Brown Bear Density and Estimated Harvest Rates in Northwestern Alaska

Human-caused mortality in general, and unregulated hunting in particular, have been implicated in reductions in brown bear (Ursus arctos) populations throughout much of their range. In northwestern Alaska, USA, bear densities have not been assessed in 20 years while harvest regulations have been liberalized, raising concerns that broad undetected population declines might occur. We used a modified mark-resight approach to estimate brown bear density during 2005–2018 in 4 subareas throughout the region. We also summarized harvest information for each subarea and used our survey results to estimate harvest rates. We estimated densities for independent bears assuming constant or heterogeneous probabilities of detection and occurrence. We present the results of the constant model for more direct comparison with past work and the heterogeneity model results to provide estimates of density that are less likely to be negatively biased. Using the constant model, we estimated the density of independent bears was 17.0, 49.2, 24.9, and 19.4/1,000 km² on portions of the Seward Peninsula, the lower Noatak River, the upper Noatak River, and Gates of the Arctic National Park and Preserve, respectively. These estimates are broadly similar to those from past work in interior and northwestern Alaska, with the exception of the lower Noatak River subarea where our estimates are the highest reported for a bear population in northern Alaska. We estimated that the harvest rate on the Seward Peninsula was approximately 5.2% or 7.7% on average, depending upon the model used. In the remaining areas, we estimated annual harvest rates were <2.5%, well within sustainability guidelines from past work. Overall, our results suggest that brown bear densities are similar or somewhat higher than in the past in much of northwestern Alaska and that current harvest rates are sustainable in most areas, except perhaps the Seward Peninsula. Ongoing survey work will be useful for further evaluating the assumptions of the modified mark-resight survey approach, assessing population trajectory, and determining the effect of harvest on brown bear populations. © 2021 The Wildlife Society.     

Brown Bear Den Habitat and Winter Recreation in South-Central Alaska

ABSTRACT Increasing demand for backcountry recreation opportunities during winter (e.g., snowshoeing, helicopter-assisted skiing, snowmobiling) in steep, high-elevation terrain has elevated concern about disturbance to brown bears (Ursus arctos) denning on the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska, USA. To help identify areas where such conflicts might occur, we developed a spatially explicit model to predict potential den habitat. The model indicated brown bears selected locations for den sites with steep slopes, away from roads and trails. Den sites were associated with habitat high in elevation and away from potential human contact. We then compared areas with the highest probability of providing den habitat with patterns of snowmobile and nonmotorized recreation on a portion of the Kenai Peninsula. We found limited overlap between the 2 recreation activities and potential den habitat for brown bears. At the landscape scale, however, backcountry skiing overlapped more high-quality den habitat than did snowmobile riding. Our results may be used by land management agencies to identify potential conflict sites and to minimize the potential effects of recreation activities on brown bears in dens.     

Efficacy of Bear Deterrent Spray in Alaska

Abstract: We present a comprehensive look at a sample of bear spray incidents that occurred in Alaska, USA, from 1985 to 2006. We analyzed 83 bear spray incidents involving brown bears (Ursus arctos; 61 cases, 74%), black bears (Ursus americanus; 20 cases, 24%), and polar bears (Ursus maritimus; 2 cases, 2%). Of the 72 cases where persons sprayed bears to defend themselves, 50 (69%) involved brown bears, 20 (28%) black bears, and 2 (3%) polar bears. Red pepper spray stopped bears' undesirable behavior 92% of the time when used on brown bears, 90% for black bears, and 100% for polar bears. Of all persons carrying sprays, 98% were uninjured by bears in close-range encounters. All bear—inflicted injuries (n = 3) associated with defensive spraying involved brown bears and were relatively minor (i.e., no hospitalization required). In 7% (5 of 71) of bear spray incidents, wind was reported to have interfered with spray accuracy, although it reached the bear in all cases. In 14% (10 of 71) of bear spray incidents, users reported the spray having had negative side effects upon themselves, ranging from minor irritation (11%, 8 of 71) to near incapacitation (3%, 2 of 71). Bear spray represents an effective alternative to lethal force and should be considered as an option for personal safety for those recreating and working in bear country. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 72(3):640–645; 2008)     

Success of Grizzly Bear Population Augmentation in Northwest Montana

Abstract: Augmentation of large carnivore populations can be a valuable management and recovery tool, but success of many programs has not been well documented. The Cabinet—Yaak grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) population was located in northwestern Montana and northern Idaho, USA, and was estimated at 30–40 individuals. The Cabinet Mountains portion of this area may be isolated from the remainder of the zone and was the site of a test of grizzly bear population augmentation. Experimental objectives included evaluating site fidelity, reproduction, and long-term survival of the translocated bears. Four subadult females (2–6 yr old) were translocated from southeastern British Columbia, Canada, from 1990 to 1994. Three of 4 transplanted bears remained in the target area for ≥1 year and satisfied the short-term goal for site fidelity. Recent genetic evidence gathered through hair-snagging efforts has determined that at least one of the original transplanted animals has reproduced, thereby providing evidence of success for the long-term goals of survival and reproduction.     

Home ranges in adult Scandinavian brown bears (Ursus arctos): effect of mass, sex, reproductive category, population density and habitat type

Annual home-range size indices for 36 male and 52 female adult brown bears Ursus arctos in two study areas in central and northern Scandinavia were estimated to evaluate factors believed to influence home-range size. Male home ranges were larger than home ranges of lone females after controlling for the sexual size dimorphism acting on metabolic needs. Further, home ranges of females with cubs were smaller than home ranges of lone females and females with yearlings. Thus, differences in metabolic need were not able to explain the variation in range size among females of different reproductive categories or between males and females, suggesting roaming behaviour of males in this promiscuous species. Home-range size in both males and females was inversely related to population density along a density gradient that was not linked to food availability. This contradicts the hypothesis that females use the minimum areas that sustain their energy requirements. However, on a large geographical scale a negative relationship between range size and food availability was evident. The annual home ranges in inland boreal environments in Scandinavia are the largest reported for brown bears in Eurasia, and similar to those in inland boreal and montane environments in North America.     

Hunting Patterns,Ban on Baiting,and Harvest Demographics of Brown Bears in Sweden

Abstract We analyzed harvest data to describe hunting patterns and harvest demography of brown bears (Ursus arctos) killed in 3 geographic regions in Sweden during 1981–2004. In addition, we investigated the effects of a ban on baiting, instituted in 2001, and 2 major changes in the quota system: a switch to sex-specific quotas in 1992 and a return to total quotas in 1999. Brown bears (n=887) were harvested specifically by bear hunters and incidentally by moose (Alces alces) hunters. Both hunter categories harvested bears 1) using dogs (37%), 2) by still hunting (30%), 3) with the use of bait (18%), and 4) by stalking (16%). The proportion of bears killed with different harvest methods varied among regions and between bear- and moose-oriented hunters. We found differences between male (52%) and female bears (48%) with respect to the variables that explained age. Moose-oriented hunters using still hunting harvested the youngest male bears. Bears harvested during the first management period (1981–1991) were older and had greater odds of being male than during the subsequent period. It appears that hunters harvesting bears in Sweden are less selective than their North American counterparts, possibly due to differences in the hunting system. When comparing the 4 years immediately prior to the ban on baiting with the 4 years following the ban, we found no differences in average age of harvested bears, sex ratio, or proportion of bears killed with stalking, still hunting, and hunting with dogs, suggesting that the ban on baiting in Sweden had no immediate effect on patterns of brown bear harvest demography and remaining hunting methods. As the demographic and evolutionary side effects of selective harvesting receive growing attention, wildlife managers should be aware that differences in harvest systems between jurisdictions may cause qualitative and quantitative differences in harvest biases. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 72(1):79–88; 2008)     

Efficacy of firearms for bear deterrence in Alaska

We compiled, summarized, and reviewed 269 incidents of bear–human conflict involving firearms that occurred in Alaska during 1883–2009. Encounters involving brown bears (Ursus arctos; 218 incidents, 81%), black bears (Ursus americanus; 30 incidents, 11%), polar bears (Ursus maritimus; 6 incidents, 2%), and 15 (6%) unidentified species provided insight into firearms success and failure. A total of 444 people and at least 367 bears were involved in these incidents. We found no significant difference in success rates (i.e., success being when the bear was stopped in its aggressive behavior) associated with long guns (76%) and handguns (84%). Moreover, firearm bearers suffered the same injury rates in close encounters with bears whether they used their firearms or not. Bears were killed in 61% (n = 162) of bear–firearms incidents. Additionally, we identified multiple reasons for firearms failing to stop an aggressive bear. Using logistic regression, the best model for predicting a successful outcome for firearm users included species and cohort of bear, human activity at time of encounter, whether or not the bear charged, and if fish or game meat was present. Firearm variables (e.g., type of gun, number of shots) were not useful in predicting outcomes in bear–firearms incidents. Although firearms have failed to protect some users, they are the only deterrent that can lethally stop an aggressive bear. Where firearms have failed to protect people, we identified contributing causes. Our findings suggest that only those proficient in firearms use should rely on them for protection in bear country. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.     

Predation on Moose Calves by European Brown Bears

Abstract: In North America, brown bears (Ursus arctos) can be a significant predator on moose (Alces alces) calves. Our study in Sweden is the first in which brown bears are the only predator on moose calves. Bears and moose occurred at densities of about 30/1,000 km² and 920/1,000 km², respectively, and bears killed about 26% of the calves. Ninety-two percent of the predation took place when calves were <1 month old. Bear predation was probably additive to other natural mortality, which was about 10% in areas both with and without bears. Females that lost their calves in spring produced more calves the following year (1.54 calves/F) than females that kept their calves (1.11 calves/F), which reduced the net loss of calves due to predation to about 22%.     

Seasonal and diel movement patterns of brown bears in a population in southeastern Europe

Most animals concentrate their movement into certain hours of the day depending on drivers such as photoperiod, ambient temperature, inter‐ or intraspecific competition, and predation risk. The main activity periods of many mammal species, especially in human‐dominated landscapes, are commonly set at dusk, dawn, and during nighttime hours. Large carnivores, such as brown bears, often display great flexibility in diel movement patterns throughout their range, and even within populations, striking between individual differences in movement have been demonstrated. Here, we evaluated how seasonality and reproductive class affected diel movement patterns of brown bears of the Dinaric‐Pindos and Carpathian bear populations in Serbia. We analyzed the movement distances and general probability of movement of 13 brown bears (8 males and 5 females) equipped with GPS collars and monitored over 1–3 years. Our analyses revealed that movement distances and probability of bear movement differed between seasons (mating versus hyperphagia) and reproductive classes. Adult males, solitary females, and subadult males showed a crepuscular movement pattern. Compared with other reproductive classes, females with offspring were moving significantly less during crepuscular hours and during the night, particularly during the mating season, suggesting temporal niche partitioning among different reproductive classes. Adult males, solitary females, and in particular subadult males traveled greater hourly distances during the mating season in May‐June than the hyperphagia in July–October. Subadult males significantly decreased their movement from the mating season to hyperphagia, whereas females with offspring exhibited an opposite pattern with almost doubling their movement from the mating to hyperphagia season. Our results provide insights into how seasonality and reproductive class drive intrapopulation differences in movement distances and probability of movement in a recovering, to date little studied, brown bear population in southeastern Europe.     

Evaluation of Bear Rub Surveys to Monitor Grizzly Bear Population Trends

Abstract: Wildlife managers need reliable estimates of population size, trend, and distribution to make informed decisions about how to recover at-risk populations, yet obtaining these estimates is costly and often imprecise. The grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) population in northwestern Montana, USA, has been managed for recovery since being listed under the United States Endangered Species Act in 1975, yet no rigorous data were available to evaluate the program's success. We used encounter data from 379 grizzly bears identified through bear rub surveys to parameterize a series of Pradel model simulations in Program MARK to assess the ability of noninvasive genetic sampling to estimate population growth rates. We evaluated model performance in terms of 1) power to detect gender-specific and population-wide declines in population abundance, 2) precision and relative bias of growth rate estimates, and 3) sampling effort required to achieve 80% power to detect a decline within 10 years. Simulations indicated that ecosystem-wide, annual bear rub surveys would exceed 80% power to detect a 3% annual decline within 6 years. Robust-design models with 2 simulated surveys per year provided precise and unbiased annual estimates of trend, abundance, and apparent survival. Designs incorporating one survey per year require less sampling effort but only yield trend and apparent survival estimates. Our results suggest that systematic, annual bear rub surveys may provide a viable complement or alternative to telemetry-based methods for monitoring trends in grizzly bear populations.     

Vital rates of two small populations of brown bears in Canada and range‐wide relationship between population size and trend

Identifying mechanisms of population change is fundamental for conserving small and declining populations and determining effective management strategies. Few studies, however, have measured the demographic components of population change for small populations of mammals (<50 individuals). We estimated vital rates and trends in two adjacent but genetically distinct, threatened brown bear (Ursus arctos) populations in British Columbia, Canada, following the cessation of hunting. One population had approximately 45 resident bears but had some genetic and geographic connectivity to neighboring populations, while the other population had <25 individuals and was isolated. We estimated population‐specific vital rates by monitoring survival and reproduction of telemetered female bears and their dependent offspring from 2005 to 2018. In the larger, connected population, independent female survival was 1.00 (95% CI: 0.96–1.00) and the survival of cubs in their first year was 0.85 (95% CI: 0.62–0.95). In the smaller, isolated population, independent female survival was 0.81 (95% CI: 0.64–0.93) and first‐year cub survival was 0.33 (95% CI: 0.11–0.67). Reproductive rates did not differ between populations. The large differences in age‐specific survival estimates resulted in a projected population increase in the larger population (λ = 1.09; 95% CI: 1.04–1.13) and population decrease in the smaller population (λ = 0.84; 95% CI: 0.72–0.95). Low female survival in the smaller population was the result of both continued human‐caused mortality and an unusually high rate of natural mortality. Low cub survival may have been due to inbreeding and the loss of genetic diversity common in small populations, or to limited resources. In a systematic literature review, we compared our population trend estimates with those reported for other small populations (<300 individuals) of brown bears. Results suggest that once brown bear populations become small and isolated, populations rarely increase and, even with intensive management, recovery remains challenging.     

Demography and Genetic Structure of a Recovering Grizzly Bear Population

ABSTRACT Grizzly bears (brown bears; Ursus arctos) are imperiled in the southern extent of their range worldwide. The threatened population in northwestern Montana, USA, has been managed for recovery since 1975; yet, no rigorous data were available to monitor program success. We used data from a large noninvasive genetic sampling effort conducted in 2004 and 33 years of physical captures to assess abundance, distribution, and genetic health of this population. We combined data from our 3 sampling methods (hair trap, bear rub, and physical capture) to construct individual bear encounter histories for use in Huggins—Pledger closed mark—recapture models. Our population estimate, Ň = 765 (95% CI = 715–831) was more than double the existing estimate derived from sightings of females with young. Based on our results, the estimated known, human-caused mortality rate in 2004 was 4.6% (95% CI = 4.2–4.9%), slightly above the 4% considered sustainable; however, the high proportion of female mortalities raises concern. We used location data from telemetry, confirmed sightings, and genetic sampling to estimate occupied habitat. We found that grizzly bears occupied 33,480 km² in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) during 1994–2007, including 10,340 km² beyond the Recovery Zone. We used factorial correspondence analysis to identify potential barriers to gene flow within this population. Our results suggested that genetic interchange recently increased in areas with low gene flow in the past; however, we also detected evidence of incipient fragmentation across the major transportation corridor in this ecosystem. Our results suggest that the NCDE population is faring better than previously thought, and they highlight the need for a more rigorous monitoring program.     

Science and Values Influencing Predator Control for Alaska Moose Management

ABSTRACT We encourage informed and transparent decision-making processes concerning the recently expanded programs in Alaska, USA, to reduce predation on moose (Alces alces). The decision whether to implement predator control ultimately concerns what society should value; therefore, policymakers, not objective biologists, play a leadership role. From a management and scientific standpoint, biological support for these predator-control programs requires convincing evidence that 1) predators kill substantial numbers of moose that would otherwise mostly live and be available for harvest, 2) low predation can facilitate reliably higher harvests of moose, 3) given less predation, habitats can sustain more moose and be protected from too many moose, and 4) sustainable populations of Alaska's brown bears (Ursus arctos), black bears (Ursus americanus), and wolves (Canis lupus) will exist in and out of control areas. We reviewed 10 moose mortality studies, 36 case histories, 10 manipulative studies, 15 moose nutrition studies, and 3 recent successful uses of nutrition-based management to harvest excess female moose. Results of these studies support application of long-term, substantial predator control for increasing yield of moose in these simple systems where moose are a primary prey of 3 effective predators. We found no substantive, contradictory results in these systems. However, to identify and administer feasible moose population objectives, recently established moose nutritional indices must be monitored, and regulatory bodies must accept nutrition-based management. In addition, the efficacy of techniques to reduce bear predation requires further study. Predicting precise results of predator control on subsequent harvest of moose will continue to be problematic because of a diversity of changing interactions among biological, environmental, and practical factors. In Alaska, the governor has the prerogative to influence regulations on predator control by appointing members to the Board of Game. At least annually, the Board of Game hears a wide spectrum of public opinions opposing and favoring predator control. We summarized these opinions as well as the societal and cultural values and expectations that are often the primary basis for debates. Advocates on both sides of the debate suggest they hold the higher conservation ethic, and both sides provide biased science. We recommend a more constructive and credible dialogue that focuses openly on values rather than on biased science and fabricated conspiracies. To be credible and to add substance in this divisive political arena, biologists must be well informed and provide complete information in an unbiased and respectful manner without exaggeration.     

Estimation of breeding population size using DNA‐based pedigree reconstruction in brown bears

Robust estimates of demographic parameters are critical for effective wildlife conservation and management but are difficult to obtain for elusive species. We estimated the breeding and adult population sizes, as well as the minimum population size, in a high‐density brown bear population on the Shiretoko Peninsula, in Hokkaido, Japan, using DNA‐based pedigree reconstruction. A total of 1288 individuals, collected in and around the Shiretoko Peninsula between 1998 and 2020, were genotyped at 21 microsatellite loci. Among them, 499 individuals were identified by intensive genetic sampling conducted in two consecutive years (2019 and 2020) mainly by noninvasive methods (e.g., hair and fecal DNA). Among them, both parents were assigned for 330 bears, and either maternity or paternity was assigned to 47 and 76 individuals, respectively. The subsequent pedigree reconstruction indicated a range of breeding and adult (≥4 years old) population sizes: 128–173 for female breeders and 66–91 male breeders, and 155–200 for female adults and 84–109 male adults. The minimum population size was estimated to be 449 (252 females and 197 males) in 2019. Long‐term continuous genetic sampling prior to a short‐term intensive survey would enable parentage to be identified in a population with a high probability, thus enabling reliable estimates of breeding population size for elusive species.     

Grizzly Bear Density in Glacier National Park,Montana

Abstract: We present the first rigorous estimate of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) population density and distribution in and around Glacier National Park (GNP), Montana, USA. We used genetic analysis to identify individual bears from hair samples collected via 2 concurrent sampling methods: 1) systematically distributed, baited, barbed-wire hair traps and 2) unbaited bear rub trees found along trails. We used Huggins closed mixture models in Program MARK to estimate total population size and developed a method to account for heterogeneity caused by unequal access to rub trees. We corrected our estimate for lack of geographic closure using a new method that utilizes information from radiocollared bears and the distribution of bears captured with DNA sampling. Adjusted for closure, the average number of grizzly bears in our study area was 240.7 (95% CI = 202–303) in 1998 and 240.6 (95% CI = 205–304) in 2000. Average grizzly bear density was 30 bears/1,000 km², with 2.4 times more bears detected per hair trap inside than outside GNP. We provide baseline information important for managing one of the few remaining populations of grizzlies in the contiguous United States.     

White-Tailed Deer Population Dynamics Following Louisiana Black Bear Recovery

Changing predator communities have been implicated in reduced survival of white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) fawns. Few studies, however, have used field-based age-specific estimates for survival and fecundity to assess the relative importance of low fawn survival on population growth and harvest potential. We studied white-tailed deer population dynamics on Tensas River National Wildlife Refuge (TRNWR) in Louisiana, USA, where the predator community included bobcats (Lynx rufus), coyotes (Canis latrans), and a restored population of Louisiana black bear (Ursus americanus luteolus). During 2013–2015, we radio-collared and monitored 70 adult (≥2.5 yrs) and 21 yearling (1.5-yr-old) female deer. Annual survival averaged 0.815 (95% CI = 0.734–0.904) for adults and 0.857 (95% CI = 0.720–1.00) for yearlings. We combined these estimates with concurrently collected fawn survival estimates (0.27; 95% CI = 0.185–0.398) to model population trajectories and elasticities. We used estimates of nonhunting survival (annual survival estimated excluding harvest mortality) to project population growth (λ) relative to 4 levels of harvest (0, 10%, 20%, 30%). Finally, we investigated effects of reduced fawn survival on population growth under current management and with elimination of female harvest. Despite substantial fawn predation, the deer population on TRNWR was increasing (λ = 1.06) and could sustain additional female harvest; however, the population was expected to decline at 20% (λ = 0.98) and 30% (λ = 0.94) female harvest. With no female harvest, the population was projected to increase with observed (λ = 1.15) and reduced fawn survival (λ = 1.02), but the population could not sustain current female harvest (10%) if fawn survival declined (λ = 0.90). For all scenarios, adult female survival was the most elastic parameter. Given the importance of adult female survival, the relative predictability in response of adult survival to harvest management, and the difficulty in altering fawn survival, reducing female harvest is likely the most efficient approach to compensate for low fawn survival. On highly productive sites such as ours, reduction, but not necessarily elimination, of harvest can mitigate effects of low fawn survival on population growth. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.     

Genetic estimates of annual reproductive success in male brown bears: the effects of body size, age, internal relatedness and population density

1. We studied male yearly reproductive success (YRS) and its determinants (phenotypic characteristics, age, population density) in two Scandinavian brown bear populations, using molecular techniques to determine paternity. 2. We found a significant difference in male YRS between the study areas, with lower YRS in the south than in the north. 3. In general, older and larger males had higher YRS. Older males may be more experienced in competition for reproduction (male dominance). Large body size is of direct benefit in male-male competition and of advantage in endurance competition for the access to females. 4. Age was relatively more important for YRS in the north and body size was more important in the south, due perhaps to differences in male age structure due to illegal killing. A single old male dominated the reproduction in the north during the study, which resulted most probably in the relatively higher importance of age in the north. In the south, with a more even male age structure, no single male was able to dominate, probably resulting in a more intense competition among males, with body size as the deciding factor. 5. Male YRS was correlated positively with population density. This may be related to the structure of the expanding bear population, with female densities declining towards the population edge. 6. Internal relatedness, a measure of genetic heterozygosity, was correlated negatively with YRS, suggesting that outbred individuals have a higher YRS. Individual heterozygosity at key or many loci may reflect male physical qualities and condition-sensitive traits, which may benefit males directly in contest or in sperm competition.