Grizzly Bear Behavior and Global Positioning System Collar Fix Rates

Abstract: Animal locations collected by Global Positioning System (GPS) collars will represent a biased sample of the sites an animal used if some position fixes fail and if those missed locations do not occur randomly. Probability of a GPS receiver obtaining a position fix is known to decline as canopy cover increases, but the impact of forest canopy cover was insufficient to account for the low fix rates we observed for GPS collars on grizzly bears (Ursus arctos). We tested the hypothesis that GPS fix rates were related to the interaction between animal activity (active vs. resting) and canopy cover by evaluating the following predictions: 1) grizzly bear activity should follow a circadian pattern similar to the circadian fix-rate pattern, 2) grizzly bear use of canopy cover should follow a circadian pattern similar to the circadian fix rates, 3) grizzly bear activity should be related to canopy cover (i.e., bears should rest in areas with relatively high canopy covers and feed and move in relatively open areas), and 4) collar orientation and canopy cover should interact to affect the fix rates of test collars. The GPS fix rates traced a bimodal circadian pattern that was directly related to the circadian pattern of grizzly bear activity. Fix rates declined when bears were more likely to be using denser cover, and fix rates of test collars demonstrated that collar orientation interacted with canopy cover, such that fix rates declined much more with increasing canopy cover when the collar was on its side than when the collar was upright. We concluded that inferences made about grizzly bear microhabitat use, based on GPS locations, will underrepresent high canopy cover sites, especially when grizzly bears are resting there. (JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT 72(3):596–602; 2008)     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Trends in intensive management of Alaska's grizzly bears, 1980–2010

Hunting regulations for grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in much of Alaska since 1980 increasingly were designed to reduce bear abundance in the expectation such regulations would lead to increased harvests by hunters of moose (Alces alces) and caribou (Rangifer tarandus). Regulations were liberalized during 1980–2010 primarily in the area we termed the Liberal Grizzly Bear Hunting Area (hereafter Liberal Hunt Area) which encompassed 76.2% of Alaska. By 2010, these changes resulted in longer hunting seasons (100% of Liberal Hunt Area had seasons > 100 days, 99.7% > 200 days, and 67.8% > 300 days), more liberal bag limits (99.1% of the Liberal Hunt Area with a bag limit ≥ 1/yr and 10.1% with a bag limit ≥ 2/yr), and widespread waiver of resident tag fees (waived in 95.7% of the Liberal Hunt Area). During 1995–2010, there were 124 changes that made grizzly bear hunting regulations more liberal and two making them more conservative. The 4-year mean for grizzly bear kills by hunters increased 213% between 1976–1980 (387 grizzly bears) and 2005–2008 (823 grizzly bears). Since 2000, long-term research studies on grizzly populations in the Liberal Hunt Area have been terminated without replacement. Management of large predators by the State of Alaska is constrained by a 1994 state statute mandating “intensive management” in areas classified as important for human consumptive use of ungulates. Current grizzly bear management in the Liberal Hunt Area is inconsistent with the recommendations of the National Research Council's 1997 report on predator management in Alaska. Current attitudes, policies and absence of science-based management of grizzly bears in Alaska are increasingly similar to those that resulted in the near extirpation of grizzly bears south of Canada in the 19th and 20th centuries. If current trends continue, they increase risks to portions of the largest and most intact population of grizzly bears in North America. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.     

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.     

Does Learning or Instinct Shape Habitat Selection?

Habitat selection is an important behavioural process widely studied for its population-level effects. Models of habitat selection are, however, often fit without a mechanistic consideration. Here, we investigated whether patterns in habitat selection result from instinct or learning for a population of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in Alberta, Canada. We found that habitat selection and relatedness were positively correlated in female bears during the fall season, with a trend in the spring, but not during any season for males. This suggests that habitat selection is a learned behaviour because males do not participate in parental care: a genetically predetermined behaviour (instinct) would have resulted in habitat selection and relatedness correlations for both sexes. Geographic distance and home range overlap among animals did not alter correlations indicating that dispersal and spatial autocorrelation had little effect on the observed trends. These results suggest that habitat selection in grizzly bears are partly learned from their mothers, which could have implications for the translocation of wildlife to novel environments.     

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.     

Home Range Size Variation in Female Arctic Grizzly Bears Relative to Reproductive Status and Resource Availability

The area traversed in pursuit of resources defines the size of an animal’s home range. For females, the home range is presumed to be a function of forage availability. However, the presence of offspring may also influence home range size due to reduced mobility, increased nutritional need, and behavioral adaptations of mothers to increase offspring survival. Here, we examine the relationship between resource use and variation in home range size for female barren-ground grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) of the Mackenzie Delta region in Arctic Canada. We develop methods to test hypotheses of home range size that address selection of cover where cover heterogeneity is low, using generalized linear mixed-effects models and an information-theoretic approach. We found that the reproductive status of female grizzlies affected home range size but individually-based spatial availability of highly selected cover in spring and early summer was a stronger correlate. If these preferred covers in spring and early summer, a period of low resource availability for grizzly bears following den-emergence, were patchy and highly dispersed, females travelled farther regardless of the presence or absence of offspring. Increased movement to preferred covers, however, may result in greater risk to the individual or family.     

Using spatially‐explicit capture–recapture models to explain variation in seasonal density patterns of sympatric ursids

Understanding how environmental factors interact to determine the abundance and distribution of animals is a primary goal of ecology, and fundamental to the conservation of wildlife populations. Studies of these relationships, however, often assume static environmental conditions, and rarely consider effects of competition with ecologically similar species. In many parts of their shared ranges, grizzly bears Ursus arctos and American black bears U. americanus have nearly complete dietary overlap and share similar life history traits. We therefore tested the hypothesis that density patterns of both bear species would reflect seasonal variation in available resources, with areas of higher primary productivity supporting higher densities of both species. We also hypothesized that interspecific competition would influence seasonal density patterns. Specifically, we predicted that grizzly bear density would be locally reduced due to the ability of black bears to more efficiently exploit patchy food resources such as seasonally abundant fruits. To test our hypotheses, we used detections of 309 grizzly and 597 black bears from two independent genetic sampling methods in spatially‐explicit capture–recapture (SECR) models. Our results suggest grizzly bear density was lower in areas of high black bear density during spring and summer, although intraspecific densities were also important, particularly during the breeding season. Black bears had lower densities in areas of high grizzly bear density in spring; however, density of black bears in early and late summer was best explained by primary productivity. Our results are consistent with the hypothesis that smaller‐bodied, more abundant black bears may influence the density patterns of behaviorally‐dominant grizzly bears through exploitative competition. We also suggest that seasonal variation in resource availability be considered in efforts to relate environmental conditions to animal density.     

Quantifying carnivory by grizzly bears in a multi-ungulate system

Grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) cohabit landscapes with a diversity of ungulates, but the degree to which grizzly bears are carnivorous is unclear and likely varies across landscapes. We used stable isotopes of carbon and nitrogen to infer seasonal diets of grizzly bears in northern British Columbia while studying predator–prey dynamics in a largely undisturbed system. We found high seasonal variation in diets among individuals; males consumed more ungulate prey than did females throughout the year. In fall, both sexes increased their consumption of prey; large ungulates constituted 51% and 32% of the fall diets of males and females, respectively. This increase in carnivory appeared to be primarily associated with consumption of elk (Cervus elaphus). Estimates of prey proportions in the diets of grizzly bears were highly sensitive to the range of tissue to diet discrimination values that were incorporated in isotope models. Small changes in discrimination values resulted in estimated prey intakes that varied more than threefold as a percentage of the diet depending on sex and season. We caution against using standard discrimination values, and we recommend that diet reconstructions using stable isotopes be based on tissue-specific values that would be appropriate for the species of interest. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.     

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.     

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.     

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.     

Grizzly bear selection of avalanche chutes: Testing the effectiveness of forest buffer retention

In mountainous areas with sufficient snowfall, avalanche chutes are an important component of grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) habitat. Therefore, regional land-use plans have recommended retaining adjacent forest buffers to maintain security and thus reduce potential impacts of clearcut forest harvesting. Our objective was to determine if forest buffers affected selection of avalanche chutes by grizzly bears, while accounting for factors such as vegetation composition and other physical attributes. We used radio-location data from 61 grizzly bears collected between 1994 and 2000 in southern British Columbia, mapped a sample of avalanche chutes (1,045), and quantified the amount of forb, shrub, tree, and non-vegetated cover within each chute. We also measured forested buffer width on each side of the chute, solar radiation, chute size, chute frequency (no. of chutes/km), and the area of clearcut logging adjacent to chutes. Each avalanche chute was the sample unit and the number of grizzly bear radiolocations was the dependent variable. We found that natural biophysical attributes were the strongest factors predicting the level of avalanche chute use by bears. Frequency of large chutes (>100 m wide), chute area, forb content, and solar radiation all positively affected use by bears. Larger avalanche chutes had a higher proportion of forb cover than smaller chutes, and more of these large chutes per unit area provided increased forage opportunities. Based on multivariate analyses, forested buffer width or the amount of clearcut logging were not strong factors predicting the level of use. However, a post hoc univariate analysis revealed that clearcut logging reduced the amount of bear use of the best avalanche chutes (large and abundant chutes). Furthermore, because a portion of our study area contained logging but no vehicle traffic, we concluded that it was the removal of tree cover, rather than displacement by vehicles, that caused the observed pattern. Although our multivariate models did not perform well using independent validation in a different geographic area, 4 factors were consistently important (large and abundant chutes, forb content, with a negative but weaker influence of clearcutting), suggesting broad applicability of these factors in mountainous ecosystems. © 2011 The Wildlife Society.     

Performance of Spread Spectrum Global Positioning System Collars on Grizzly and Black Bears

ABSTRACT Global Positioning System (GPS) telemetry is a prevalent tool now used in the study of large mammals. Global Positioning Systems either store the data on board the collar or contain a remote-transfer system that allows for data recovery at more frequent intervals. Spread spectrum (S-S) technology is a new mode of data transfer designed to overcome interference problems associated with narrow-band very high frequency and ultra high frequency data-transfer systems. We evaluated performance of S-S GPS radiocollars deployed on grizzly (Ursus arctos) and black bears (U. americanus). We also evaluated variables that influenced GPS fix success rates, with particular focus on animal activity, time of year, and temperature. The S-S GPS collars performed to our expectations and met study objectives; we did not experience any major problems with the data-transfer system. We observed varying rates of fix success that were directly related to recorded activity counts. Using logistic regression, we verified that activity counts were a reasonable measure of resting or feeding-traveling in both bear species. Our results showed that 73% and 79% of missed fixes, respectively, occurred when we predicted black and grizzly bears to be resting. Temperatures measured in the canister of the collar were not correlated with air temperature, suggesting posture and activity influenced canister temperature. Both measures of temperature were predictive of fix success. We did not find that fix success was related to body morphology (i.e., neck circumference, mass, and chest girth), fix interval, position of the GPS antenna relative to the sky, or sex of the bear. We conclude that fix success for both species is strongly related to activity patterns and time of year. Activity counters appear to be a reasonable measure of this behavior, and we recommend researchers consider including an activity-count system when deploying GPS collars. We also recommend researchers explore building separate models of habitat selection based upon categories of activity to account for bias in fix success associated with bear behavior.     

Evaluating the role of environmental familiarity and behaviour in the success of wildlife translocation: A grizzly bear case study using agent-based modelling

Human-carnivore systems are built on multi-scalar complex processes often resulting in conflicts that force wildlife managers to address what are conceived as problem individuals. In North America, the grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) is often involved in human-bear conflict with management measures such as translocations, in which problem individuals are moved to new areas, being used to reduce conflict risk. While translocations offer a non-lethal alternative to managing conflict animals, they show varying levels of success. Our objective was to perform a novel assessment of grizzly bear translocation success through agent-based simulation by evaluating how familiarity with landscape features coupled with behavioral traits affects the way individuals use resources in a new environment. Our results showed that bears translocated to familiar habitat used high-quality habitat more than bears moved to areas with unfamiliar landscape characteristics. Increased exploration led to greater use of high-quality habitat in the long run but resulted in reduced use of high-quality habitat during the first two years following a translocation. Habitat quality use depended on scale, with bears translocated to less familiar environments accessing higher quality areas at a finer scale than bears translocated to familiar habitats. We emphasize the need to account for wildlife behavioral traits and habitat characteristics at multiple scales when selecting suitable translocation locations. Understanding the role of factors such as these on translocation outcome will help ensure the success of translocations not only as a method for managing problem wildlife, but also for population restoration, species reestablishment, and conservation translocations across the globe.     

Parasites in grizzly bears from the central Canadian Arctic.

Standardized flotation techniques were used to survey 56 grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) fecal samples for parasites. The samples were collected during the spring and autumn of 1995 and 1996 in the central Arctic of the Northwest Territories (Canada). Parasites of the genera Nematodirus, gastrointestinal coccidia, and an unidentified first stage protostrongylid larva are reported for the first time from grizzly bear feces in North America. Parasites of the genera Diphyllobothrium and Baylisascaris also were collected. Prevalence of gastrointestinal parasites were significantly different between the spring and autumn seasons (31% and 58% respectively). Thus, we provide evidence supporting the theory that bears void gastrointestinal parasites before hibernation.     

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.     

Constraints on herbivory by grizzly bears

Although well known as carnivores and not capable of digesting plant fiber, grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) consume over 200 species of plants and are entirely vegetarian in some ecosystems. Even in ecosystems with abundant meat resources, green vegetation can be an important seasonal food resource. Therefore, we examined the morphological, physiological, and environmental constraints that determine the nutritional value of herbaceous vegetation to grizzly bears. Short-term, board foraging trials were used with captive grizzly bears to determine constraints on intake rate including bite size, bite rate, bear size, plant species, plant height, and plant distribution. Feeding trials were conducted to determine the effect of protein level (12-35%) and digestible dry matter intake on weight gain. Finally, maximum daily intake, daily foraging time, and weight change were measured for captive bears foraging on highly abundant and nutritious forbs and grasses during 12-day trials. Intake during short-term board trials overestimated the intake of freely foraging bears from two- to seven-fold depending on bear size. Because of their relatively larger bite sizes, smaller absolute energy requirements, and relatively larger intake capacity, smaller bears (<120 kg) made greater weight gains than very large bears on herbaceous vegetation. Smaller bears with ad libitum access to palatable, nutritious forbs gained weight at rates equal to wild bears. However, depending upon plant characteristics, bite sizes and available daily foraging time increasingly prevented large bears (>120 kg) from gaining weight on herbaceous vegetation. Both captive and wild bears select forbs over grasses at similar growth stages because forbs are generally higher in protein and more digestible than grasses. Therefore, the nutritional well-being of wild grizzly bears could be improved in areas where bears are largely herbivorous and, thus, relatively small by purposefully managing for nutritious forbs.