an attractive management tool to mitigate effects of human recreation activities on wildlife; however, the efficacy of such measures is rarely assessed. In 1982, Yellowstone National Park identified areas important to grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) to help protect critical grizzly bear habitat and reduce the likelihood of human injuries by bears. Referred to as bear management areas (BMAs), human access is restricted in these areas for 2–8 months each year, with timing and type of restrictions varying by area. We examined 2 datasets to evaluate grizzly bear selection of BMAs and differences of bear density in BMAs and non-BMAs. First, we used 17 years of recent global positioning system telemetry data for grizzly bears to assess their selection of BMAs during periods when human access was allowed, and when access was restricted. We used step-selection functions to test the hypothesis that bears spend time in places that allow them to avoid people and select quality food sources. There was support that grizzly bears differentially select for BMAs regardless of whether human access was restricted at the time, compared with areas outside BMAs, and that selection changed with sex and season. Only males during the summer and hyperphagic seasons changed their selection of BMAs based on whether access restrictions were in place, and overall, male bears preferred unrestricted BMAs (BMAs without restrictions in place). Females preferentially selected BMAs regardless of whether the area had access restrictions in place only during the mating season. Individuals varied widely in their preference for BMAs and access restrictions. Bears likely choose to spend time in BMAs based on available food resources rather than restrictions to human access. Supporting this interpretation, our analyses indicated that a greater proportion of BMA in an area was associated with higher densities of grizzly bear. Thus, restrictions to human access likely help reduce the potential for human–bear interactions, accomplishing one of the original objectives for establishing the BMAs.     

Factors associated with black bear density and implications for management

Wildlife density estimates are important to accurately formulate population management objectives and understand the relationship between habitat characteristics and a species’ abundance. Despite advances in density and abundance estimation methods, management of common game species continues to be challenged by a lack of reliable population estimates. In Washington, USA, statewide American black bear (Ursus americanus) abundance estimates are predicated on density estimates derived from research in the 1970s and are hypothesized to be a function of precipitation and vegetation, with higher densities in western Washington. To evaluate current black bear density and landscape relationships in Washington, we conducted a 4-year capture-recapture study in 2 areas of the North Cascade Mountains using 2 detection methods, non-invasive DNA collection and physical capture and deployment of global positioning system (GPS) collars. We integrated GPS telemetry from collared bears with spatial capture-recapture (SCR) data and created a SCR-resource selection model to estimate density as a function of spatial covariates and test the hypothesis that density is higher in areas with greater vegetative food resources. We captured and collared 118 bears 132 times and collected 7,863 hair samples at hair traps where we identified 537 bears from 1,237 detections via DNA. The most-supported model in the western North Cascades depicted a negative relationship between black bear density and an index of human development. We estimated bear density at 20.1 bears/100 km², but density varied from 13.5/100 km² to 27.8 bears/100 km² depending on degree of human development. The model best supported by the data in the eastern North Cascades estimated an average density of 19.2 bears/100 km², which was positively correlated with primary productivity, with resulting density estimates ranging from 7.1/100 km² to 33.6 bears/100 km². The hypothesis that greater precipitation and associated vegetative production in western Washington supports greater bear density compared to eastern Washington was not supported by our data. In western Washington, empirically derived average density estimates (including cubs) were nearly 50% lower than managers expected prior to our research. In eastern Washington average black bear density was predominantly as expected, but localized areas of high primary productivity supported greater than anticipated bear densities. Our findings underscore the importance that black bear density is not likely uniform and management risk may be increased if an average density is applied at too large a scale. Disparities between expected and empirically derived bear density illustrate the need for more rigorous monitoring to understand processes that affect population numbers throughout the jurisdiction, and suggest that management plans may need to be reevaluated to determine if current harvest strategies are achieving population objectives. © 2019 The Wildlife Society.     

Effect of energy availability, seasonality, and geographic range on brown bear life history

Life-history theory allows predictions of how changes in environmental selection pressures along a species' geographic distribution result in discrete shifts in life-history traits. We tested for spatial patterns of 24 populations of brown bears Ursus arctos across North America that grouped according to the following environmental and population parameters: evapotranspiration as a correlate of primary productivity of vegetation, coefficient of variation of monthly evapotranspiration values as a measure of seasonality. population density, and adult female weight. Cluster analysis grouped brown bear populations into two regions: Pacific-coastal populations characterized by high population density and large females that lived in areas of high primary productivity and low seasonality. and inland and barren-ground populations characterized by relatively low density and small bears that lived in areas of low productivity and high seasonality. For each region, we tested whether life-history traits (age at maturity and interbirth interval) related to primary productivity or seasonality. High altitude (interior: > 1000 m) and high latitude (barren-ground; >65°N) populations respond to extremes in seasonality with risk-spreading adaptations. For example, age at maturity and interbirth interval increased with greater seasonality. In contrast, Pacific-coastal populations living on the western edge of brown bear geographic range respond to intraspecific competition at high densities by maximizing offspring competitive ability. For example, age at maturity increased with greater primary productivity and high population density. In each region, the female parent decided on the life-history trade-offs required to reduce the risks of offspring mortality depending on the environmental pattern.     

Components of Grizzly Bear Habitat Selection: Density,Habitats, Roads,and Mortality Risk

Abstract: We used resource selection functions (RSF) to estimate the relative probability of use for grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) adjacent to the Parsnip River, British Columbia, Canada, 1998-2003. We collected data from 30 radiocollared bears on a rolling plateau where a large portion of the landscape had been modified by human activities, primarily forestry. We also monitored 24 radiocollared bears in mountain areas largely inaccessible to humans. Bears that lived on the plateau existed at less than one-quarter the density of bears in the mountains. Plateau bears ate more high-quality food items, such as meat and berries, leading us to conclude that food limitation was not responsible for the differences in densities. We hypothesized that plateau bears were limited by human-caused mortality associated with roads constructed for forestry activities. Independent estimates of bear population size from DNA-based mark-recapture techniques allowed us to link populations to habitats using RSF models to scale habitat use patterns to population density. To evaluate whether differences in land-cover type, roads, or mortality risk could account for the disparity in density we used the mountain RSF model to predict habitat use and number of bears on the plateau and vice versa. We predicted increases ranging from 34 bears to 96 bears on the plateau when switching model coefficients, excluding land-cover types; when exchanging land-cover coefficients, the model predicted that the plateau population would be 9 bears lower than was observed. Large reductions in the numbers of mountain bears were predicted by habitat-selection models of bears using the plateau landscape. Although RSF models estimated in mountain and plateau landscapes could not predict bear use and abundance in the other areas, contrasts in models between areas provided a useful tool for examining the effects of human activities on grizzly bears.     

Predicting Grizzly Bear Density in Western North America

Conservation of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) is often controversial and the disagreement often is focused on the estimates of density used to calculate allowable kill. Many recent estimates of grizzly bear density are now available but field-based estimates will never be available for more than a small portion of hunted populations. Current methods of predicting density in areas of management interest are subjective and untested. Objective methods have been proposed, but these statistical models are so dependent on results from individual study areas that the models do not generalize well. We built regression models to relate grizzly bear density to ultimate measures of ecosystem productivity and mortality for interior and coastal ecosystems in North America. We used 90 measures of grizzly bear density in interior ecosystems, of which 14 were currently known to be unoccupied by grizzly bears. In coastal areas, we used 17 measures of density including 2 unoccupied areas. Our best model for coastal areas included a negative relationship with tree cover and positive relationships with the proportion of salmon in the diet and topographic ruggedness, which was correlated with precipitation. Our best interior model included 3 variables that indexed terrestrial productivity, 1 describing vegetation cover, 2 indices of human use of the landscape and, an index of topographic ruggedness. We used our models to predict current population sizes across Canada and present these as alternatives to current population estimates. Our models predict fewer grizzly bears in British Columbia but more bears in Canada than in the latest status review. These predictions can be used to assess population status, set limits for total human-caused mortality, and for conservation planning, but because our predictions are static, they cannot be used to assess population trend.     

A study of predominant aerobic microflora of black bears (Ursus americanus) and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in northwestern Alberta

Swab specimens were obtained from nasal, rectal, and preputial or vaginal areas of 37 grizzly and 17 black bears, captured during May to June of 1981 to 1983, to determine the types and frequency of predominant aerobic microflora. Bacterial genera most frequently isolated from bears were Escherichia, Citrobacter, Hafnia, Proteus, Staphylococcus, and Streptococcus species, comprising about 65% of the isolates. Erwinia, Xanthomonas, Agrobacterium, Rhizobium, and Gluconobacter/Acetobacter were also isolated but at lower frequencies (less than 5%). Comparison of bacterial generic composition using similarity quotient values showed no appreciable differences between grizzly and black bear flora. Also, no outstanding differences in bacterial generic composition were observed among grizzly bear samples; however, differences were noted among black bear samples. Fungal genera most commonly encountered included Cryptococcus, Rhodotorula, Cladosporium, Penicillium, Sporobolomyces, and Candida. In general, the microflora of both bear types were marked by generic diversity and random distribution. The majority of microorganisms isolated from the plant samples in the study area were also found in bear samples. This observation and the presence of certain water and soil bacteria in samples from bears suggest that the predominant microflora of both grizzly and black bears were transient and probably influenced by their foraging habits and surrounding environments.     

Black bear movements and habitat use during a critical period for moose calves

In sub-Arctic and north-temperate ecosystems, opportunistic carnivores, such as black bears (Ursus americanus) and brown bears (Ursus arctos), are active on the landscape for a shorter period annually than sympatric gray wolves (Canis lupus). Therefore, bear movement patterns and habitat use might be expected to be more deliberate and of greater consequence, in terms of energy acquisition, than those of predators not undergoing hibernation. Habitat choices concerning feeding, bedding, and denning grounds made by black bears therefore should reflect seasonal abundance and distribution of vegetation and key prey items as these are sites where bears remain and forage for prolonged periods of time. We recorded the movement patterns of 6 GPS-collared black bears from den emergence to onset of moose (Alces alces) parturition in 2003. Over approximately 3 weeks prior to parturition, results from average distance calculations suggest that black bears moved closer to probable moose calving-site habitat. Additionally, the seasonal habitat use by black bears surrounding dens reflected the same trend for areas where cow moose gave birth in spring 2003, with a propensity to use needleleaf forest more than any other habitat.     

Prevalence of Trichinella spp. in black bears, grizzly bears, and wolves in the Dehcho Region, Northwest Territories, Canada, including the first report of T. nativa in a grizzly bear from Canada

Samples of muscle from 120 black bears (Ursus americanus), 11 grizzly bears (Ursus arctos), and 27 wolves (Canis lupus) collected in the Dehcho Region of the Northwest Territories from 2001 to 2010 were examined for the presence of Trichinella spp. larvae using a pepsin-HCl digestion assay. Trichinella spp. larvae were found in eight of 11 (73%) grizzly bears, 14 of 27 (52%) wolves, and seven of 120 (5.8%) black bears. The average age of positive grizzly bears, black bears, and wolves was 13.5, 9.9, and approximately 4 yr, respectively. Larvae from 11 wolves, six black bears, and seven grizzly bears were genotyped. Six wolves were infected with T. nativa and five with Trichinella T6, four black bears were infected with T. nativa and two with Trichinella T6, and all seven grizzly bears were infected with Trichinella T6 and one of them had a coinfection with T. nativa. This is the first report of T. nativa in a grizzly bear from Canada. Bears have been linked to trichinellosis outbreaks in humans in Canada, and black bears are a subsistence food source for residents of the Dehcho region. In order to assess food safety risk it is important to monitor the prevalence of Trichinella spp. in both species of bear and their cohabiting mammalian food sources.     

Grizzly bear movements relative to roads: application of step selection functions

Access management is among the most important conservation actions for grizzly bears in North America. In Alberta, Canada, nearly all grizzly bear mortalities are caused by humans and occur near roads and trails. Consequently, understanding how bears move relative to roads is of crucial importance for grizzly bear conservation. We present the first application of step‐selection functions to model habitat selection and movement of grizzly bears. We then relate this to a step‐length analysis to model the rate of movement through various habitats. Grizzly bears of all sex and age groups were more likely to select steps closer to roads irrespective of traffic volume. Roads are associated with habitats attractive to bears such as forestry cutblocks, and models substituting cutblocks for roads outperformed road models in predicting bear selection during day, dawn, and dusk time periods. Bear step lengths increased near roads and were longest near highly trafficked roads indicating faster movement when near roads. Bear selection of roads was consistent throughout the day; however, time of day had a strong influence over selection of forest structure and terrain variables. At night and dawn, bears selected forests of intermediate age between 40 and 100 yr, and bears selected older forests during the day. At dawn, bears selected steps with higher solar radiation values, whereas, at dusk, bears chose steps that were significantly closer to edges. Because grizzly bears use areas near roads during spring and most human‐caused mortalities occur near roads, access management is required to reduce conflicts between humans and bears. Our results support new conservation guidelines in western North America that encourage the restriction of human access to roads constructed for resource extraction.     

Influence of whitebark pine decline on fall habitat use and movements of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

When abundant, seeds of the high‐elevation whitebark pine (WBP; Pinus albicaulis) are an important fall food for grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Rates of bear mortality and bear/human conflicts have been inversely associated with WBP productivity. Recently, mountain pine beetles (Dendroctonus ponderosae) have killed many cone‐producing WBP trees. We used fall (15 August–30 September) Global Positioning System locations from 89 bear years to investigate temporal changes in habitat use and movements during 2000–2011. We calculated Manly–Chesson (MC) indices for selectivity of WBP habitat and secure habitat (≥500 m from roads and human developments), determined dates of WBP use, and documented net daily movement distances and activity radii. To evaluate temporal trends, we used regression, model selection, and candidate model sets consisting of annual WBP production, sex, and year. One‐third of sampled grizzly bears had fall ranges with little or no mapped WBP habitat. Most other bears (72%) had a MC index above 0.5, indicating selection for WBP habitats. From 2000 to 2011, mean MC index decreased and median date of WBP use shifted about 1 week later. We detected no trends in movement indices over time. Outside of national parks, there was no correlation between the MC indices for WBP habitat and secure habitat, and most bears (78%) selected for secure habitat. Nonetheless, mean MC index for secure habitat decreased over the study period during years of good WBP productivity. The wide diet breadth and foraging plasticity of grizzly bears likely allowed them to adjust to declining WBP. Bears reduced use of WBP stands without increasing movement rates, suggesting they obtained alternative fall foods within their local surroundings. However, the reduction in mortality risk historically associated with use of secure, high‐elevation WBP habitat may be diminishing for bears residing in multiple‐use areas.     

Hazards Affecting Grizzly Bear Survival in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Abstract: During the past 2 decades, the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) population in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) has increased in numbers and expanded its range. Early efforts to model grizzly bear mortality were principally focused within the United States Fish and Wildlife Service Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone, which currently represents only about 61% of known bear distribution in the GYE. A more recent analysis that explored one spatial covariate that encompassed the entire GYE suggested that grizzly bear survival was highest in Yellowstone National Park, followed by areas in the grizzly bear Recovery Zone outside the park, and lowest outside the Recovery Zone. Although management differences within these areas partially explained differences in grizzly bear survival, these simple spatial covariates did not capture site-specific reasons why bears die at higher rates outside the Recovery Zone. Here, we model annual survival of grizzly bears in the GYE to 1) identify landscape features (i.e., foods, land management policies, or human disturbances factors) that best describe spatial heterogeneity among bear mortalities, 2) spatially depict the differences in grizzly bear survival across the GYE, and 3) demonstrate how our spatially explicit model of survival can be linked with demographic parameters to identify source and sink habitats. We used recent data from radiomarked bears to estimate survival (1983–2003) using the known-fate data type in Program MARK. Our top models suggested that survival of independent (age ≥ 2 yr) grizzly bears was best explained by the level of human development of the landscape within the home ranges of bears. Survival improved as secure habitat and elevation increased but declined as road density, number of homes, and site developments increased. Bears living in areas open to fall ungulate hunting suffered higher rates of mortality than bears living in areas closed to hunting. Our top model strongly supported previous research that identified roads and developed sites as hazards to grizzly bear survival. We also demonstrated that rural homes and ungulate hunting negatively affected survival, both new findings. We illustrate how our survival model, when linked with estimates of reproduction and survival of dependent young, can be used to identify demographically the source and sink habitats in the GYE. Finally, we discuss how this demographic model constitutes one component of a habitat-based framework for grizzly bear conservation. Such a framework can spatially depict the areas of risk in otherwise good habitat, providing a focus for resource management in the GYE.     

Black bear spatial responses to the Wallow Wildfire in Arizona

The Wallow Fire, the largest wildfire in Arizona history, encompassed 2,170 km² and provided a rare opportunity to examine habitat selection and home ranges of American black bears (Ursus americanus) before and after a wildfire. We had fitted global positioning system (GPS) collars on 47 bears from 2005 to April 2011, and 10 of these were still collared when the fire started in May 2011. We captured and collared an additional 7 black bears within the fire perimeter post-fire (Jul–Sep 2011 and Jun 2012). To evaluate how black bears were affected by the fire, we fit a step selection function using a conditional mixed effects Poisson regression model to estimate the relative strength of black bear habitat selection in response to burn severity. Additionally, we estimated home range sizes using an autocorrelated kernel density estimator by means of a continuous-time movement model. We then used a generalized linear model with a negative binomial error distribution and mixed effects to estimate the effect of the burn severity on black bear home range size, while controlling for sex and drought. In spring and summer in years prior to the fire, bears selected areas that later burned in the fire. After the fire, bears used all burn severities, but their selection for high-severity burns decreased significantly in summer 2011 and fall 2012. Home range sizes were 3.06 times larger pre-fire than post-fire. Our study demonstrates that black bears continued to use all burn severities after a major wildfire, and that post-fire conditions did not result in expanded black bear home ranges.     

Estimating grizzly and black bear population abundance and trend in Banff National Park using noninvasive genetic sampling

We evaluated the potential of two noninvasive genetic sampling methods, hair traps and bear rub surveys, to estimate population abundance and trend of grizzly (Ursus arctos) and black bear (U. americanus) populations in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada. Using Huggins closed population mark-recapture models, we obtained the first precise abundance estimates for grizzly bears (N=?73.5, 95% CI?=?64-94 in 2006; N=?50.4, 95% CI?=?49-59 in 2008) and black bears (N=?62.6, 95% CI?=?51-89 in 2006; N=?81.8, 95% CI?=?72-102 in 2008) in the Bow Valley. Hair traps had high detection rates for female grizzlies, and male and female black bears, but extremely low detection rates for male grizzlies. Conversely, bear rubs had high detection rates for male and female grizzlies, but low rates for black bears. We estimated realized population growth rates, lambda, for grizzly bear males (λ=?0.93, 95% CI?=?0.74-1.17) and females (λ=?0.90, 95% CI?=?0.67-1.20) using Pradel open population models with three years of bear rub data. Lambda estimates are supported by abundance estimates from combined hair trap/bear rub closed population models and are consistent with a system that is likely driven by high levels of human-caused mortality. Our results suggest that bear rub surveys would provide an efficient and powerful means to inventory and monitor grizzly bear populations in the Central Canadian Rocky Mountains.