Could we live with reintroduced large carnivores in the UK?

1. Literature on the wolf Canis lupus, brown bear Ursus arctos and lynx Lynx lynx is reviewed to determine if sufficient semi‐natural habitat exists in the UK for a viable population of any of these species and to assess the potential risks to human safety, livestock and economically valuable wildlife. Public attitudes to the recovery and reintroduction of some other mammals are also briefly reviewed. 2. The large home range sizes and low population densities of large carnivores mean that the Scottish Highlands is the only UK region with the potential to support a viable population. Human population density is also lower in the Highlands and the density of wild ungulate prey higher than in many parts of Europe where large carnivores survive. 3. Attacks on people have been recorded in Europe for healthy bears and for rabid bears and wolves but there are no reports of attacks by lynx. Bears are more carnivorous in the north of their range than in the south and although wild mammals seldom appear to be important prey serious predation of livestock can occur. Livestock predation is also reported for the wolf and the lynx but they appear to prefer wild prey if available. However, mass kills of up to 100 or more sheep are occasionally recorded for wolves. 4. Attitudes to reintroductions and carnivores generally tend to be favourable amongst the general public, but negative amongst those most likely to be adversely affected. Fears for human safety and significant livestock predation with bears and wolves, respectively, suggest that reintroduction of these species is unlikely to be acceptable in the foreseeable future. Reintroduction of the lynx may be feasible but habitat suitability and potential impact on vulnerable native wildlife need to be assessed. Socio‐economic and legal issues also need to be addressed before such a reintroduction is considered.     

Phylogeography and mitochondrial diversity of extirpated brown bear (Ursus arctos) populations in the contiguous United States and Mexico

The fossil record indicates that the brown bear (Ursus arctos) colonized North America from Asia over 50 000 years ago. The species historically occupied the western United States and northern Mexico but has been extirpated from over 99% of this range in the last two centuries. To evaluate colonization hypotheses, subspecific classifications, and historical patterns and levels of genetic diversity in this region, we sequenced 229 nucleotides of the mitochondrial DNA control region in 108 museum specimens. The work was set in a global context by synthesizing all previous brown bear control region sequences from around the world. In mid-latitude North America a single moderately diverse clade is observed, represented by 23 haplotypes with up to 3.5% divergence. Only eight of 23 haplotypes (35%) are observed in the extensively sampled extant populations suggesting a substantial loss of genetic variability. The restriction of all haplotypes from mid-latitude North America to a single clade suggests that this region was founded by bears with a similar maternal ancestry. However, the levels and distributions of diversity also suggest that the colonizing population was not a small founder event, and that expansion occurred long enough ago for local mutations to accrue. Our data are consistent with recent genetic evidence that brown bears were south of the ice prior to the last glacial maximum. There is no support for previous subspecies designations, although bears of the southwestern United States may have had a distinctive, but recent, pattern of ancestry.     

Translocation of carnivores as a method for managing problem animals: a review

Translocation of individual carnivores has been a standard management tool for decades in North America and southern Africa in response to livestock depredation and other conflict behaviours. As carnivore populations across Europe begin to increase it is expected that management problems will also increase. Before translocation becomes established as a management tool in Europe its success needs to be reviewed. In general, there has been very little follow-up of translocated animals. Almost no data exist on the subsequent levels of damage after translocation. Large carnivores have shown a consistent ability to return to the site of capture over distances of up to 400 km. Even those individuals that do not succeed in returning home roam over very large distances, best measured in units of hundreds of kilometres. Very few individuals remain at the release sites. Survival of translocated animals has occasionally been shown to be poor, often as a result of the large movements. In general, there needs to be a large area (hundreds or thousands of square kilometres) without conflict potential where the individuals can be released for the strategy to work. When such areas are not available, management efforts should concentrate on reducing conflict potential, or, where this is not practical, lethal control. This revised version was published online in November 2006 with corrections to the Cover Date.