STATUSOF BROWNBEARS IN KAMCHATKA,RUSSIAN

IGORA. REVENKO,Kamchatka Ecology Institute,Russian Academy of Science, Rybakov19a, PetropavlovskKamchatskiy, , email: [email protected]

Abstract: The KamchatkaEcology and Nature ManagementInstitute has been censusing brown ( arctos) in the southernpart of the Kamchatkapeninsula () since 1991. The censused area comprised 11,045 km2within the districtsof Yelizovo, Ust' Bolsheretsk, Sobolevo, and Ust' Kamchatsk. We used an aerial total count method while flying in small fixed-wing planes duringlate spring (May-early Jun) to collect data on numbers,their distribution,den location, birthrate, and cub survival. A total of 1,051 bears was observed during 83 hours of overflight time during 1991, 1993, and 1994. Our yearly estimates of average bear densities in the southernpart of Kamchatka(54,100 km2 study area)ranged from 0.81 to 1.30 bears/10 km2. Some areashad high bear density (>1.7 bears/10 km2)despite huntingpressure. Bear numbers declined (<0.8 bears/10 km2)near settlementsalong main roads. The main threatto brown bears in Kamchatkais poaching for bear partsby local residents. We recommend that aerial censuses be expanded and improved to more accuratelyestimate population status and trends. Alternate means of employment in ecotourism and outfitting should be developed for local residents to encourage their support of measures to sustain Kamchatka'sbrown bears.

Ursus 10:11-16

Key words: aerial census, , density, Kamchatka,Russia, Ursus arctos.

In 1991 the KamchatkaEcology and NatureManage- Our study was done in 84,600 km2of the southeastpart ment Instituteinitiated a study on the status and dynam- of the peninsula, a mountainousarea divided by broad ics of the brown bear populationin Kamchatka,Russian river valleys with most peaks reaching 1,500 m of eleva- Far East. Prior to that time wildlife authorities in tion (Fig. 1). The study area is a very active volcanic Kamchatkahad insufficientdata aboutbrown bear popu- zone that includes >20 volcanoes (1,900-5,850 m eleva- lations to manage them, including estimates of the num- tion). The long coastline consists of steep banks, cliffs, ber and distributionof bears or knowledge of habitatuse, and beaches. More than 95% of the human population recruitment,and survivorship. Ostroumov (1968) esti- and all majorcities are along the coast. These centers of mated Kamchatka'sbrown bear populationto be 18,000 humanactivity are servicedby only 2 main roads, with a to 22,000 in the early 1960s. Dunishenko (1987) esti- total length of approximately1,000 km. mated a populationof 12,000 to 14,000 bears in the late The vegetationcover on Kamchatkais very dense and 1960s. Accordingto an official reportof Kosheev (1991) mainly consists of pine (Pinuspumila) and alder bushes there were 8,000 to 10,000 bears in Kamchatkain 1986- (Alnus kamtschatika)from the coast to 1,200-1,300 m 90. These estimates described a downward trend in above sea level, stone birch (Betula ermanii) forests on Kamchatka'sbrown bear population. In the late 1980s lower slopes to 700-800 m elevation, and willow (Salix and early 1990s brownbears also faced increasedpoach- undensis) and cottonwood (Populus komarovii) forests ing. Worsening economic conditions in Russia forced along drainages. The rugged terrainand lush vegetation authoritiesand natureconservation agencies to pay less provided high security cover for bears during the en- attentionto brown bears. These developmentsincreased tire snowfree period. Approximately half the study the need for more accurateinformation on Kamchatka's area (46.7%) provided bears with a variety of foods brown bears. Consequently,we initiatedthis aerial sur- (e.g., grasses, salmon [Oncorhynchus spp.], , vey to estimate the density of bears in this population. and pine nuts), protection, and den sites (Table 1) For help during this project I thank: A. Kovalenkov, (Revenko 1993). These high quality bear habitatshave V. V. Kudryavtsev, Martynov, V. Mosolov, A. helped bears to maintain their number through a long and V. Gordienko. Nikonorov, history of bear-human relations. Moderate quality bear habitats (6.3% of the study area) lacked food di- versity, good denning sites, and There are STUDY AREA protection. many settlements and logging activity within this area. Kamchatkais a 1,200-km long peninsula in the Rus- Low quality bear habitats on 47% of the study area sian Far East bounded the by ,the Bering provide limited food resources and had little protec- Sea, and the Pacific Ocean. Its maximum width is 440 tion for bears. km, and area is km2. Brown 472,300 bears occupy ap- Two nature preserves comprise 14% of our study proximately 81.3% (384,200 km2) of the Kamchatka area: Kronotskiy State Preserve and South Kamchatka almost Peninsula, without fragmentation(Anon. 1995). Sanctuary. Bear hunting has been prohibited within 12 Ursus 10:1998

Fig. 1. The study area (withindotted line) for aerial surveys of brown bears in southeastern KamchatkaPeninsula, Russia, 1991. Shaded areas include bear preserves. their bordersfor the last 20 and 10 years, respectively. we spent 2 years studyingbear activity in differentparts Bear huntingis permittedin the rest of the study area. of the study area and the effect of snow conditions on bear activity and our ability to detect activity. Due to the high visibility of bears and their tracks on snow, we METHODS chose early May to early June for aerial surveys. We We conducted aerial strip counts of bears during the tried to time our surveys to coincide with the 1-2 weeks late springof 1991, 1993, and 1994 to estimatebear den- duringwhich most bears emerged from their dens while sity, distribution,and birth rate. Prior to these surveys snow was still present. Weatherpermitting, we tried to BROWNBEARS IN KAMCHATKA * Revenko 13

Table 1. Extentand qualityof habitattypes occupied by duringthe 3 years of survey (Table 2). We recordedthe brownbears in Russia on Anon. Kamchatka, (based 1995). following data on a portabletape recorderwhile flying: flight date, time of day, weathercondition, percent snow Bear habitatquality, type Area, x 1000 km2 Percent cover, habitattype, and numberof bears seen. For each High quality adult bear we recordedsize, color, activity, and number Birch forest 64.2 16.7 and age of any offspring. For the census we did not count Willow forest 15.0 3.9 beartracks on snow as have previousresearchers because Dwarf pine shrub 74.0 19.3 it resultedin biases in We counted tracks Alder shrub 26.0 6.8 extrapolation. Subtotal 179.2 46.7 of females with cubs and yearlingsto estimatebirth rate. The time spentconducting surveys for any year depended Medium quality on the available funds for aircraftrental. Larch forests 14.1 3.7 The of bearsin the areawas estimatedas Spruce forests 2.2 0.6 density study Clearcuts, burs 7.7 2.0 follows: density of bears = bears observed in transect/ Subtotal 24.0 6.3 area of strip transect. I applied area-specificcorrection factors to account for the different of bears Low quality sightability Flat tundraand swamps 125.0 32.5 undervarying conditions of snow cover, terrain,weather, Mountain tundra 56.0 14.5 andtime of the day. The factorrepresented an averageof Subtotal 181.0 47.0 the sightabilityof bears over the yearly survey. To com- Total 384.2 100.0 putethe averagesightability we assumedthat we observed 80% of the bears in birch forests on steep mountainous time our surveys to occur when bears were most ac- slopes, 90% in less brokenterrain, and all bears on open tive. Our preliminary study revealed that to be 0700- snow covered surfaces on sunny days. We did not con- 1000 hours and 1700-2200 hours. duct aerial surveys duringcloudy weather. To compare During 1991 we used a 10-passengerplane (AN-2) and beardensities within the study areawe divided the region an 18-passengerhelicopter (MI-8) which were the stan- into zones. Each zone representeda homogeneousland- dard vehicles for aerial surveys in Kamchatkauntil the scape with respect to the quality of bear habitatand hu- early 1990s. In 1993 and 1994 we used a small fixed- man occupation. The bear density for a zone was the wing Polish plane (3 passenger, Vilga-35) and a small mean numberof bearsobserved/10 km2 of transectflown helicopter(6 passenger,MI-2). In 1991 we surveyedthe within the zone. Lastly we asked residents about their Yelizovo and Bol'sheretsk districts. We also surveyed attitudestoward bears to understandthe main threatsto the Ust'-Kamchatskand Sobolevo districtsduring 1993 bears from humans. and 1994. Withindistricts we avoided open coastal flats with tundrasand wide swampsand mountains higher than 1,500 m because brown bears do not use these areas in RESULTS spring. We flew mostly over forests, shrub lands, and We observed a total of 1,051 bears during83 hours of mountaintundra. We did not fly in a straightpath but overflightsduring 1991, 1993, and 1994 (Table 2). Esti- followed the major geographicalfeatures such as main mateddensity was 0.81 bears/10km2 in 1991, 1.30 bears/ rivers, ridges, and coastline. 10 km2in 1993, and 1.13/10 km2bears in 1994. Most of We observed bears from aircraftduring strip transect these bears we observed either in mountainousterrain surveys; sightings were used to estimate the total num- between 300 and 1,100 m elevation or in birch forests or bers and density in each study area. The strip width was aldershrubs along the Pacific coast. Very few bearswere 1-km wide when observerscould see the groundon both seen on open, low elevation areas. Fresh grasses along sides of aircraft,or 0.5-km wide when there was 1 ob- the coast or river banks appearedto attractbears begin- serveror when the plane was flying along the coast. We ning in late May. Most of the bears observed in June flew 150 m above the groundat speeds of 140-160 km/ were feeding on fresh grasses along river banks. Some hour. We maintaineda distanceof at least 5 km between bearsfed on remainsof late salmonaround Lake Kurilskoe transectsto preventcounting bears twice. The areaof the or pine nuts. South KamchatkaSanctuary, including the transectwas calculatedas the productof the transectwidth, Lake Kurilskoe watershed,had the highest bear density the averageflight speed, andflight time. The striptransect in the study area. Bear density aroundLake Kurilskoein areacomprised between 4.9% and 5.2% of the study area 1991 was 32.25 bears/10km2 oftransect (Revenko 1993). 14 Ursus 10:1998

Table2. Conditionsunder which aerial surveys were conducted on brownbears in Kamchatka,Russia, and estimates of their density.

Conditions 1991 1993 1994

Dates of surveys 14-28 May 4, 10-27 May 20-23 May, 3-6 Jun Percent snowcover 75-90 90-100 85-100 Aircrafttype AN-2 Vilga-35, MI-8 Vilga-35, MI-2 Number of observers 2 2 1-2 Airspeed (km/hr) 145 150 150-160 Count time (hr) 23 28 32 Strip transectarea (km2) 3,335 4,150 3,505 Study area (km2) 63,660 84,600 70,830 % area surveyed 5.2 4.9 4.9 Bears counted 224 467 360 Visibility correctionfactor 1.2 1.15 1.1 Estimatednumber of bears 5.131 10,948 8.002 Estimateddensity, /10 km2 0.806 1.294 1.129

In 1993 density in the same areadensity was 5.45 bears/ landing. In addition,shortages of properfuel in remote 10 km2of transect.Mountainous coasts andremote ridges areas limited its usefulness. Under these conditions it used for denninghad relatively high numberof bears(>1.7 was easier to fly small helicopters (MI-2), althoughthe bears/10km2 of transect,Fig. 2). Such zones overlapped rentalfee was twice thatfor the Vilga-35. Local airports with high quality bear habitats. Zones with moderate suppliedthe helicopterwith kerosene fuel, and it had no number of bears (0.8-1.7 bears/10 km2 of airstrip)oc- need for a runway. curredin most of the study area. Zones with low bear The apparentincrease in bear density between 1991 density (<0.8 bears/10 km2 of airstrip)occurred around and 1993 and its decline in 1994 may reflect our meth- majorcities and along main roads. ods, the changes in the status of the bear population,or We observedtwice as manylitters in the springof 1993 both. The density estimate for the entire study area in (n = 95 litters ) as we did in the spring of 1994 (n = 44 1991 (e.g., 0.81 bears/10 km2)was low despite an enor- litters,Table 3). The proportionof litters with offspring mous concentration of bears around Lake Kurilskoe, of different ages was similar both years of observation. where bears fed on the remains of a late salmon run. Cubs comprisedthe lowest proportionof litters over the During40 minutesof flight there,we observed 129 bears 2-year period (mean = 17.3%), followed by 2-year olds (Revenko 1993). We may have underestimated the vis- (mean = 29.5%), and yearlings (mean = 53.2%). The ibility correction factor for our flight over Central mean number of cubs/maternalfemale bear was lower Kamchatkaon 10 June 1991. The snow cover in Central during both census years (e.g., 2.06 and 2.00) than the Kamchatkawas fragmentedin the mountainsand lack- average of 2.24 cubs (n = 86 litters) recorded during ing in elevationsbelow 500 m. These conditionsand our groundobservations in 1988-91 (Revenko 1991). use of the larger aircraft(AN-2) made it difficult to ob- serve bears, and the visibility correctionfactor for that part of the study area may have been too low. Despite DISCUSSION these difficulties, the bear density we recorded around The use of smalleraircraft and a tape recorderto store Lake Kurilskoewas probablythe highest for Kamchatka data were improvements over the methods used by andperhaps for Russia. Brownbear density was reported Kamchatkagame managers since the 1960s. Accurate to be high but still less than Kamchatkain the northFar counts require access to appropriateaircraft and good Eastof Russia(8 bears/10km2, Chernyavskiy et al. 1993), visibility. The largerplane (AN-2) was unsatisfactoryon in the Altai Mountains(6 bears/10 km2, Sobanskiy and both accounts, and its use was limited by lack of proper Zavatskiy 1993), and along the shore of Lake Baikal (2.6 fuel. The small fixed-wing aircraftVilga-35 (on skis) bears/10 km2,Ustinov 1993). have provideda betterangle of view for observerson both sides The higher 1993 density (1.30 bears/10km2) may of the aircraft. Its relatively slow air speed allowed ob- resulted from better visibility from the smaller aircraft serversmore time to recorddata. However, the Vilga-35 andbetter timing. Oursurvey period of 15-18 May 1993 could not be used after 22-23 May due to the warm took place during the time of den emergence for many weather,which made runwaystoo soft for takingoff and bears. We do not know if the 12.3%decline in the esti- BROWNBEARS IN KAMCHATKA * Revenko 15

Fig. 2. Estimated relative brown bear density within study area, southeastern , Russia, 1991-94. Dark shaded areas indicate low density; unshaded area, moderate density; and light shaded area, high density. mates of bear density from 1993 to 1994 reflects our east part of the study area (20-23 May) and northeast methods or the true populationtrend, although we sus- part(3-6 Jun). Late emergencemay be one reasonfewer pect the latter. The economic hardshipssuffered in Rus- litters were observed in 1994 than in 1993. sia since 1991 have increased, particularly in remote We recommendseveral steps to improve the accuracy regions such as Kamchatka.Consequently, a lot of bears of aerialcounts. First,more flights are requiredto ensure have been poached by the local people for subsistence thatobservers see the greatestnumber of bearswhen con- purposes. However,heavy snow cover in 1994 may have ditions are optimal. Second, a more accuratemethod of delayed the emergence of bears from dens. We tried to estimatingvisibility correctionfactors needs to be devel- compensatefor this by startingour surveys later in the oped and tested. Third, we recommendthat aerial sur- 16 Ursus 10:1998

Table3. Compositionof brownbear litters observed during continued employment and a sustainedbear population aerialsurveys in Kamchatka,Russia, 1993 and 1994. to be encouragedto reduce poaching.

Year Age of offspring Litters (%) N

1993 cubs 17 (17.9) 35 2.06 LITERATURECITED yearlings 51 (53.7) 111 2.18 ANON.1995. Materialyokhoteconomicheskogo obsledovaniya 2-year-olds 27 (28.4) 59 2.19 i mehzkxozyaystvennogoustroistva territorii Kamchatskoi Subtotal 95 (100.0) 205 2.16 oblasti.Vol. 1. Sibecocenter,Novosibirsk, Russia. Page 12. 1994 cubs 7 (15.7) 14 2.00 (InRussian.) yearlings 23 (52.4) 44 1.91 CHERNYAVSKIYF.B., A.V. KRETCHMAR, AND M.A. KRETCHMAR. 2-year-olds 14 (31.9) 26 1.86 1993. The northof the FarEast. Pages318-348 in M.A. Subtotal 44 (100.0) 84 1.91 Vaisfeldand I.E. Chestin,eds. Bears.Nauka, Moscow, Total 139 289 2.08 Russia. DUNISHENKO,U.M. 1987. Rasprostraneniei Chislennost Burykh MedvedeivSibiriina Dal'nem Vostoke. Pages 45-56 in B.S. veys be extended to cover the entire area occupied by Yudin,ed. Bearecology. Nauka, Novosibirsk, Russia. (In bears in the KamchatkaPeninsula. Russian.) The main threatto brownbears in Kamchatkais illegal KOSHEEVV.V. 1991. Sostoyanieresursov burogo medvedya i recomendatsii ikh v Kamchatskoioblasti huntingfor bearparts by local people, field workers,and po ispol'zovaniyu v sesone1990/1991 godov. Rep.Kamchatka Nat. Use Dep. militarystaff. Although on abouthalf of the Kamchatka Pacific Geogr.Inst. RussianAcad. Sci. Petropavlovsk- brown bears have access to high qualityhabi- peninsula, Kamchatsky,Russia. 3pp.(In Russian.) tat thatis and an estimated8,000- unfragmented supports OSTROUMOV,A.G. 1968. Aero-visual'ny uchet chislennosti 10,000 bears, their future status is compromisedby the burykhmedvedei na Kamchatkei nekotoryeresul'taty worsening economic conditions that encourage local nablyudeniyza ikh povedeniem. Bull. Moskovskogo people to exploit them. Illegal kills are furtherencour- ObshchestvaIspytatelei Prirody 73:35-49. (In Russian.) aged by the lack of regulatorycontrols brought on by the REVENKO,I.A. 1991. Sovremennoesostoyanie i chertybiologii Kamchatki. 56-61 in B.P. lack of fundingfor enforcementagencies and the perma- burogomedvedya yuhznoi Pages andY.G. Shevtsov, eds. Bearsin U.S.S.R.Nauka, nent demandfor bear partsfrom Orientalcountries with Zavatskiy Novosibirsk,Russia. (In Russian.) markets near Kamchatka. People have good access to . 1993. Kamchatka.Pages 380-403 in M.A.Vaisfeld remote bear areas in The concentrationof early spring. andI.E. Chestin, eds. Bears. Nauka,Moscow, Russia. food sources and their visibil- bears aroundlimited high SOBANSKIY,G.G., ANDB.P. ZAVATSKIY.1993. The Altai and ity against snow backgroundsmakes them vulnerableto Sayans.Pages 214-249 in M.A.Vaisfeld and I.E. Chestin, poachers. Due to the inability of authoritiesto enforce eds. Bears.Nauka, Moscow, Russia. bear huntingregulations, reduction of poaching can best USTINOV,S.K. 1993. The Baikal region. Pages 275-301 in be achieved by modifying the conditionsthat promote it. M.A.Vaisfeld and I.E. Chestin, eds. Bears.Nauka, Moscow, We recommendauthorities support private outfitter busi- Russia. nesses and ecotourismas alternativeways to employ lo- cal people. Residentsneed to understandthe link between