Spring 2018 Vol

International Bear News

Tri-Annual Newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) and the IUCN/SSC Bear Specialist Group Spring 2018 Vol. 27 no. 1

Attendees of the 25th International Conference on Bear Research & Management in Quito, Ecuador. Read the conference summary on pages 18-29.

IBA website: www.bearbiology.org Table of Contents

International Bear News 3 International Bear News, ISSN #1064-1564

IBA President/IUCN BSG Co-Chairs 4 President’s Column 5 Is Conservation Advancing? It Depends How You Ask the Question

IBA Grants Program News Conference Report: 25th Conference on Bear 7 Bear Conservation Fund Report Research and Management 18 Session Summaries Reflections 27 Human-Bear Conflicts Workshop 7 Laurie Craig, Naturalist, US Forest Service 29 Student Activities

Conference Announcements Conservation 8 First Sight 30 26th International Conference on Bear Research & Management Illegal Trade 9 Understanding Use of Bear Parts in Workshop Announcements Southeast Asia to Diminish Demand 2 24th Eastern Black Bear Workshop

Human Bear Conflicts Student Forum 11 How Locals Characterize the Causes of 31 To Intern, or Not to Intern Sloth Bear Attacks in Jawai, Rajasthan 32 Truman Listserv and Facebook Page

Biological Research Publications 13 A Double-Edged Sword: American Black 33 Recent Bear Literature Bears Rely on Hunters’ Baits in the Face of Declining Natural Foods IBA Officers & Council 15 Ecological Modeling of the Genus Ursus: 38 Executive Council Members and Ex-Officio What Does the Niche Tell Us? Members

Reviews BSG Expert Team Chairs 16 Yellowstone Grizzly Bears - Ecology and 39 Bear Specialist Group Team Chairs Conservation of an Icon of Wildness 17 Press Release: Fifty Miles Outside Rome Live the Rarest Bears on Earth

2 International Bear News Spring 2018, vol. 27 no. 1 Table of Contents International Bear News, ISSN #1064-1564 Tri-Annual newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management Editors: Mark Edwards (Managing Editor) Amy Macleod (Layout & Design) Jim Tomlin (Proofing) Jennapher L Teunissen van Manen (Distribution) 907 Jessie Way Bozeman MT 59715 Email: [email protected]

Websites: www.bearbiology.com www.bearbiology.org Back issues are available at www.bearbiology.com Editorial Policy International Bear News welcomes articles about biology, conservation, and management of the world’s eight bear species. Submissions of about 750 words are preferred, and photos, drawings, and charts are appreciated. Submissions to regional correspondents by email are preferred; otherwise, mail or fax to the address above. IBA reserves the right to accept, reject, and edit submissions.

Correspondents: Western US and Canada: Carrie Lowe, Email: [email protected] Eastern US and Canada: Jared Laufenberg, Email: [email protected] Central and South America: Marco Enciso, Email:[email protected] Europe: Stefanie Franke, Email: [email protected] Central Asia: Tatjana Rosen, Email:trosen@panthera.org Zoo and Captive Bear Organizations: Jordan Schaul, Email:[email protected] Bear Specialist Group: Dave Garshelis, Email:[email protected] Manager’s Corner: Rich Beausoleil, Email: [email protected] All other submission and/or inquiries: Mark Edwards, Email: [email protected] Consult website for submission guidelines. Deadline for the Summer 2018 issue is 05 June 2018.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this issue. Artwork is copyrighted – Do not reproduce without permission.

For Membership Information and Publication Ordering Go to www.bearbiology.com to order or renew memberships, make donations, and/or update member information.

The use of the IBA logo at the end of The use of the BSG logo at the end of The use of the IBA-BCF logo at the an article indicates articles submit- an article indicates articles submitted beginning of an article signifies ted via the IBA regional correspon- via the Bear Specialist Group. work that was supported, at least in dents and the IBN editorial staff. part, by the Bear Conservation Fund through an IBA grant.

International Bear News Spring 2018, vol. 27 no. 1 3 IBA President President’s Column

Andreas Zedrosser Institute for Natural Sciences and Environmental Health University College of Southeast Norway Pb. 235, N-3603 Kongsberg, Norway Email: [email protected] A Vision for the Future In the last IBN, I have informed IBA membership that the management consulting company Oliver Wyman (OW) has carried out a review to explore how IBA can become a more effective and global player in promoting science-based management and conservation of bears. OW did an enormous amount of work and reached a remarkable degree of understanding of our organization in a short time. In the end, the OW team has left IBA with two main things: 1. A report that reflects back to us what they heard from us about how we in IBA see ourselves and our potential future. 2. A blueprint for how we potentially might move that vision forward, including draft strategy, prioritization scheme, and pitch to donors. Some of the key findings by OW are: • A need to decrease the workload of volunteers, especially the president, secretary and treasurer, possibly by hiring regular staff. This should increase IBA’s ability to fundraise and to grow its programs judiciously and strategically in the future. • The philanthropic capacity exists in the world to increase IBA’s funding by an order of magnitude; other wildlife and conservation-focused organizations have successfully done it. • To do so, however, will require a fundamental change in IBA’s structure and functioning. The OW team laid out a proposal for an ambitious blueprint for developing IBA into an organization with 4-5 permanent employees and an annual budget of about 5 million USD over the next 5 years. The core of this proposal is that IBA should develop two already existing sides in parallel: a) the professional scientific organization that works for the benefit of its members professional development, opportunity, networking, and conferences; b) the funding side of IBA that financially supports the conservation of bears, as well as the generation of new knowledge and methods for achieving sustainable conservation. OW suggests that IBA should continue to be headed by an elected Council, responsible for setting the overall tone for the organization and having final say on policy, and priorities. The transition from an all-volunteer to a professional organization is a very large task, and a Director of Transition would need to be a first hire to perform and manage the tasks required to transform IBA’s structure. This position should be filled with someone already familiar with the inner workings of IBA, and could later morph into a full-time Director of Capacity Building, who would maintain, and further develop member-focused programs, e.g. conferences and grant programs. The responsibilities of treasurer and secretary should be shifted to paid staff, while some of the presidential duties should eventually be shifted to a paid Executive Director. This person would also be the public face of IBA and be responsible for executing programs and seeking partnerships. Another key suggestion by the OW team is that IBA should strive to increase the annual income and annual budget of the IBA by 1 - 2 orders of magnitude. Initially, fundraising would need to focus on finding foundational donors in the first few years to invest in the areas needed for growing the organization, e.g. salaries for staff, etc. OW suggests that IBA develops a clearly articulated vision statement, work strategy and justification, a system for prioritizing project/grant selection, and examples of successes and projects in need of funding. OW further suggests an Executive Management Board including Council officers and several appointed outsiders who could bring in skills and expertise otherwise lacking (e.g., expert on tax rules for non-profit organizations, financial expertise). These experts could fill knowledge gaps would also bring the benefit of their contacts and own professional networks to the IBA. OW has provided us with a highly ambitious vision for the future, but has also committed to us that they will provide assistance in taking key steps forward. It is now up to IBA to decide on how to continue, develop and adjust this vision.

AN APOLOGY… In the President’s Column of the last IBN, I welcomed new Council members and thanked departing Coun- cil members for their contribution. Likely induced by a lack of sleep and an overabundance of coffee, I forgot to express my gratitude to IBA’s departing Vice-President of Eurasia, Alex Kopatz. Alex, thank you so much for your enthusiastic and thoughtful contributions to IBA!

4 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 IUCN BSG Co-Chairs Is Conservation Advancing? It Depends How You Ask the Question

Dave Garshelis Rob Steinmetz Co-Chair IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-Chair IUCN Bear Specialist Group Minnesota Department of Natural Resources World Wildlife Fund –Thailand Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USA Bangkok, Thailand Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

At the BSG session at the IBA conference in Quito, each presenter was asked to answer the question: Is bear conservation advancing (in relation to the topic of their talk)? Of 15 presentations, covering 6 of the 7 terrestrial bears (all but the Ameri- can black bear, Ursus americanus), the answer was equivocal. Only 3 presenters gave an optimistic impression of the current conservation efforts in their country or region. Others had a more qualified, or more pessimistic outlook. One explanation is that the presenters in this session happened to be overly pessimistic, or discussed issues that were particularly intractable. We think this was not the case: the issues were diverse, as were the presenters (see summary of this session, page 18). A more likely explanation is that while conservation may be advancing, it is not advancing as fast, or with as much effectiveness, as we (all) would hope. In other words, our expectations are higher than we can reasonably achieve. It is not necessarily bad to set lofty goals, unless there is a negative reaction when those goals are rarely achieved. This could signal to the public, to donors, and to future conservation biologists that what we are doing is not worthwhile. Why would someone want to support a lost cause, or worse yet, devote their life to a lost cause? Our concept for the theme of the BSG session was to examine how a cross-section of the most active bear biologists –– young and old; from Europe, South America, and Asia; examining bears, habitats, people, and conservation efforts –– truly felt about the progress of the work that they perform each day. We could have guided the session to a potentially more positive outlook by modifying the theme: Are bears better off today than they would have been without conservation efforts? Interestingly, nobody directly answered that question in their presentation. And certainly, that really is a different question. But it’s also an important one, and maybe would be a better gauge of our progress. In a global review of the impacts of conservation, the IUCN compared trajectories in Red List categories for groups of species (Hoffman et al. 2010). For example, a quarter of all mammal species are Threatened (Vulnerable, Endangered, or Critically Endangered) –– has this gotten better or worse over time (using consistent measurement methods)? To answer this question the IUCN uses an aggregated measure of extinction risk based on the Red List categories of all assessed species within a taxon, called the Red List Index (RLI). The RLI has declined over time for all taxa (some at alarming rates), seemingly confirming the pessimistic view that conservation is not working. This decline in the RLI is not due to different methods of assessment, or better data, but to what is called “genuine changes”. In other words, more species in the taxa moved to a more threatened category than moved to a safer category. The decline does not even consider species that declined in abundance or geographic range, but not enough to “uplist” to a more threatened category. But the IUCN observed that despite the general deterioration in RLI, some species did improve, and for the most part these improvements could be directly traced to conservation efforts (e.g., Young et al. 2014). In other words, without these conservation efforts, the RLI would have declined even faster. For example, Hoffmann et al. (2015) estimated that the rate of decline for the world’s 235 ungulate species would have been 8x worse without the conservation actions currently in place. Is this just a positive spin on a bad situation? Or do these conservation success stories give us some hope that conservation can work? Moreover, Frequency of responses of the presenters at the BSG session to the question: counter to the above argument that some species Is bear conservation advancing? Presenters were asked to choose 1 of the are declining but not fast enough to uplist, there 4 designated responses with reference to the topic of their talk. are likely also some species that are improving, but

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 5 IUCN BSG Co-Chairs not fast enough to downlist to a less threatened Red List category (Hoffman et al. 2011). In fact, we suggest that most conservationists who have had input into the Red List assessments tended to err on the side of keeping their species “on the list” (i.e., threatened) so as not to lose ground in any conservation actions. Certainly, nobody wants to downlist a species prematurely; thus, in doing assessments (whether of- ficially for the global Red List or any national Red List, or less formally for some local area), conservationists tend to find reasons not to downgrade the species or paint too promising a future. Consider arguably the biggest recent conservation success story among the bears –– the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). At the BSG session in Quito, Dajun Wang showed that within the broad conservation community, instead of crediting the panda’s downlisting Slaven Reljić Slaven Bear conservation advanced most when bears were viewed as valuable from Endangered to Vulnerable to China’s exemplary to local people. Often the step before valuable is simply tolerable. conservation efforts, there was widespread distrust and even dismay. Although pandas no longer meet the strict criteria for Endangered, some suggest that they should still qualify based on other, non-IUCN criteria (Xu et al. 2017). On a less dramatic scale of positive news, sun bears (Helarctos malayanus) were recently rediscovered in Bangladesh and China, and a number of recent camera trapping studies have shown that this species is more tolerant of degraded habitats than previously thought. That’s a good sign for their future if previously logged or burned habitats are allowed to recover. Likewise, sloth bears (Melursus ursinus) have recently been found to travel greater distances and in more open, human- populated habitats between protected areas than previously thought possible; and Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus) have been discovered in places they were not known to exist, and appear to be increasing in areas where just 10 years ago they were in decline. It is unclear how many of these findings represent a “genuine change” in the species status versus a correction of erroneous past information. Accordingly, we do not know if any of this is related to on-the-ground conservation actions (although some reforestation projects seem to be having positive effects). Nevertheless, they certainly open up possibilities for conservation in sites that otherwise might have been written off. To be sure, among the 6 species of threatened bears, all but the giant panda are thought to be suffering widespread declines. But, also to be sure, there is a great deal of uncertainty as to the real rate of decline, whether that rate is changing (i.e., lessening or increasing), and even what it is due to (i.e., actual limiting factors). Also even if the species is declining as a whole, that is not true for every population of each of these species. Certainly some populations are stable or increasing, and for some, this is attributable to actions of dedicated conservationists. Conservation could be advancing in small patches –– those places where people are actively working. That may be less than we hope for, but these successes are worth documenting, as it could mean that we are not meeting our own expectations in part because we lack the people and resources, and not because what we’re doing doesn’t work. Maybe at the next conference, we should highlight those positive stories, under the theme: Where would we have been, if not for …..?

Literature Cited Hoffmann, M., C. Hilton-Taylor, A. Angulo, et al. 2010. The impact of conservation on the status of the world’s vertebrates. Science 330:1503–1509. Hoffmann, M., J. L. Belant, J. S. Chanson, N. A. Cox, J. Lamoreux, A. S. L. Rodrigues, J. Schipper, and S. N. Stuart. 2011. The changing fates of the world’s mammals. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B 366:2598–2610. Hoffmann, M., J.W. Duckworth, K. Holmes, D.P. Mallon, A.S.L. Rodrigues, and S. N. Stuart. 2015. The difference conservation makes to extinction risk of the world’s ungulates. Conservation Biology 29:1303–1313. Xu, W., A. Viña, L. Kong, S. L. Pimm, J. Zhang, W. Yang, Y. Xiao, L. Zhang, X. Chen, J. Liu, and Z. Ouyang. 2017. Reassessing the conservation status of the giant panda using remote sensing. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1:1635–1638. Young, R.P., M.A. Hudson, A.M.R. Terry, C.G. Jones, R.E. Lewis, V. Tatayah, N. Zuël, and S.H.M. Butchart. 2014. Accounting for conservation: Using the IUCN Red List Index to evaluate the impact of a conservation organization. Biological Conservation 180: 84–96.

6 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 IBA Grants Program News Bear Conservation Fund Report

Julia Bevins, Chair [email protected]

Dear IBA Members, Our 2017 Annual Report to donors and members didn’t go out electronically last year and so I’m taking the opportunity to send it out to you now. Enjoy! https://www.bearbiology.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/02/BCF_Report_2017_high.pdf We’ve had a couple of great years for the Bear Conservation Fund. Firstly, we’ve had 2 special grant awards, each for $30,000 from a long-term donor – the Tropical Bear Grant - and a 2018 award for an innovative Community-Based Conserva- tion Grant. This is the second year in a row we’ve collected more than $100,000 for bear conservation. For the Research and Conserva- tion Grants, that’s seed money to 15 projects in 2017 and 14 projects in 2018. Last year we passed the mile- stone of a million dollars given to bear conservation over 25 years. To celebrate, I worked with a mapping expert, Ian Moore, in Anchorage to develop an interac- tive map showing all Research and Conservation Grants funded from 1993-2017. Featured in the map are 183 projects! These grants have helped launch world-class conservationists and secure a future for imperiled bear populations. This is a great long-term accomplishment and we can all be proud. I encourage you all to check it out: http:// alaskamapscience.com/Bear_Conservation_Fund_Grants_Map.html

IBA members, this is your charity. Wild bears need their human advocates- we know the need. And, if not us, then who? Thank you members who have stepped up to give. Those that haven’t, please consider the Bear Conservation Fund for a bequest in your will or some other form of giving. Thank you all for the team effort to conserve the world’s bears. Reflections When a person can observe a wild female bear nursing her cubs up close at the elevated platforms in the Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center, it’s a universal intimate family moment, and it changes people’s lives because they see a commonality between themselves and another species. Many are moved to tears. It’s not something that can be adequately described, it’s something to be experienced. The Mendenhall Glacier Visitor Center and its platforms provide an safe opportunity for that first hand experience. For me personally, being that connector between the animals and the person is incredibly rewarding.”

Laurie Craig, Naturalist, US Forest Service, Juneau, Alaska 2018

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 7 Conservation First Sight Rubin Philip Chhaya Bhatnagar Assistant Prof. Assistant Prof. Dept. of Zoology Dept. of Zoology St. Berchmans College Changanacherry University College of Science Kerala, India Udaipur, Rajasthan, India Email: [email protected]

In wildlife biology, the phrase “familiarity breeds contempt” is a misnomer for a wildlife biologist. With more time in the field, they become more sensitive to the signs they perceive. On the trails, every faint movement in the bushes or understory is remarkable and may provide a lifetime opportunity. An immediate halt and a careful gaze may give a moment of wilderness, which the majority of human beings cannot witness, or even if seen, may not be able to appreciate. But transforming into a wildlife biologist is no easy task. In March 2013, when I visited the Mount Abu Wildlife Sanctuary (MA-WLS) in Rajasthan, India, for the first time, to study sloth bear (Melursus ursinus), I presumed Mount Abu to be void hills with mere green cover. For the next few visits my perception remained the same. Local people, whom I met on the trails, gave me indications about the presence of sambar deer (Rusa unicolor), leopards (Panthera pardus fusca), hyena (Hyaena hyaena), wild boars (Sus scrofa cristatus) and sloth bears. But I felt they were all like age-old fables since I hadn’t seen any of them. I was not skilled enough to read the signs left behind. Rather than curiosity, it was “fear” that ruled me during those days. Though I desired to be outside in the sanctuary, once out of my vehicle and on the forest floor, a cloud of fear would engulf me. The fear was strong enough to block my senses. Even the sound of the litter getting crushed under my boots terrified me. I searched all around for animals, but didn’t see any. Though I pretended to be the brave researcher, I was watching for all possible danger and my intention was to get back safe as early as possible. Luckily, I did not give up and I relied on the safety of the watch towers of Mount Abu, waiting long hours for sloth bears. The safety of the watch towers helped me to become accustomed to the high altitude evergreen forests, valleys with mixed deciduous forests, and adjoining water bodies. It was monsoon season in Mount Abu. I was in a watch tower near the Trover’s tank, which is an artificial water body named after its engineer. It is surrounded by densely wooded hills, and from there, I could observe the dense forests in the valleys, exposed rocks, scattered bamboo clusters and intermittent bushes of lantana, karonda (Carissa sp.) and khaatty (Flacourtia sp.) plants. I struggled in the sanctuary for more than two months to see a sloth bear. All whom I met, in and around MA-WLS, had stories of their sightings and encounters. But for me, the bears remained out of sight, with only their fresh diggings, warm scats and clear pugmarks left minutes before I arrived, to satisfy my curiosity. After waiting an hour or so during one drizzly evening, the mist over the hills slowly receded. A delicate, dark, movement on the rocky out crop caught my eye. I viewed it through my camera. It was my first sighting of sloth bear, a mother and her cub foraging on the hill. My companions were in a hurry to leave the sanctuary as it was getting dark, but I wanted to stay and watch them more. Slowly I learned the riddle of forest. Searching for a wild animal in its habitat is like an eagle searching for a kitten in a room. The eagle can search, but the kitten is skilled enough to stay unnoticed. I learned to be patient and to merge myself with nature. Thereafter, bears started walking into my binoculars at different locations of MA-WLS. Sometimes I would see them at a water hole or among the rocky slopes, or at the far ends of a trail, or beside the steps towards a jungle shrine. I learned to find them in the hills and valleys, while they searched for fruits, ants and termites. Watching them carefully from machans (tree houses), watch towers, rocky outcrops and trees slowly transformed my fear into curiosity. Sometimes the bears did not even sense my presence. But at other times when they noticed me, they would gaze at me for a short while and then retract silently. If I startled them by chance, they would huff at me with their “ghugh, ghugh” vocalization, to warn me or to call their cubs and then run away making a rattling sound. Stories of bear attacks and risky encounters are common. I met several survivors of maulings by sloth bears. While returning from the temple in the evening a 50 year old woman was attacked and left her eye enucleated by a mother bear. Also a 42 year old man of Phoolabai Khera, near the sanctuary, also lost his eye in an attack while he grazed his goats near the jungle. One of the foresters was seriously injured while rescuing a sloth bear that had fallen in a well at a village. Such incidences angered me, but every sighting persuaded me to another. Mount Abu with its different forest types and microhabitats, used to be home for a number of wild animals. Historical records show that lions (Panthera leo persica) and tigers (Panthera tigris tigris) inhabited this serene oasis in an otherwise semi-arid region. Maharajas, British, then settlements and successive urbanization followed by tourism have affected the quality of forests and thus the fauna and flora. Sloth bears with their adaptations for living in dry habitats, including flex-

8 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conservation ible food habits, relatively small home ranges and tolerance to anthropogenic disturbances, are present in considerably good populations, even today in and around MA-WLS. The study I conducted was in response to an urgent need to evaluate the behavioral ecology of the species including distribution pattern, habitat use, ecological corridors, and diet, and situation of human-sloth bear conflict to refine the conservation strategies of the existing population in the sanctuary and to prevent its extirpation.

Illegal Trade Understanding Use of Bear Parts in Southeast Asia to Diminish Demand

Elizabeth Oneita Davis Brian Crudge Department of Archaeology and Anthropology Member: Sun Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Group University of Bristol, Bristol, BS8 1UU, UK Free the Bears Email: [email protected] Phnom Penh, Cambodia

David A. O’Connor Thona Lim Member: Sun Bear and Asiatic Black Bear Expert Teams, IUCN Free the Bears Bear Specialist Group Phnom Penh, Cambodia San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research Escondido, CA 92027, USA Matt Hunt Email: [email protected] Co-chair Asiatic Black Bear Expert Team Member: Captive Bears Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Jenny Anne Glikman Group San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research Free the Bears Escondido, CA 92027, USA Phnom Penh, Cambodia

Diogo Veríssimo San Diego Zoo Institute for Conservation Research Escondido, CA 92027, USA

The sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) is one of the more poorly understood bear species in the world, and is facing significant threats from extensive habitat loss and poaching. Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus) face similar threats in Southeast Asia. Despite the wide recognition that poaching remains a prominent issue for both of these species, there is nevertheless much misunderstanding about the drivers of the demand for bear parts. Free the Bears (FTB), San Diego Zoo Global (SDZG), and local governments partnered to better understand the demands for bear parts in Cambodia and Lao PDR employing a mixed-methods approach of social science and anthropological techniques. We sought to understand which ethnic groups have the greatest demand and specifically what this demand is for, so that we could better address how to reduce it. Our first study of use of bear parts was performed in Lao PDR in 2014, using social science surveys (Davis et al. 2016). We felt that a significant limitation of that work was the sole reliance on direct questions to inquire about use of bear parts. Direct questions can yield deceitful answers when the person is asked about illegal and/or socially undesirable behaviours (St. John et al. 2010). As bear part use is illegal in both Lao PDR and Cambodia, we presumed that asking directly about use of these products would under-estimate the actual prevalence of use. Therefore, we are now employing methodological techniques that rely on a series of questions and statistical techniques to derive probabilities of occurrence of sensitive activities. We used the randomised response technique (RRT), nominative technique (NT), and unmatched count technique (UCT) in Cambodia to better measure the true prevalence of use of bear parts. UCT was recently used to derive the prevalence of illegal bird hunting in Cambodia (Ibbett et al. 2017). So far, these techniques have shown that users of bear parts in Cambodia may comprise as much as a fifth of the country’s population –– much higher than the 8% that admitted this through direct questioning.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 9 Illegal Trade T. Lim T. T. Lim T. (left) A member of the survey team (wearing shirt) conducts an interview about use of bear parts in Stung Treng, Cambodia. (right) The Stung Treng survey team (left to right): Mony, Chenda, Munny, Virak, Marady, and Vichet.

Considering the extensive demand for bear parts in Cambodia, FTB-SDZG are now focusing efforts on implementation of a behavioural change/demand reduction campaign in northeast Cambodia (Stung Treng) during 2018, through a partnership with Oxford University. To allow for sufficiently rigorous impact evaluation, we will be tailoring the campaign specifically to the use of bear bile or gallbladders for medical purposes. Although we have uncovered numerous uses for bear parts within Cambodia, we have confirmed that the primary reason for use appears to be medicinal. An intriguing finding of our research is that use of bear parts for medicine is not regarded as Traditional Chinese Medicine (TCM), nor is it regarded as Traditional Khmer Medicine (TKM). Rather, such use appears to exist in a separate conceptual sphere that is tied to Western (also sometimes termed “scientific”) medicine. Cambodians who suffer bruising or internal bleeding (usually from a motor-related accident, though uterine issues have also been cited), they typically will first take Western medicine, and if their bruising/bleeding ailments are not alleviated, they may turn to bear bile or gallbladder. Our campaign has been designed to discourage individuals from turning to bear bile/gallbladder as a medical option by encouraging those individuals to consult trained medical professionals of both Western and traditional Khmer medicine. The campaign will also target the medical professionals of both TKM and Western medicine by discouraging prescription of bear parts. Should the campaign in Stung Treng be effective, we hope to expand to other geographical areas of Cambodia, in particular towns and villages that are located near protected areas, where there are bears that could be poached. If the goals of the campaign are realized, the reduction in users of bear parts throughout Cambodia should lessen the impetus to poach.

Literature Cited Davis, E.O., D. O’Connor, B. Crudge, A. Carignan, J.A. Glikman, C. Browne-Nuñez, and M. Hunt. 2016. Understanding public perceptions and motivations around bear part use: A study in northern Laos of attitudes of Chinese tourists and Lao PDR nationals. Biological Conservation 203:282-289. Ibbett, H., C. Lay, P. Phlai, D. Song, C. Hong, S.P. Mahood, and E.J. Milner-Gulland. 2017. Conserving a globally threatened species in a semi-natural, agrarian landscape. Oryx doi:10.1017/S0030605316001708 St. John, F.A., G. Edwards-Jones, J.M. Gibbons, and J.P. Jones. 2010. Testing novel methods for assessing rule breaking in conservation. Biological Conservation 143:1025-1030.

10 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Human-Bear Conflicts How Locals Characterize the Causes of Sloth Bear Attacks in Jawai, Rajasthan Ashish Kumar Jangid Ravi Kumar Sharma Member: Sloth Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Group Wildlife Institute of India Wildlife Institute of India Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India- 248001 Dehradun, Uttarakhand, India- 248001 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Human maulings and injuries caused by carnivores occur globally, leading to losses of both animal and human life. The Indian subcontinent is known for its rich biodiversity and high human population density, and close sharing of space by people and large carnivores, with commensurate human–wildlife interactions (Treves and Karanth 2003, Sripal 2015). Nega- tive human–wildlife interactions can undermine conservation efforts (Madden and McQuinn 2014). We conducted a survey of people living in the proposed Jawai Community Conserva- tion Reserve (309 km2; 25.0705°N, 73.1566°E) in Rajasthan state of western India. Jawai is a village located 16 km from Sumerpur town. The community reserve comprises both private and community land, and the local community participates in wildlife and habitat conservation, without any changes in land use patterns. The community reserve is not within the protected area network, but is governed by the Com- munity Reserve Management Committee (The Wildlife Protection Amendment Act 2002). The area is part of the Aravalli Mountain Range with interspersed hills and undulating terrain dominated by dry deciduous forests (Champion and Seth 1968). It is inhabited by sloth bears (Melursus ursinus), which are near the western limit of their range. Sloth bears are included under Schedule I of India’s Wildlife Protection Act 1972 and as Vulnerable in the IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. The area has a high human population density (263/km2) sharing space with wildlife (Sharma 2017). Human–sloth bear encounters occur frequently; however, no scientific studies have been conducted on the sloth bear population, their habitat utilization, level of conflict, and peoples’ perceptions of this conflict. Here we present results of a reconnaissance study aimed at assessing peoples’ perception of the causes of interactions with sloth bears. During our reconnaissance survey, we gathered direct and indirect signs of sloth bears. Proposed Jawai Community Conservation Reserve, Rajasthan, India, where We confirmed the occurrence of the species in survey was conducted of leading causes of conflicts with sloth bears. the south-western and central regions of the proposed reserve area, which has 21 villages. We carried out 72 semi-structured interviews in 8 representative villages to assess the characteristics of conflict in the area. We documented 5 main causes of sloth bear attacks in this area. Below we list these, with a brief description of each, and indicate the percent of interviewees who perceived this as the primary cause of human–bear conflicts in the area (listed in order of most to least perceived cause):

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 11 Human-Bear Conflicts • Dependency on forests and natural resources by locals (37%): The proposed reserve area is within a human-dominated landscape containing suitable habitat for bears and providing food resources like fruits, termites, ants, honey, and also the Prada (food offerings made by devotees in temples). The natural foods of bears are also utilized by locals, resulting in encounters with bears. Sloth bears are especially attracted to Prasad and are even able to open the closed doors of small temples to feed on edibles (similar to recently observed behavior of sloth bears in Maharashtra, India; Singh et al. 2017). These close encounters have resulted in some maulings. • Sanitation unawareness (22%): Open defecation is a common practice by local people in the early morning and late evening hours due to a lack of sanitation awareness, resources, and toilets. While walking to a place to defecate, people sometimes encounter bears. • Crop raiding (18%): Attraction of bears to crops increases the risk of confrontations with people. Farmers are scared of early morning attacks while irrigating and guarding their crops. The activities of farmers and bears have temporal and spatial overlap (Bargali et al. 2005). • Livestock grazing (12%): Local semi-pastoral “Rabari” community take their livestock to graze in the proposed reserve. A few livestock are often inadvertently left behind, forcing herders to go back and retrieve them. Incidents of mistak- ing bears for livestock and approaching them at close range during dawn and dusk has led to some attacks. • Encounters with nursing bears (10%): Female sloth bears are very protective of their young. As the study area is hilly and speckled with boulders and thick brush, people may not see a female with cubs behind a rock or bush until already too close, leading the bear to burst upon the intruder.

Avoiding these conflicts will require raising awareness of the local community of the need to modify their activity patterns and level of awareness. We believe more detailed studies are war- ranted, aimed at identifying conflict hotspots, understanding activity patterns and habitat utilization of bears, and recognizing intensive use areas of both bears and people. Acknowledgements We are thankful to the local villagers, who shared their opinions. We would like to thank the Forest Department, Government of Rajasthan and Wildlife Institute of India. We also thank Mr. Injured sloth bear and human after an attack. (Photos: Ashish Kumar Jangid) Anupam Srivastav, Mr. Samaram and Mr. Lalit Kumar for their supporting efforts during the study. Literature Cited Bargali, H.S., N. Akhtar, and N.P.S. Chouhan. 2005. Characteristics of sloth bear attacks and human casualties in north Bilaspur forest division, Chhattisgarh, India. Ursus 16:263–267. Champion, H.G. and S.K. Seth. 1968. A revised forest types of India. Government of India, Delhi. Madden, F. and B. McQuinn. 2014. Conservation’s blind spot: the case for conflict transformation in wildlife conservation. Biological Conservation 178:97–106. Sharma R. K. 2017. A Country side carnivore- Aspect of Leopard ecology at Jawai, Rajasthan, Wildlife Institute of India, Dehradun, India. M.Sc. Thesis 599.742.7 [544.6] SHA. Singh, N., J. Rot, S. Sonone, and N. Dharaiya. 2017. An unusual attractant spurs sloth bear break-ins in Maharashtra, India. International Bear News 26(3):20–21. Sripal, R.T. 2015. Understanding stakeholders perception towards human–wildlife interaction and conflict in a tiger landscape-complex of India. M.S. Thesis, University of Massachu- setts, Amherst, USA. The Wildlife Protection Amendment Act 2002 (No. 16 of 2003) downloaded from http://envfor. nic.in/legis/wildlife/wild_act_02.pdf Accessed on February 23, 2018. Treves, A. and K.U. Karanth. 2003. Human–carnivore conflict and perspectives on carnivore management worldwide. Conservation Biology 17:1491–1499.

12 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Biological Research A Double-Edged Sword: American Black Bears Rely on Hunters’ Baits in the Face of Declining Natural Foods Spencer Rettler James Forester PhD. Student Assistant Professor Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 USA University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 USA Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Mark Ditmer Dave Garshelis Postdoctoral Research Associate Co-chair IUCN Bear Specialist Group Department of Fisheries, Wildlife and Conservation Biology Minnesota Department of Natural Resources University of Minnesota, St. Paul, MN 55108 USA Grand Rapids, MN 55744 USA Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Andrew Tri Wildlife Research Biologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Grand Rapids, MN 55744 USA Email: [email protected]

Food availability and legal hunting can influence bear populations in unexpected ways, and are often interconnected. Numerous studies have demonstrated that when natural foods are scarce, bears often seek calorically-dense anthropogenic foods such as garbage and crops, bringing them into proximity to humans and increasing their chance of being killed. For bear populations that are harvested, there is strong evidence that bears are more attracted to hunters’ baits in years of poor natural food availability, leading to increased hunter success. That is, poor natural foods prompt bears to increase risky behaviors. We investigated a system where natural foods were reduced not just in 1 season or 1 year, but over a long term. Reduced timber harvesting on federal lands in northcentral Minnesota, USA, led to more mature, closed canopy forests resulting in a gradual reduction in soft and hard mast foods for American black bears (Ursus americanus) over a 30-year period. As a consequence, bears living in this area in recent years were faced with a late season caloric deficit. We hypothesized that during hyperphagia bears would either migrate south to areas of more abundant natural mast and crops, enter developed areas where garbage or birdfeeders were available, or hibernate in poor physical condition. Using data from 16 GPS-collared bears (M=8; F=8), we rejected all of our initial hypotheses and discovered an alternate important food source and foraging strategy. We checked bears in winter dens and found that despite a paucity in natural food availability, most had gained significant weight since their summer capture, and had appreciable fat reserves (measured using BIA [bioelectrical impedance analysis], skinfold thickness, and bone prominence). To explain this finding we examined locations of bears during mid-August to mid-October to see where they were feeding. Specifically, we looked at Driftwood Outdoors Lodge/Kabetogama Driftwood Outdoors Lodge/Kabetogama American black bears in Minnesota, faced with a fall food deficit due to a long-term decline in natural foods as a consequence of forestry practices, have found hunters’ baits to be a reliable substitute. The concentration of high-calorie foods enables them to put on substantial weight before hibernation, but is an obvious mortality risk.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 13 Biological Research whether they fed in towns, cropfields, or hunters’ baits. We used Resource Selection Functions to test for their selection of these food sources while controlling for habitat type, how recently the area had been disturbed by timber harvest, and the distance to roads or trails. We predicted (based on other studies) that males would use anthropogenic food sources more often than females and that if they did access these resources, they would do so mainly during the crepuscular period or at night, to avoid contact with people. If true, though, we wondered what females were doing to stay in such good shape. We found strong evidence that many bears in this population sought out hunters’ baits: approx. 63% of individual bear–time period combinations exhibited a significant selection for proximity to bait piles. Contrary to our hypothesis, both females (70%) and males (55%) selected for hunters’ baits during at least 1 time period, and there was no difference in selection by time of day. Only 1 bear demonstrated a significant selection for crops and none selected for developed areas. Bears that exploited bait piles appeared to be in better body condition than those that did not. For example, we had an opportunity to compare 2 females, each with 2 cubs, whose home ranges broadly overlapped: 1 that used bait piles in fall had 42% body fat and 33–43 kg yearlings in the den whereas the other did not use hunters’ baits and had 35.8% body fat and 16–18 kg yearlings. To determine whether this is a recent behavioral adaptation, we will employ stable isotope analysis of hair samples collected from this population in the 1980s versus recent years to compare the relative contributions of corn-based products (i.e., high-fructose corn syrup in baits) to bears’ diets. Ironically, it appears that baits used to attract and kill bears are also acting as a key food to compensate for the long-term reduction in natural foods. The types of foods that hunters are now commonly using (e.g., bulk granola, nuts, grains) have clear nutritional benefits for bears, but represent a double-edged sword.

14 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Biological Research Ecological Modeling of the Genus Ursus: What Does the Niche Tell Us? Carlos Luna-Aranguré Ella Vázquez-Domínguez Instituto de Ecología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de Instituto de Ecología, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México (UNAM) México (UNAM) Email: [email protected]

Understanding how the environment can shape the diversification patterns and geographic distribution of species represents an essential question in evolutionary biology. By answering these questions we can get deeper understanding of the history of species, but also establish new conservation strategies considering the evolutionary context of their past. Bears as a family are the most studied carnivores of the world, making available an extensive record of information regarding geographic distribution, genetics, paleontology, behavior, among many other biological aspects. Ursus is the best represented genus of the family, characterized by a complex evolutionary history with unresolved phylogenetic relationships among the lineages of the 4 extant species. Our aim in the study I presented at the 25th IBA Conference held in Quito, Ecuador, was to apply a new approach that integrates phylogeographic methods, ecological niche modeling, and fossil information. This allowed us to evaluate the role that environmental change exerted during the bears diversification, and further explore the effect of climatic oscillations of the last glacial maximum over the 4 Ursus species distribution patterns (below).

Visual abstract of the general procedures of our study: A) we gathered all the available mitochondrial DNA sequences and the geographic information of each sample; B) then we inferred the phylogenetic relationships of the samples and extracted the values of current precipitation and temperature where the samples were collected; C) we characterized the climatic niche of the species and measured their overlapping patterns; D) next we projected the resulting relationships to the past environmental conditions during the last glacial maximum and calibrated our results using the fossil records; and E) we applied a phyloclimatespace approach in order to reconstruct the ecological conditions of the ancestors of the modern bears.

It was a privilege to present our study in Quito and to receive valuable feedback from the assistants at the conference, which allowed us to improve the focus of our research. This wonderful experience was possible thanks to the support I received from the IBA through a travel grant, and because of the hardworking efforts of many biologists who have studied bears for decades, generating the extensive records we used for our study. The results of our study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal soon.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 15 Reviews Yellowstone Grizzly Bears – Ecology and Conservation of an Icon of Wildness Edited by: P.J. White, Kerry A. Gunther and Frank T. van Manen Yellowstone Forever, PO Box 117, Yellowstone National Park, WY, 82190 Reviewed by A. H. (Tony) Hamilton ([email protected])

One of the most challenging elements of moving bear research into management is the translation of that science into everyday language. Who better to show us how it’s done than the folks at Yellowstone? The authors and editors of a new book published by Yellowstone Forever and the US Geological Survey: Yellowstone Grizzly Bears – Ecology and Conservation of an Icon of Wildness - have produced an up-to-date and fully-accessible synthesis of ongoing Grizzly research and monitoring begun by John and Frank Craighead in 1959. In addition, they have tackled the current controversy surrounding de-listing (under the Endangered Species Act) head-on by providing a fulsome, un-biased review of the history of the issue and their prognosis for the future. I am delighted to add this volume to my collection of over 360 books about bears. Not only does the book read well and contain a comprehensive review of the largest, oldest and yes, most expensive dataset assembled for any Ursid, it is a joy to see and feel and use. There are a number of photographs, including several taken by remote cameras, with excellent colour accuracy and clarity. You know when a particularly good bear photo can put the hair up on the back of your neck, or make you sigh? Try a few of these and you’ll see what I mean. Older ursophiles will have to reach for their reading glasses, but all of the text and all but one of tables (8.1) and graphs are clear and well-labeled. The maps are likewise colourful and clear, but some lack the customized, detailed labelling that was possible when geographers did everything by hand instead using stock GIS base maps. The 8” by 10” size and weight of the 278-page print version of the book is, at least for my hands, ideal, if unusual. I wondered about the relatively high proportion of white edge space, particularly noticeable when there are no marginal notations. On the other hand, that large page size gives those beautiful full-page photographs all the more impact. The references section, glossary, historic timeline, fact sheet and index are clear and add to the book’s usability and utility. One of the strengths of the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team and their associates is their huge body of published literature. In addition, they, their agencies and various coalitions of locals have given thousands of presentations and sponsored outreach at countless meetings, conferences and at booths, in classrooms and off the Park Warden’s and State bear manager’s tailgates. I have seen some of this book’s content in other formats, but this volume brings it all together in one place at just the right time. If ever there was a time to apply sound scientific evidence such as presented here, this is it. With the March 2018 an- nouncement that a US District judge denied a request by the Department of the Interior to put the anti-hunt lawsuits brought forward by environmentalists and Native Americans on hold, Yellowstone Grizzly Bears should be required reading by the court. It contains the irrefutable evidence of population increase, range expansion, food resiliency (even in light of climate change) and supports the State and Park-delivered Conservation Strategy – a Strategy backed by a series of defensible checks and balances that would kick in if monitoring were to indicate something other than continued success in meeting spatially explicit occupancy, productivity targets and mortality limits. The timely publication of this book will help offset misinformation. The book is such a powerful demonstration of the truth of the matter that anyone suggesting “alternative facts” about Yellowstone Grizzly Bears will now completely lack credibility. And by providing an easily downloadable version for free, the USGS has ensured the truth is readily at hand to assist with the delisting decision later this year. The recovery of the Yellowstone Grizzly, truly the “Icon of Wildness” of the Park and its surrounding ecosystem, stands as an example of what we hope to achieve globally for many bear populations. This book does an excellent job of presenting the science behind this incredible conservation success story that has been 50 years in the making. Help celebrate that success by getting your own copy. You won’t regret it.

The hard copy version of Yellowstone Grizzly Bears is available from Yellowstone Forever: https://shop.yellowstone.org/yellowstone-grizzly-bears-ecology-and-conservation-of-an-icon-of-wildness Thanks go to Yellowstone Forever for allowing a free downloadable version at: https://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/70189120

16 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Reviews Press Release: Fifty Miles Outside of Rome Live the Rarest Bears on Earth Ashland Creek Press is pleased to announce the upcoming publication of Roger Thompson’s eye-opening new book, NO WORD FOR WILDERNESS: Italy’s Grizzlies and the Race to Save the Rarest Bears on Earth.

RELEASE: May 1, 2018 PRICE: $18.95 TRIM 5.25 x 8 x .57 PAGES: 231 ISBN: 978-1-61822-056-1

In Italian, there is no word for wilderness. Yet in the mountains of Italy, brown bears not only exist, they are fighting to survive amid encroaching development, local and international politics, and the mafia.

This meticulously researched and eye-opening book tells the incredible stories of two special populations of bears in Italy—one the last vestige of a former time that persists against all odds, the other a great experiment in rewilding that, if successful, promises to change how we see not only Italy but all of Europe.

The Abruzzo bears of central Italy have survived amid one of the oldest civilizations on earth—but now, with numbers estimated at as low as fifty individuals, they face a critical future as multiple forces, from farmers to the mob, collide within their territory. The Slovenian bears of northern Italy, brought to the Alps at the turn of the century, have sparked controversy among local and international interests alike.

The stories of these bears take readers on a spectacular journey across Italy, where we come face-to-face not only with these fascinating species but with embattled park directors, heroic environmentalists, innovative scientists, and a public that is coming to terms with the importance of Italy’s rich natural history.

Award-winning author Roger Thompson has traveled throughout Italy documenting the history and current crises of these bears, and the result is an engaging and in-depth examination that resonates across all endangered species and offers invaluable insights into the ever-evolving relationships between human and non-human animals in a rapidly changing world.

About the Author: Roger Thompson is an award-winning nonfiction writer and director of the Program in Writing and Rhetoric at Stony Brook University and a former wilderness canoe guide for a Minnesota camp and the founder and director of an environmental program in Banff, AB.

Ashland Creek Press is a boutique publisher focused on literature related to the environment and animal protection. For more information about Ashland Creek Press, visit www.AshlandCreekPress.com.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 17 Conference Reports

25th International Conference on Bear Research & Management November 12 - 17, 2017 QUITO, ECUADOR The main focus for the conference was “New Frontiers for Bear Research and Conservation in the Tropics”. The conference was designed to give a special emphasis to presentations about research, management and conservation of bear species in tropical zones. The program included 9 sessions, and for the first time in an IBA Conference, the program included a Spanish session, with simultaneous translation in English about the Andean bear. Session: Invited Keynote speakers Invited Speaker: Dave Garshelis Lack of knowledge on the four tropical bears is killing them Dave Garshelis discussed the current state of knowledge of the 4 tropical bears (Andean, Tremarctos ornatus, Asiatic black, Ursus thibetanus, sun, Helarctos malayanus, and sloth, Melursus ursinus), and made a case that more research is needed to effectively conserve them. He showed that many previously posed assumptions/assertions about these species is proving to be “not the whole story”, and that recent studies of these bears based mainly on remote sensing and statistical models can be even more deceiving. He called for a “critical transition” to include: a greater boldness to go against accepted wisdom (thinking outside the box), more scrutiny of assumptions of one’s own work, more field studies directed at understanding limiting factors and what it takes for bears to persist, less emphasis on dire predictions with greater recognition of the complexity and resiliency of ecological systems, and employing research and monitoring to find what conservation actions are working, thus enabling improved conservation through an adaptive process.

Invited speaker: Diego Tirira Una revisión al conocimiento histórico del oso andino en el Ecuador. Diego Tirira presentó una revisión al conocimiento del oso andino en el Ecuador, desde los primeros y más antiguos registros encontrados hasta el presente. La evidencia indica que no existen fósiles en Ecuador y que se trata de una especie con escasa información histórica. La primera documentación escrita corresponde a Pedro Cieza de León en 1553, mientras que la primera vez que se utilizó nomenclatura binomial para esta especie en Ecuador fue por Caetano Osculati en 1854. Desde entonces y hasta fines del siglo XX fueron pocos los aportes publicados sobre la especie en Ecuador. A partir del siglo XXI se inició un importante avance en el conocimiento liderado por diferentes investigadores locales. Session: BSG Special Session. Is bear conservation advancing? Chair: Dave Garshelis Bear Specialist Group members were asked to submit abstracts for presentations under the theme: Is Bear Conservation Advancing? This session included 15 presentations: 4 on European brown bears (U. arctos), 3 on Andean bears, 1 on sun bears, 1 on Asiatic black bears plus 1 on demand for parts of sun bears and Asiatic black bears, 2 on sloth bears, 1 on giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca), 1 on the role of captive bears, and 1 summarizing the conservation state of affairs related to all the bears. Marta De Barba led off the session with a summary of ecological data collected for the 10 brown bear populations in Europe, gathered from 44 institutions working on brown bear research and management in 24 countries. Marta showed

18 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conference Reports that whereas substantial valuable data are available, important gaps in knowledge still exist, and moreover, there are widely variable levels to which scientific data are used to inform management. Jon Swenson showed that rapidly increasing knowledge from a long-term research project did not yield better management of brown bears in Sweden, measured against established goals; this was despite concerted efforts by researchers to share information. He asked if it was possible for a local management board, consisting of politicians and representatives of interest groups, to truly manage using the adaptive management paradigm. Djuro Huber showed that brown bears provide an excellent example of how economic value can generate local acceptance. Using Croatia as a case study, he il- Brent Hemly Brent lustrated how trophy hunting, limited to strong Data from an adult female, GPS-collared American black bear (U. americanus) in and stable populations, can exist together with Minnesota, USA, showed that it resided entirely within a narrow riparian forest sur- bear-related eco-tourism (e.g., bear watching rounded by agriculture, and its offspring also settled in this same forest strip. Dave and bear-friendly products), all offering op- Garshelis made the point that improved knowledge of temperate bears could aid portunities to raise the value of the bear. Nuria in understanding tropical bears, and that we shouldn’t think of tropical bears as Selva reviewed the extraordinary magnitude of being less adaptive to fragmented and degraded habitats. artificial feeding for brown bear populations in Europe and documented effects on the species ecology and behavior. She pointed to this practice as a main challenge for European brown bear conservation and highlighted the importance of preserving natural behaviors. Switching to South America, Robert Marquez explained a method for prioritizing conservation units based not just on biological components, but also socio-economic factors. Using an example from Colombia, he discussed a system of core conservation units (COCOUN), consisting of parks and other types of protected areas, within which there has been created a strong public–private partnership of diverse stakeholders with economical, logistical, technical, and legal capacity to imple- ment management actions for the long-term benefit of Andean bears. Nereyda Falconi stressed the importance of sharing data regarding Andean bears in Peru, to avoid duplicated efforts and increase synergy in research efforts. She compiled data from a host of research projects and created a database that can be used to design more efficient and focused field studies, and prioritize future research directions. Roxana Rojas showed that Andean bear conservation in Peru has been improving through the generation of important documents such as the National Conservation Plan. She concluded that bear conservation should employ a multidisciplinary perspective, working with local people (e.g., helping them to diversify their main means of subsistence) and greater participation of government stakeholders. Moving on to Asia, Gabriella Fredriksson discussed how sun bear conservation has progressed over the last 2 decades. With the first field studies on this species initiated in 1997, she showed that much knowledge has been gained on its ecology, but at the same time conservation challenges have dramatically increased, with record rates of deforestation in strongholds within this species’ range (Indonesia, Malaysia and Myanmar). A Sun Bear Conservation Action Plan is being developed, which will hopefully provide stimulation and ideas for integrating bear conservation with various other species conservation actions. Mei-hsiu Hwang discussed the many challenges of conserving Asiatic black bears in Taiwan. She has worked there tirelessly for 20 years, identifying threats to bears, cultivating new bear scientists, educating the general public and informing society through numerous outreach programs, establishing a bear-focused NGO, and encouraging participation of various key state-holders. Despite all these efforts, poaching and other threats continue to imperil Formosan black bears. E.O. Davis discussed the use of novel survey techniques to gain a clearer understanding of the drivers of consumption of bear parts in Lao PDR and Cambodia. She also presented preliminary results from both countries, showing that the extent of use of these products may be much higher than previously found, because with previous survey tools, people were reluctant to admit to using an illegal product. Thomas Sharp showed that there has been a great deal of progress in sloth bear conservation in India: for example, poaching is down and a number of people are actively working toward solutions to human–bear conflicts. However, conservation advances are up against rapid human population growth, which is causing continual habitat loss and ever increasing human–bear encounters and conflicts. Water can be a limiting resource for sloth bears inhabiting tropical dry deciduous for-

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 19 Conference Reports ests in places like Gujarat, India. This may drive sloth bears to seek water in and around human settlements. Arzoo Malik used geo-spatial techniques to identify areas in the Jessore sloth bear sanctuary where rainwater can accumulate naturally; in such places, structures to aid in the retention of water might help in reducing movements of sloth bears out of the sanctuary, and thereby alleviate conflicts with people. Dajun Wang discussed the surprising negative reac- tions to the downlisting of giant pandas from Endangered to Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. The downlisting was based on population data from the China State Forestry Administration’s circa decadal national panda surveys, compared to standardized IUCN criteria. Other species in China that have been downlisted in recent years, such as the snow leopard (Panthera uncia), Przewalski’s gazelle (Procapra przewalskii) and Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii), did Map of probability of rainwater accumulation may aid in creating water retention sites for sloth bears in Jessore sloth bear sanctuary, Gujarat, India, thereby alleviat- not generate as much controversy as the giant ing the propensity for bears to seek water near villages. This is one example of panda because they are not held in the same advancing conservation, posed by the young researcher, Arzoo Malik. esteem by the public, politicians, and scientists. José Kok showed that there are quite a number of European zoos that support bear conservation projects, but the potential is even higher. LINCZ (Linking Conser- vation and Zoos; www.LINCZ.org) is a new online “dating site” to help conservationists find donors, and zoos find projects to support. It provides NGO’s a platform to showcase their conservation projects and thereby helps zoos find projects that match their goals, that are affordable, and run by reliable conservation organizations. Emre Can ended the session with a stirring summary entitled “Conservation is Dying. Can we talk about it?” He reviewed our current state of bear conservation, finding that the conservation community does not accurately portray the diversity of cultures in which nature has been valued and conserved for centuries. He implored us to recognize the need for a new conservation paradigm that is anchored in conservation practice rather than academia, international NGOs, or funding providers. Session: Bears of the world: Distribution and conservation status Chair: Djuro Huber The 4 presentations illustrated different approaches to help with the bear conservation in South America but one also included tropical Asia. Annemarie Weegenaar presented on the efforts of Bears in Mind to keep some formerly mistreated European brown bears happy in a sanctuary in the Netherlands, as well as to support the public awareness, improve environmental education and field research in Indonesia, Laos and Ecuador; all the bears in the tropics. They try to create an environment where humans and bears can coexist in harmony. Becky Zug explained how her team used the Andean bears as conservation surrogates for other at-risk Andean mammals they share their habitat with. Bears are an important cultural symbol and in their study area showed some positive effects on the presence of carnivore species, but broader habitat conservation should be an important focus. Russ Van Horn asked if we can improve the effectiveness of the national plans to better conserve the Andean bear? He addressed the apparent gap between the plans’ goals and the bears’ trajectory and reviewed the implementation progress of these plans in the 5 primary range countries of which 4 have established national plans or strategies for its conservation. The perceived relative magnitude of threats and the socio-political context of bear conservation vary among countries, so the plans also differ. Samantha Young closed the session explaining how her team works on reducing human impacts on Andean bears in Peru through community-based conservation. They work collab- oratively with locals to facilitate the adoption of sustainable behaviors through capacity building for sustainable activities, including fuel efficient cook-stoves and forest fire prevention, providing environmental education for teachers and students.

20 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conference Reports Session: Ecología y Distribución del Oso Andino Chair: Diego Tirira Samuel Rodríguez-Páez. Este estudio se desarrolló en la zona de amortiguamiento del Parque Nacional Natural Chingaza y tuvo como propósito evaluar el uso del hábitat del oso andino durante dos períodos climáticos. Se evidenció que las bro- melias terrestres son un recurso utilizado por la especie. También se observó que las localidades que presentan una mayor intervención fueron las más utilizados por el oso andino, lo cual puede apoyar la idea de que los espacios intervenidos brindan nuevos recursos para la supervivencia del oso y que sustentan la plasticidad de la especie frente a cambios ambien- tales. Fernando Del Moral Sachetti Comparó y cuantificó el uso del hábitat por el oso andino en las estaciones climáticas y la respectiva interacción interespecífica con otros grandes carnívoros en la parte sur de su distribución, dentro de territorio argentino. Se registró que el pastizal de niebla es utilizado además del oso andino, por el jaguar, puma y zorro colorado durante el período estival, cuando las lluvias y crecientes de los ríos son intensas. En esta época, el oso aprovechó la oferta de Gunnera apiculata y Puya novarae como recurso alimentario. Durante la época seca, el oso prefirió el bosque por sobre el pastizal. Russ Van Horn. To facilitate the investigation of Andean Bear space and habitat use throughout the species’ range we evaluated potential movement corridors in the dry forest of NW Peru. Bear trails were readily visible in satellite imagery because vegetation there was relatively sparse. Models developed from this site will be extrapolated to predict the locations of travel routes at other study sites in Peru. Identifying how topographic and landscape features affect the movements of bears will inform conservation efforts to identify potential corridors to link patches of habitat in landscapes undergoing continued fragmentation. Diana Paredes. Se utilizaron modelos de nicho ecológico y de ocupación para estimar la idoneidad de hábitat para el oso andino en Ecuador, así como la probabilidad de ocupación, extensión de presencia y área de ocupación. Se evaluó la efectividad de las áreas protegidas y el impacto del cambio climático entre 1990 y 2070. Los resultados indicaron que las áreas protegidas apoyan la protección del oso andino; sin embargo, más del 50% de las áreas con mayor idoneidad de hábitat y probabilidad de ocupación se encuentran sin protección. El calentamiento global parece no tener un impacto significativo en el nicho climático del oso andino. Este estudio actualizó el conocimiento de la distribución del oso en Ecuador, constituye la primera evaluación cuantitativa del impacto del cambio climático sobre la especie en el país y sugiere una actualización del ordenamiento territorial para mejorar la gestión de las áreas protegidas. Víctor Utreras. Para apoyar la conservación del oso andino mediante la gestión del paisaje se han implementado diferentes acciones y estrategias. Se determinó la abundancia relativa de osos en tres paisajes seleccionados: Cotacachi-Cayapas-El Ángel, Cofán-Bermejo-Llanganates y Podocarpus. Se incorporaron 206.209 hectáreas como áreas de conservación de la especie. Se ha trabajado con gobiernos locales para el fortalecimiento de iniciativas de conservación y gestión de vida silvestre. Se han implementado iniciativas productivas sostenibles para disminuir la presión de la frontera agrícola. Se atendieron cinco especímenes de osos cautivos y se apoyó en el proceso de liberación y monitoreo de dos individuos. La gestión de paisajes representa una oportunidad para mejorar la efectividad de la conservación del oso andino y otras especies amenazadas, y aportar al bienestar humano. Jhon Rojas modeló el área de ocupación y amenazas para el oso andino en el Parque Natural Tamamá y su área de amortiguamiento, en Colombia. Los modelos de ocupación a escala de sitio señalaron la existencia de presiones humanas y la cantidad de hábitat remanente, como las variables que más afectan la presencia del oso andino. La información obtenida fue usada para ejercicios de prevención, vigilancia y control, con el aumento o disminución de rutas de patrullaje en los sectores con base en la intensidad de las presiones. En las áreas priorizadas se reforzó la educación ambiental enfocada a niños escolares y adultos para disminuir las amenazas. Estos resultados muestran la importancia de vincular

la información de monitoreo en la gestión y A. Fuller manejo del área asegurando el éxito de las Robert Márquez talks about the importance of core intervenciones. conservation areas for Andean bear.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 21 Workshop Reports Session: Ecology and distribution of the Andean Bear 2 Chair: Russ Van Horn These 8 speakers described efforts to determine where Andean bears currently live, why, and how. They conducted research at differing spatial and temporal scales in Ecuador, Colombia, and Venezuela, working with abiotic and biotic data. Abiotic data included data on precipitation, elevation and topography, and distance to wáter. Biotic data included records from natural history collections, forest types, replicable records of bear sign, distance to human activities and information from camera traps. Projects explored variation in occupancy, connectivity among protected areas, habitat quality, demographic patterns, and other phenomenon. Results included diurnal activity, seasonality in reproduction, <1.5 cubs/litter, a male-biased sex, and an estimated <3 bears/100 km2. In at least some sites, bear occupancy increased with distance from roads and there was some evidence that human-bear conflict occurred where more natural vegetative cover had been lost. Overall, this session was an encouraging step towards the long-term conservation of Andean bears. Session: Bear Ecology and Behavior 3 Chair: Frank T. van Manen This session consisted of 6 presentations and covered a spectrum of topics. Interestingly, despite the differences in topics, there were distinct links that tied these presentations together. Kamil Barton (Institute of Nature Conservation, Polish Acad- emy of Sciences) spoke about research efforts to develop Bayesian models of individual movements of European brown bears. The analyses suggested the existence of bimodal movement behaviors among dispersing bears with longer, more directed movements interspersed by area-concentrated movements. Among resident bears, foraging sites were primary drivers of local movement paths. These modes of movements and scales of decision-making related directly to the presentation by Isobel Phoebus (fRI Research, Canada), who studied grizzly bear use of riparian zones in Alberta, Canada. She reported that bears selected riparian zones particularly in summer and in areas that had been harvested. Her study showed that riparian buffers in areas with timber harvest provide valuable grizzly bear habitat, which is an important consideration for forest managers. At a finer scale, Santiago Molina (Universidad San Francisco de Quito, Ecuador) described how Andean bears seasonally forage on the fruits of aguacatillo trees in a secondary forest on the northwestern edge of Quito. The fruits are nutritious, with a high fat content, and have a very strong odor that attracts multiple bears to this relatively small area. This pioneer tree species may thus provide an important food resource in an area where secondary and primary forests are interspersed with human activities such as agriculture and ranching. The seasonal congregation of Andean bears has provided valuable opportunities to study this elusive bear species. Where bears congregate because of the availability of valuable food resources, temporal segregation may be a strategy that bears deploy to gain access to important resources. Miha Krofel (University of Ljubljana, Slovenia) reported the use of such strategies by brown bears in Slovenia, where bears frequently use permanent feeding sites (mostly consisting of corn) that are used for diversionary feeding. Hunting pressure is quite high and because most harvest takes place at or near these sites, the use of these sites is risky, especially during the hunting season. Given high bear densities at these sites, there is also the additional risk of negative interactions with more dominant bears. Bears of different sex and age classes navigated these risks through temporal segregation, with yearlings and females with offspring arriving earlier in the evening and adult males arriving last, when the risk of encounters with humans was lowest. Miha referred to these strategies with a catchy entry to his title “Optimizing dinner time in a risky restaurant…”. Finally, 2 presentations focused on olfaction, a key behavioral trait among bears that influences many of the patterns observed in the presentations above, namely movements, habitat selection, foraging activities, and intraspecific interactions. Olfaction was a primary focus of a study presented by Heiko Jansen (Washington State University, USA). He reported on his research with 4 grizzly bear cubs (all born in captivity) at the Washington State University Bear Research Center to examine to what degree responses to odorants by young grizzly bears represented innate behaviors. The captive research facility allowed a robust experimental design so Heiko and his team set up 42 trials and measured responses to 16 different odorants at different concentrations. Responses ranged from attractants (fruit oils, eucalyptus, urine of a familiar male bear) to repellents (musk-related odors, urine of unfamiliar bears) and the degree of responses were proportionate to the concentration of each odorant. Interestingly, typical bear lure consisting of rancid cow’s blood was the single exception to this graded response; it was a robust attractant among the cubs, even at the lowest concentration, suggesting some learning had occurred. Finally, Eva Filipczková (Universidad Técnica Particular de Loja, Ecuador) presented results of a pilot study focusing on marking behaviors of Andean bears in Ecuadorian cloud forest in Napo Province. Using remote cameras, Eva and her team documented various marking behaviors, with scent marking by males being the most common behavioral display. The pilot study formed the basis for a more comprehensive study that expanded the study area into Zamora Chinchipe province. Videos from 6 marking sites showed that scent marking occurred in 80% of recordings. Eva showed several fascinating video segments of these behaviors, including bears biting, rubbing, sniffing, and licking the mark tree;

22 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conference Reports the one that stood out most in my mind, however, was of bears climbing high up in a tree to do the marking. A compila- tion of these videos can be viewed on YouTube and I encourage you to check them out here: https://www.youtube.com/ watch?v=9FMtiaDauVw. Thanks to the presenters for a very informative, inspiring, and synergistic session. Session: Physiology Chair: John Hechtel John Whiteman discussed how monthly fluctuations in body mass of rescued and rehabilitated adult sun bear males were tracked. Male mass exhibited a pronounced decline of approx. 12% from March through May, the warmest months of the year. Preliminary data do not support the hypothesis that mass loss during this period was caused by food deprivation from increased enclosure-raiding by habituated macaques (Macaca fascicularis). Lana Vranković discussed how trans fatty acids in processed food products (elaidic acid is predominant) and ruminant’s meat, dairy products and milk (vaccenic acid is predominant) were compared in samples from bears killed during conflicts versus hunted or road-killed bears in order to determine if those fats can be used to assess anthropogenic foraging by brown bears in Croatia. Further research should be focused on larger sample size of bears that died after intervention shooting. Nuria Fandos explained how the maternal stress axis programming (MSAP) has become an important topic in human health and also been recognized in the ecological literature. The primary goal was to determine if MSAP occurs in brown bears using data collected during the Scandina- vian Brown Bear Research Project from 1988 to 2014. Preliminary results suggest that maternal capture history may affect the offspring’s body condition. MSAP could be a plausible explanation. Abbey Wilson showed how chemical signals produced by giant pandas were identified through characterization of volatile compounds in urine of males and females during the breeding season, determination of olfactory interest by males to estrous urine prior to ovulation, and confirmation of pheromone candidates through behavioral bioassays. The combination of analytical techniques and behavioral bioassays can be used to identify pheromones related to reproductive status, sexual motivation, and identity in both captive and free-ranging individuals. Yaduraj Khadpekar discussed how urinary hormone assays and data on visible changes in the vulva are currently under study to help develop a non-invasive method to monitor reproductive hormones in captive female sloth bears. Preliminary results show that the levels of urinary estradiol metabolites in female sloth bears increase during mid-May to mid-July, and this increase occurs during a period of high vulva visibility. Sloth bears appear to have a single, seasonal estrous period like most other bear species. Peter Stevinkel explained how differences in Trimethylamine-N-oxide, choline and betaine levels between free-ranging and Zoo brown bears were quantified and may reflect differences in nutrition and feeding behaviors. The 4-fold increase in betaine levels from summer to winter may be protective since betaine is an osmolyte that protect cells, proteins, and enzymes from environmental stress. Further studies should evaluate if high levels of betaine may promote A. Macleod hypermethylation and down-regulation of gene Yaduraj Khadpekar presenting on non-invasive monitoring of activity during hibernation. reproductive hormones in captive female sloth bears. Session: Genetic studies in Bears Chair: Maria de Lourdes Torres This session consisted of 5 interesting talks on research being conducted on the bear specie genetics. Maria de Lourdes Torres discussed how a total of 31 different bears were unambiguously identified through camera trap images, and DNA was extracted from hair samples collected from these individuals via non- invasive methods. The mitochondrial region under study was PCR amplified and sequenced for all samples to determine specific haplotypes for each individual. From these results, haplotype diversity was found to be moderate (0.6645), while nucleotide diversity (π) appeared to be extremely low (0.001783) compared to other bear species. Michael Saxton explained how using RNA-sequencing, the transcriptional changes that occur in muscle, liver, and adipose tissues of captive brown bears in active, hyperphagic, and hibernation states were analyzed. A significant differential expression was found between hibernation and the other seasons in all three tissues, with the highest number of changes occurring in adipose tissue. AKT2, a key regulator in the insulin signal-

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 23 Conference Reports ing pathway, is downregulated in hibernation. Other genes associated with diabetes in humans, such as KLF11 and GNMT, show differential expression consistent with expectations in insulin resistance. Michael J. Hooker described how multi-locus microsatellite genotypes derived from bear hair and tissue samples collected from the 3 Georgia bear populations was used to assess levels of genetic diversity within and between populations. Compared to other southeastern United States bear populations, the North Georgia Bear Population and the South Georgia Bear Population have relatively high rates of genetic diversity (Ho =0.72±0.02, A=6.68±0.32, and Ho =0.72±0.02, A=6.82±0.35, respectively). In contrast, the Central Georgia Bear Population has relatively low rates (Ho =0.46±0.03, and A=3.96±0.20). Given the juxtaposition of the 3 populations, this finding provides evidence that the Central Georgia Bear population has experienced long-term genetic isolation and genetic drift. Prachi Thatte discussed how the connectivity of 2 large mammals – tigers, Panthera tigris tigris, and sloth bears – in the central Indian landscape was examined. Microsatellite data from non-invasive samples (Tiger: 116 individuals, 12 markers. Sloth bears: 196 samples, 11 markers) was used to examine genetic differentiation and this genetic data was used to infer the resistance- to-movement across different land-use types. Both tiger and sloth bear populations show sub-structuring in the landscape. However, sloth bear populations show lower genetic differentiation compared to tiger populations. However, they do show a mild but significant isolation by distance. Finally, Sudhanshu Mishra showed how the correlation of structural composition of gut microbiota and genetic diversity in wild giant pandas was examined. Eighty fecal samples of wild giant pandas were collected from Wolong National Nature Reserve, China. Further, the structural profile of the giant panda gut microbiome was studied, comprehensively based on pyrosequencing of V4-V5 region of 16S rDNA, and assessed genetic diversity using primers for Cyt-b gene and D-loop region of mitochondrial DNA. The bacterial composition in the wild giant pandas was primarily dominated by Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes, and Firmicutes (contributing 60.49%, 21.85% and 14.95%, respectively). This research is the first attempt to identify and partition the colonization and sorting process in a gut microbiota metapopulation of the wild giant panda with large sample-size. Session: Population Estimation & Spatial Analysis Chair: Nishith Dharaiya The session on population estimation and spatial analysis covered 8 interesting talks on 4 different species of bears across the world. Varied issues of bear population monitoring using the spatial analysis were discussed by 8 different presenters. Angela Fuller discussed landscape management through connectivity corridors to preserve the viable population of Andean bears. She used density-weighted connectivity as a model-based estimator of landscape connectivity using camera trapping data. Density weighted-connectivity results in landscape designs with a higher aggregation index, maintaining connected landscapes that have the greatest expected densities of Andean bears. Sheng Li, from China, showed how the current distribution of Asiatic black bears across China are being determined using robust ecological models. He identified the regional populations and assessed their conservation priorities in China. Michel Proctor from Canada discussed the relationship of functional bottom up, foods and top down, mortality risks on the Grizzly bear population processes. He added that, managing mortality risk through human access controls in locales with road access into high quality food resources would be the most effective strategy for bear conservation management in the near term. He suggested proactive management of resources to prevent road building in high quality habitat and managing for food resources should be considered. Santiago Molina from Ecuador, elaborated on the Andean bear population monitoring programme in Quito, Ecuador. A significant population of Andean bears have been recorded since 2008 through direct observations and camera trapping in an area within the Metropolitan District of Quito. The population lives, moves, feeds and reproduces in a human dominated landscape with important natural remnants partially protected. The ecology of the population, structure, movement patterns, feeding and disper- sion, is influenced by the presence of humans and the level of conversion/protection of the landscape. Annie Loosen from University of Alberta, Canada presented on uncertainty of American black bear monitoring and management. She showed that we

A. Macleod often manage American black bears by the “seat of Lorraine Scotson giving presentation on monitoring sun bears and our pants”, meaning we have poor data on which to Asiatic black bears in Lao PDR with remotely sensed predictors. track population changes. This is the case in south

24 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conference Reports western Alberta, Canada. She presented new density estimates using non-invasive genetic sampling methods. Amy Macleod from University of Alberta, Canada talked about how the 2 species of bears (Grizzly and American black bears) live together in Glacier National Park in the United States. Amy et al., conducted genetic and stable isotope analyses on hair samples collected from barbed wire hair traps setup within and developed regression models to identify environmental conditions and stable isotope signatures associated with each species. She concluded that, areas of current grizzly bear expansion in northwest Montana are occupied by black bears and competition for habitat will likely effect the location and rate of grizzly bear re-colonization. Lorraine Scotson from University of Minnesota gave her talk on developing a monitoring tool for Asiatic black bear and sun bear co-occurring in Lao PDR. She modelled bear sign as a log-linear function of environmental predictors that were associated with habitat assemblages and levels of human disturbance. With simple bear sign transects, she developed a replicable GIS-based monitoring and assessment tool for bears in Lao PDR that can be used to identify conservation opportunities and potentially monitor changes in bear distribution. She demonstrated the application of remotely sensed predictors in monitoring bear population in response to human development through time. She concluded that the bear populations in Lao PDR will likely decline in the absence of proactive conservation measures. Finally, Yuri Shirane from Japan presented her talk on natal dispersal pattern of brown bears in Shiretoko Peninsula, eastern Hokkaido, Japan. She introduced the dispersal pattern in most populous area for brown bears in Japan, and suggested the implications for management of bears. She has done large scale genetic analysis and monitoring of individuals to know how age and sex affect the natal dispersal pattern of brown bears. She added that, bears exhibit male-biased natal dispersal and males begin dispersal at the age of 2-3 years old. She also concluded that bears that were born in the protection area have caused conflicts with people during its dispersal. The session concluded with 2 minutes of discussion and a vote of thanks to all the presenters by the moderator. Session Human Bear Intereactions 1 Chair: Lana Ciarniello As the human population expands human-bear conflicts are affecting the conservation of bears world-wide. Research in the identification and management of human-bear interactions has become increasingly popular during the last decade. Types of bear conflicts vary enormously around the world, and so do the feasible methods of mitigation. This session focused on human-bear interaction research in Europe and Canada. The session opened with Carlos Bautista presenting his work on the Management of large carnivore damage in Europe: mitigating or subsidizing the conflicts? Carlos provided an interdisciplinary and continental-scale approach to identify the weaknesses and strengths of current policies for large carnivore damage management in Europe. First, he showed the results of a comparative analysis among 27 European countries on the costs of damage compensation and how those costs related to the rate of large carnivore’s recolonization, national wealth, and the costs of subsidies to prevent damage. Next, Carlos explored the relationship between the total costs for compensation and prevention of brown bear damage and the perceived tolerance towards the species. Carlos also provided recommendations to help optimize the cost-efficiency of bear damage management at the national level and mitigate associated conflicts. This work represented a meta-analysis initiative across Europe. Next we moved to British Columbia, Canada, where Clayton Lamb presented on the effects of habitat quality and access management on the density of a recovering grizzly bear population. This study used DNA mark-recapture and spatially explicit capture recapture (SECR) models to estimate the population size of a threatened grizzly bear population (Kettle- Granby). Clayton’s research found that as road densities increase so does human presence and human-caused mortality of bears. However, the risk of bear mortality could be managed by managing for road densities <0.6 km/km2 , supporting previous research in this area. In parts of the study area where road densities had been managed below this threshold bear densities were higher. This research concluded that population recovery is possible in a multi-use landscape when management actions target priority areas. Remaining in Canada, Karine Pigeon presented on predator-prey dynamics on linear features: a broadly applicable, non- invasive approach to understand multispecies behavioural responses to anthropogenic landscape features. Karine’s research took place in the boreal forest of Alberta, where extensive resource extraction activities have created habitat favourable to primary prey (i.e., moose, elk, and deer), and this has resulted in an increase in wolves. The objective of Karine’s work was to identify management actions aimed towards species conservation that can reduce primary prey and wolf numbers without negatively impacting other predators (i.e., bears). The probability of occupancy and detection for bear, wolf, and primary prey was modelled using wildlife sign and camera traps data gathered along linear features. Bears were more likely to use linear features with more ground cover vegetation and more signs of moose, while wolves used seismic lines with less ground cover vegetation. Higher detection rates of primary prey were in areas with more graminoids and less alder. The use of camera and sign data was found to be an affordable and non-invasive method for modeling multiple species to inform restoration activities in a human-dominated landscape.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 25 Conference Reports Next, we returned to Europe where Teresa Berezowska-Cnota presented on the ecology of human-bear conflicts: estimating the fraction of the population causing damages in the Polish Eastern Carpathians using molecular techniques. Teresa used DNA sampling obtained from hair and scat to identify bears involved in damage occurrence, and estimate their proportion in the population. She identified 50 unique individuals, and then applied capture-recaptures data to estimate the population size for 2014 (n = 63 individuals, CI 50- 91) and 2015 (n =53 individuals, CI 37-117). There were 56 bear damages claimed between 2014 and 2015, and 12 “problem” bears identified to cause the damage, representing 36% of the damage sites. Applied to the larger population, Teresa concluded that appprox. 1/4 of the population was involved in damages. She further assessed the differences in gender of bears responsible for damage with respect to the sex ratio in the population. She found no difference in the proportion of males and females involved in making damages. There appeared to be a fraction of “troublemakers”, representing both females and males. Keeping in Europe, Aleksandra Majić Skrbinšek presented her work on public perceptions about human-bear conflicts and potential solutions in the four countries sharing the same population. Respondents in Italy, Austria, Slovenia and Croatia (n = 2,280) were surveyed about their perceptions of human-bear conflicts and also about the effectiveness of possible solutions to HBC. The Italians tolerated the most conflict situations although all groups showed tolerance of the majority of the presented situations. Younger generations, males, dog owners and peoples’ knowledgeable about bear biology were more tolerant of conflicts with bears. Across the 4 countries there was general consensus on the effectiveness of using mitigation methods to reduce HBC. They found that providing information about bear biology was important in predicting support for mitigation measures and increased tolerance for bears. She concluded that investing into younger generations might be more cost-effective. A clear theme throughout these presentations was the impact that humans are having on bear habitat, ranging from industrial resource extraction initiatives altering predator-prey dynamics and/or affecting bear mortality to the attitudes of farmers inhabiting Alpine habitats in Europe towards bear conservation. This session highlighted the increasing use of empirical research to guide decisions regarding human-bear interactions and offered science-based management and mitigation techniques for humans and bears alike. Session Human Bear Interactions 2 Chair: Santiago Molina This session included 6 interesting presentations that covered different approaches to study and contribute to mitigation of human-bear conflicts in different portions of the world. Ximena Velez identified the Pilaya watershed as a “human-bear conflict” region in Bolivia. Surveys carried out in different communities measured perceptions, attitudes, and tolerance regarding wildlife. This type of approach highlights the importance of the human dimensions perspective for effectively understanding and resolving human-bear conflicts. Along the same lines, Coral Mascote research was conducted in rural communities north-east of Mexico, part of the restricted distribution of the American black bear. The study includes also a perspective base on perceptions and knowledge that local people have about the black bear, with the purpose of supporting the construction of strategies and management actions that help mitigate conflicts and contribute to long-term conservation. Karine Pigeon evaluated different features in a human-dominated landscape where predator-prey interactions involved wolves, bears, moose, elk, and deer, with responses varying depending on the composition of an altered landscape, particularly linear features that are a product of human activities. Understanding these predator-prey interactions in a human landscape can contribute to benefits and applications that would help restoration activities and management actions. From another perspective, Klemen Jerina presented the results of the study in Slovenia that showed the probability of bears entering settlements increases with a) higher bear densities in the wider settlement surrounding, b) higher ratio of the settlement circumference and surface área, and c) shorter minimal distance between the settlement edge and the closest forest patch edge. Changes in the landscape contributed to the increased frequency of bear-human conflicts. The presentation by Thomas Sharp focused on sloth bear attack messaging and reviewed 6 sloth bear attack studies across this species range and summarized the data into three levels of sloth bear safety, 1) how to avoid sloth bears, 2) how to deal with sloth bear confrontations and 3) how to survive a sloth bear attack. Finally, Valerie Matheson discussed efforts to reduce human-bear conflicts in the town of Boulder, Colorado in the USA. In 2014, 4 bears were killed in the city due to public safety concerns and community support increased for new laws requiring trash to be secure from bears. Implementation of the new ordinances has substantially decreased bears’ ability to access trash and brought a welcome increase in the cleanliness of the community. Session: Human-Bear conflict 3 Chair: Roxana Rojas Human-bear conflicts fourth session had 2 presentations and was focused on how anthropic activities influence on bear developed and behavior. The first presentation Huber Djuro, explained how large carnivores, such as brown bears, need

26 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conference Reports wide living spaces to satisfy their survival needs (seasonal food sources, reproduction, and select best denning sites) and are above political limits. A big problem nowadays is the presence of fences because of the human migrant crisis that prompted some governments to prevent and control human entry, but those actions may also affect movements of wild animals. An example of this threat is happening in the Dinaric mountains which contains an important and large brown bear population, with its success partly due to the ability of individuals to move between subpopulation. Despite this, in 2015, the Slovenian government decided to build a security fence within bear range along the boundary with Croatia, affecting the conservation of the species. It is important that European politicians are alert about this situation and focus on reducing this secondary effect of fences. Monitoring research by satellite tracking and genetics surveys will help to track populations, understand better the situation and propose solutions. Next, Cheryl Hojnowski, described how front-country bears use habitats close to human activity, and interactions between bears and people are sometimes unavoidable. But how do bears change their behavior in response to human presence in Peter Lougheed Provincial Park? Their hypothesis was that front-country bears avoid the places and times of highest human activity within the front country. To test this, they monitored human use on trails using trail counters and trail cameras and monitored bears using GPS collars. Results showed that there was a diurnal response by bears to human use on roads and a weekly and seasonal response to human use on trails and in campgrounds. Specifically, bears avoided high-use roads in the daytime, but used areas close to roads at night. Bears also avoided high-use trails on the weekends compared to weekdays, and they avoided both high-use trails and campgrounds during the busy summer tourist season. Lastly, bears selected for forested habitat significantly more in the frontcountry than they did in the backcountry, suggesting bears used forest to further conceal themselves from people in high human-use areas. Human-Bear Conflicts Workshop Human-bear conflicts (HBC) are increasing worldwide, and pose a growing threat to some bear populations. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Bear Specialist Group (BSG) organized a workshop that was held on the 12 November 2017, the day prior to the start of the International Bear Association conference in Quito, Ecuador. Participants did not have to be members of the BSG to attend the workshop, but needed to be interested and knowledgeable of HBC issues from any place in the world. The workshop focused on 2 goals that are current priorities of the BSG and Human-Bear Conflicts Expert Team

(HBCET): (1) Strategizing for a manual to mitigate L. Ciarniello HBC around the world; and, (2) Setting priorities BSG and IBA pre-conference trip group photo. for future HBC initiatives. To capture the variation in global HBC issues, the workshop opened with a whirlwind tour of invited expert presentations on human–bear conflicts in different localities around the world and covered all 8 species. After the presentations, participants were split into pre-determined groups and asked to actively engage in think-tank activities. The first part of the workshop focused on the design of a Global Human–Bear Conflicts “Manual”. The main goal was to strategize how to capture the variation in HBC in a meaningful way to create a manual of mitigation methods that is useful to people working in the field as well as to governments. Participants decided that the manual should be in PDF form and provided via the world wide web, approximately 50-70 pages, L. Ciarniello there should be a long version (detailed) and a BSG HBCET workshop participants.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 27 Conference Reports L. Ciarniello L. Ciarniello (left) Nishith Dharalya presenting at the workshop (right) Group working on an exercise at the workshop.

separate short version, and include case studies by conflict type. The second part of the workshop focused on the complex issue of priority setting for HBC funding; that is, how do we judge what proposals should be highest priority for funding, and what sorts of things do we recommend that people should be doing to solve HBC issues around the world? Participants were provided with 6 hypothetical HBC funding situations/proposals, asked to tease out the important elements, and provide both subjective and quantitative rankings for each proposal. The larger group then reconvened to first compare the subjective with the objective rankings of the projects both within and across subgroups, and to examine and discuss the consistencies and differences among the groups. The next steps for the BSG and HBCET include writing the global HBC manual and formalizing the way to rank funding applications for HBC projects. Human-Bear conflicts are increasing on a global scale and the results of this workshop are important to the BSG and HBCET. We thank the Grizzly Bear Foundation of British Columbia Canada for funding this workshop.

The HBC Workshop Organizing Committee (Bear Specialist Group): Lana Ciarniello, Co-Chair of the IUCN BSG Human-Bear Conflicts Expert Team Dave Garshelis, Co-Chair IUCN Bear Specialist Group & Asiatic Black Bear Expert Team Michael Proctor, Co-Chair Brown Bear Specialist Group, HBCET member Nishith Dharaiya, Co-Chair Sloth Bear Expert Team, HBCET member Emre Can, IUCN Human-Wildlife Conflicts Task Force member, HBCET member Santiago Molina, PhD Candidate, HBCET member

28 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Conference Reports Student Activities at the Quito Conference Student Representative: Amy Macleod Many students attended the IBA Conference in Quito. There were at least 39 students from all over the world that gave oral or poster presentations at this conference and many more that attended without giving a presentation. For some it was their first poster or oral presentation at a conference, and for others it was their first at an IBA conference. The conference organizers awarded travel grants to 12 of the student presenters. Conference organizers also arranged for Ecuadorian students to attend conference presentations, many attended Tuesday when the conference sessions were in Spanish (headsets were available for the English translation) and focused on South American bears. As the student representative, I organized the judging of all the student oral and poster presentations, the student lunch, and the silent auction… and was also a student giving an oral presentation at the conference. We had 16 judges (non-students) that evaluated 14 oral and 25 poster presentations. Many of the students gave excellent presentations but only the highest scoring oral and poster presentation received an award. It was my pleasure to give the Best Student Oral Presentation award to Spencer Rettler and the Best Student Poster Presentation award to Carlos Luna during the closing ceremony, both received a certificate and $100 (USD). You can read about the winners below and more about Spencer Rettler’s research on page 13 of this issue of the IBN, and Carlos Luna’s research on page 15. I gave a student activities update during the Member Meeting on Wednesday, thanked members for their support of students at the conference, and encouraged them to seek out some of the students attending the conference to learn about their research. Wednesday was also the student lunch at the Crep- erola Restaurant located a couple blocks from the conference center. Each table of 8-10 people included students and one or two IBA Council members (current and former) and the students were encouraged to ask the council members questions about their careers and experience on council. Student lunch with council members at Creperola Restaurant. The Silent Auction was Thursday evening and raised $1,366.75 USD for the student activities fund which supports student activities (e.g., conference student lunch). I am so very thankful to all those that donated items and to those that bid at the silent auction. The auction is always a treat with many unique items from all over the world to bid on. I am also very grateful for all the help from various students during all these student activities, and I am very thankful to all the judges that evaluated all the student oral and poster presentations. Overall, the students had a good time, showcased their research, learned a lot of new information, and met lots of ‘bear’ people from all over the world.

Spencer Rettler: Best Student Oral Presentation Winner Spencer Rettler is a graduate student at the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities. Before starting his graduate studies, Spencer worked on a variety of wildlife research projects through the University of Alberta studying grizzly bears, wol- verine and elk. His current graduate research focuses on how a changing forest composition affects food availability, habitat use and reproduction for American black bears. His advisors are Dr. James Forester and Dr. Dave Garshelis.

Carlos Luna-Aranguré: Best Student Poster Presentation Winner My name is Carlos A. Luna Aranguré, and I am halfway on my PhD degree at the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México with my doctoral advisor Ella Vazquez Dominguez in the Laboratory of Genetics and Ecology. My research interests focus on the evolutionary history the Ursidae family, which we analyze through the integration of phylogeographic methods and ecological niche modeling to further explore the relationship between genetic divergence mechanisms and the patterns in the ecological niche.

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 29 Conference Announcements 26th International Conference on Bear Research & Management September 16-21 2018 in Ljubljana, Slovenia

The 26th International Conference on Bear Research & Manage- ment will be held between September 16-21, 2018 in Ljubljana, Slo- venia. The main theme “Life with Bears” is a human-bear coexistence in human dominated and politically fragmented landscapes. Specific conference topics are designed in a way to welcome recent research results, technical advances, and case studies on a wide spectrum of issues relevant to ensuring a long-term coexistence of bears and humans.

All details and deadlines can be found on the website https://lifewithbears.eu

24th Eastern Black Bear Workshop April 22 – 25, 2019. Potosi, Missouri

Laura Conlee Resource Scientist – Furbearer Biologist Missouri Department of Conservation, Columbia, Missouri, USA Email: [email protected]

The Missouri Department of Conservation is excited to host the 24th Eastern Black Bear Workshop 22–25 April, 2019 at the YMCA of the Ozarks Trout Lodge in Potosi, MO: http://www.ymcaoftheozarks.org. The purpose of the Eastern Black Bear Workshop (EBBW) is to bring together state/provincial biologists, federal biologists, and university researchers with responsibilities for managing black bear (Ursus americanus) populations in the eastern USA and Canada to discuss issues important to the management, conservation, and perpetuation of those black bear populations. EBBWs are inherently different from general conferences. Whereas conferences have the purpose of sharing information through the presentation of research and management papers, EBBWs are designed not only to share information, but more specifically to discuss and find solutions to problems of managing bear populations at the regional level. Details coming soon! Visit www.easternblackbearworkshop. org in the coming months for more information on lodging, registration, agenda items, and

poster submissions. Contact: Laura Missouri Department of Conservation Conlee: [email protected] Trail camera footage of Bear 1428 and her yearlings exiting their den on a warm or 573-815-7900 ext. 2903. March day in southern Missouri.

30 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Student Forum To Intern, or Not to Intern: That is the Question for Many Students

Amy Macleod MSc student, University of Alberta, Edmonton, AB, Canada Email: [email protected]

It’s spring! A time to look forward to summer but also ponder the question, what am I going to do this summer? Maybe you are wondering if you should return to your high school employer that has a minimum wage job waiting for you and maybe live with your parents saving money for your next term of school… or maybe you are dreaming of an amazing internship you’ve seen online. How you spend your summer can change your life. If a career as a wildlife professional is your dream you likely already know that there are many steps you need to take and they will likely take a circuitous path that leaves you frustrated at times. Funding is short, jobs can be few, and paid positions are often only obtained after you’ve had one or more unpaid internships or volunteer positions to get the experience to compete for the paid positions. How you spend your time during your school term and outside of school can greatly impact your ability to compete for paid wildlife jobs when you finish your degree. Even if you really need the money gained from a non-wildlife job during the summer that doesn’t mean you can’t be working on gaining experience and skills during your off days from that job. Most wildlife projects have unpaid positions out of necessity, funding is tight and they need more labor than they have money for, so they put the word out they need volunteers or have internships available. Some internships up front say that they are volunteer or unpaid, some hide it in the fine print of the job description. Most wildlife internships are unpaid (no salary) but they give you a stipend for food and/or lodging. If your living expenses are few (e.g. no car) you may be able to live off a stipend for the summer but for many a stipend is not enough to cover their living expenses and they use their savings (or go into debt) in order to get the experience and skills the internship provides. Some have written about this huge unpaid workforce that keeps wildlife research going as unfair, pseudo-slavery, and causes wildlife to be a career only the wealthy can afford to get into. Whether you agree or not, the current pattern of unpaid positions for one or more field seasons before obtaining a paid wildlife job continues. Paid internships are out there but they are rare and usually don’t pay more than minimum wage. Some internships will look great but in the details you’ll find they require you to pay them, be careful of these, they may not give you the experience you want because they tend to be more of a vacation with a few days of work used to fund research somewhere else. No matter the position you want, unpaid, paid, or you paying them do your homework and be sure it is worth your time and energy.

When looking at internships there are important questions and considerations you should think about. 1) Will the skills and experience you gain make you more competitive for the job you want after finishing your degree? Knowing where you want to go helps you figure out how to get there. What skills do you need to learn and how much experience is required to obtain the job you want when you finish your degree. Reviewing postings of the jobs you want in the future and summarizing all that you don’t have will help you identify the best internship positions to apply for now. 2) Does the internship offer the opportunity to learn more than just one specific job/task? Good internships will offer opportunities to learn more and/or diversify the experience beyond the one set of duties of an internship position. For example, if it is an internship doing fieldwork, is there an opportunity to see and learn other facets of the project like the databases, GIS, lab techniques, etc? Don’t assume these will be available, even if it is in the internship description, include your interest in learning more about the project in your cover letter and/or during the interview and don’t be afraid to ask questions about the project beyond your outlined duties. 3) Can the internship qualify for your internship or research requirement for your degree? Some degrees require the completion of an internship and/or a small research project. You are usually not limited to the internships offered by your institution or to conducting a research project on campus to fulfill the requirement for your degree. Some employers will be open to their internship qualifying for your requirement, BUT be clear about what you need from them in order to fulfill the requirement, you don’t want to get to the end of the internship and they are unwill- ing to complete the paperwork or share data you need to write a paper. This will also require your institution to agree and it may take some time for them to evaluate the position and possibly discuss with the employer. 4) Could the internship lead to a paid position during the next year or field season on the same project? An internship could be more than just a learning experience and a good reference, it could lead to a paid position on the project you intern for. Some scientists with multi-year projects or multiple projects in various stages of completion may have paid positions opening up during the next field season. Stellar interns from the previous field season can easily

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 31 Student Forum become top of the list to hire – they know you, your work ethic, your abilities, your knowledge of the project (remember learning those other facets I mentioned in #2), and your desire to move into a paid position. 5) Can you afford to take an unpaid internship? As you weigh the pros and cons of an unpaid internship it could all come down to this question, and unfortunately whether you can afford to take an unpaid internship could mean the difference between obtaining, or not obtaining, a paid wildlife job when you both finish your degree. However, your living expenses and bank account aren’t all you have to take into consideration, if you plan ahead far enough there are scholarship opportunities to apply for to help with expenses during your internship and/or travel to your internship. 6) Can you do an internship abroad? With wildlife positions available far and wide around the globe, the internship you want may be in another country. Depending on the country, duration, and amount of money you are receiving (even in the form of a stipend or reimburse- ment) you may need to obtain a visa, which in some cases may also require a sponsor agency in the country the internship is located. Although it can be a complicated process that takes time and patience to get it all figured out it, it can be extremely rewarding to do an internship in another country. And you don’t have to figure it all out yourself, there are people at your institution that can help you navigate the process and have connections that can speed up the process.

Summer wildlife opportunities usually start being posted in late December but will continue to be posted into the summer. Sometimes funding arrives just a few weeks before the field season starts and it’s a scramble to find the labor to do the fieldwork, these postings may be open for applications for a short period of time or will say ‘open until filled’. As you search online and reach out to your network to find opportunities for the summer you’ll have lots of questions and may not know who has the answers. Remember you are not alone, your institution has people to help you, and many people you know have likely been in the same situation as you or know people that have been there and can help you. If you get no help from them you can always ask me and if I can’t answer your question I’ll try to find someone who can or point you in a direction you may not have thought of.

Best of luck in your search!

Student Forum Truman Listserv and Facebook Page • Discussions pertaining to bear biology, management, or study design challenges • Assistance with proposals and study design through IBA professionals • Job searches, announcements, information regarding the IBA and student membership • Planning for IBA student activities and meetings • IBA membership is encouraged, but not required, for initial sign-up Listserv Signup Instructions - Visit: http://www.bearbiology.com/iba/stu.html - Follow the links to request an invitation - If you’re a new member, please submit a paragraph about your project and include your contact information so we can all get to know you. Facebook Signup Instructions - Visit: https://facebook.com/groups/IBA.Conference/

32 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Publications Recent Bear Literature Agnieszka Sergiel Email: [email protected] If you have an article recently published please email the citation for inclusion in the next issue of Recent Bear Literature. The deadlines for the next issues are: • Summer Issue: 5 June: Agnes Pelletier: [email protected] • Fall Issue: 5 October: Marion Schneider: [email protected] • Spring Issue: 5 February: Agnieszka Sergiel: [email protected]

For easy access to articles, we are now including the DOI citation and corresponding author email address, if available. To open articles from their DOI, enter the DOI citation in the text box provided at the following website: http://dx.doi.org Anderson, K., M.M. Garner and P.M. Dennis. 2018. Causes of mortality in sloth bears (Melursus ursinus) housed in U.S. zoos. Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 6(1): 12-15. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19227/jzar.v6i1.261. Email: [email protected]. Basler, N., G. Xenikoudakis, M.V. Westbury, L. Song, G. Sheng and A. Barlow. 2017. Reduction of the contaminant fraction of DNA obtained from an ancient giant panda bone. BMC Research Notes 10: 754. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13104-017-3061-3. Email: [email protected]. Bhat, T.A., A. Gulzar, A.A. Bhat, T.A. Bhat and Z. Ali. 2017. A review of upper limb injuries in bear maul victims: consistent pattern and inverse relation in severity with facial and scalp injuries. Chinese Journal of Traumatology: in press, accepted manuscript. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjtee.2017.11.001. Email: [email protected]. Bischof, R., C. Bonenfant, I.M. Rivrud, A. Zedrosser, A. Friebe, T. Coulson, A. Mysterud and J.E. Swenson. 2018. Regulated hunting re- shapes the life history of brown bears. Nature Ecology & Evolution 2: 116-123. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41559-017-0400-7. Brown, T.A., M.P. Galicia, G.W. Thiemann, S.T. Belt, D.J. Yurkowski and M.G. Dyck. 2018. High contributions of sea ice derived carbon in polar bear (Ursus maritimus) tissue. PLoS ONE: 0191631. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191631. Email: thomas. [email protected] Bryant, J. and T. Roth. Annual fecal glucocorticoid metabolite concentrations in pregnant and pseudopregnant polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in North American zoos. Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research 6(1): 6-11. DOI: https://doi.org/10.19227/jzar.v6i1.259. Email: [email protected]. Burrell, C., H. Zhang, D. Li, C. Wang, C. Li and C. Aitken-Palmer. 2017. Hematology, serum biochemistry, and urinalysis values in the adult giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 48(4): 1072-1076. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1638/2016-0215.1. Email: [email protected]. Cattet, M., G.B. Stenhouse, J. Boulanger, D.M. Janz, L. Kapronczai, J.E. Swenson and A. Zedrosser. 2018. Can concentration of steroid hormones in brown bear reveal age class? Conservation Physiology 6(1): coy001. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/coy001. Email: [email protected] Coogan, S.C.P., D. Raubenheimer, G.B. Stenhouse, N.C. Coops and S.E. Nielsen. 2018. Functional macronutritional generalism in a large omnivore, the brown bear. Ecology and Evolution: early view. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3867. Email: scoogan@ ualberta.ca Crupi, A. P., J. N. Waite, R. W. Flynn and L. R. Beier. 2017. Brown bear population estimation in Yakutat, Southeast Alaska. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Final Wildlife Research Report ADF&G/DWC/WRR-2017-1, Juneau. Darimont, C.T., P.C. Paquet, A. Treves, K.A. Artelle and G. Chapron. 2018. Political populations of large carnivores. Conservation Biology: early view. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13065. Email: [email protected]. Daugaard-Petersen, T., R. Langenbæk, F.F. Rigét, R.J. Letcher, L. Hyldstrup, J. Bech Jensen, T. Bechshoft, Ø. Wiig, B. Munro Jensen, C. Pertoldi, E.D. Lorenzen, R. Dietz and C. Sonne. 2018. Persistent organic pollutants, skull size and bone density of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from East Greenland 1892–2015 and Svalbard 1964–2004. Environmental Research 162: 74-80. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1016/j.envres.2017.12.009. Email: [email protected]. DeMars, C.A. and S. Boutin. 2018. Nowhere to hide: effects of linear features on predator-prey dynamics in a large mammal system. Journal of Animal Ecology 87(1): 274-284. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/1365-2656.12760. Email: [email protected]. Desforges, J., L. Jasperse, T. Hammer Jensen, C. Grøndahl, M.F. Bertelsen, S. DeGuise, C. Sonne, R. Dietz and M. Levin. 2018. Immune function in arctic mammals: Natural killer (NK) cell-like activity in polar bear, muskox and reindeer. Veterinary Immunology and Immunopathology 195: 72-75. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vetimm.2017.11.010. Email: [email protected]. Doan-Crider, D.L., A.N. Tri and D.G. Hewitt. 2017. Woody cover and proximity to water increase American black bear depredation on cattle in Coahuila, Mexico. Ursus 28(2): 208-217. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-17-00014.1. Email: [email protected]. Egunyu, F. D.A. Clark and L. Bradford. 2017. Polar bear science: characterizing relationship patters and identyfying opportunities. Polar Geography: published online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/1088937X.2017.1403978. Email: [email protected]. Emura, S., K. Sugiyama and S. Kusuda. 2017. Morphology of the lingual papillae of the polar bear (Ursus maritimus). Okajimas Folia Anatomica Japonica 94(2): 55-59. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2535/ofaj.94.55. Email: [email protected].

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 33 Publications Frank, S.C., A. Ordiz, J. Gosselin, A. Hertel, J. Kindberg, M. Leclerc, F. Pelletier, S.M.J.G. Steyaert, O. Støen, J. Van de Walle, A. Zedrosser and J.E. Swenson. 2017. Indirect effects of bear hunting: A review from Scandinavia. Ursus 28(2): 150-164. DOI: https://doi. org/10.2192/URSU-D-16-00028.1. Email: [email protected]. Gippoliti, S., D. Brito, F. Cerfolli, D. Franco, B. Kryštufek and C. Battisti. 2018. Europe as a model for large carnivores conservation: Is the glass half empty or half full? Journal for Nature Conservation 41: 73-78. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jnc.2017.11.007. Email: [email protected]. Gormezano, L.J., S.N. Ellis-Felege, D.T. Iles, A. Barnas and R.F. Rockwell. 2017. Polar bear foraging behavior during the ice-free period in western Hudson Bay: Observations, origins, and potential significance. American Museum Novitates 3885: 1-28. DOI: https:// doi.org/10.1206/3885.1. Guo, W., S. Mishra, J. Zhao, J. Tang, B. Zeng, F. Kong, R. Ning, M. Li, H. Zhang, Y. Zeng, Y. Tian, Y. Zhong, H. Luo, Y. Liu, J. Yang, M. Yang, M. Zhang, Y. Li, Q. Ni, C. Li, C. Wang, D. Li, H. Zhang, Z. Zuo and Y. Li. 2018. Metagenomic study suggests that the gut microbiota of the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) may not be specialized for fiber fermentation. Frontiers in Microbiol- ogy: provisionally accepted. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2018.00229. Harne, R., A. Rokde, J. Chitariya, N. Rajput, A.B. Shrivastav. 2017. Pulmonary contussion in a free ranging sloth bear (Melursus ursinus) - a case report. The Indian Journal of Veterinary Sciences and Biotechnology 13(2). DOI: https://doi.org/10.21887/ijvsbt. v13i02.10058. Harrer, L.E.F. and T. Levi. 2018. The primacy of bears as seed dispersers in salmon-bearing ecosystems. Ecosphere 9(1): e02076. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.2076. Email: [email protected]. Harvey, J.A., D. Van Den Berg, J. Ellers, R. Kampen, T.W. Crowther, P. Roessingh, B. Verheggen, R.J.M. Nuijten, E. Post, S. Lewan- dowsky, I. Striling, M. Balgopal, S.C. Amstrup and M.E. Mann. 2017. Internet blogs, polar bears, and climate-change denial by proxy. BioScience: bix133. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/biosci/bix133. Email: [email protected]. Jia, H., J. Guo and J. Zhu. 2017. Comparison of the photo-thermal energy conversion behavior of polar bear hair and wool of sheep. Journal of Bionic Engineering 14(4): 616-621. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/S1672-6529(16)60427-4. Email: [email protected]. Jin, Y., X. Zhang, Y. Ma, Y. Qiao, X. Liu, K. Zhao, C. Zhang, D. Lin, X. Fu, X. Xu, Y. Wang and H. Wang. 2017. Canine distemper viral infec- tion threatens the giant panda population in China. Oncotarget 8:113910-113919. DOI: https://doi.org/10.18632/oncotarget.23042. Email: [email protected]. Kang, D. and J. Li. 2017. Role of nature reserves in giant panda protection. Environmental Science and Pollution Research: published online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0831-3. Email: [email protected]. Karamalidis, A.A., T. Skrbnisek, M. de Gabriel Hernando, L. Krambokoukis, V. Munoz-Fuentes, Z. Bailey, C. Nowak and A.V. Stronen. 2018. History-driven population structure and asymmetric gene flow in a recovering large carnivore at the rear-edge of its European range. Heredity 120: 168-182. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41437-017-0031-4. Karelus, D.L., J. Walter McCown, B.K. Scheick and M.K. Oli. 2018. Microhabitat features influencing habitat use by Florida black bears. Global Ecology and Conservation 13: e00367. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2017.e00367. Email: [email protected]. Karikalan, M., S. Ilaraja, A. Sha Arun, S.C. Mohan and A.K. Sharma. 2017. Mucinous cholangiocarcinoma in captive sloth bear (Melursus ursinus). Indian Journal of Veterinary Pathology 41(4): 324-326. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.5958/0973-970X.2017.00078.5. Email: [email protected]. Keay, J.A., C.T. Robbins and S.D. Farley. 2018. Characteristics of a naturally regulated grizzly bear population. Wildlife Mangement: early view. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.21425. Email: [email protected]. Kermish-Wells, J., A. Massolo, G.B. Stenhouse, T.A. Larsen and M. Musiani. 2018. Space-time clusters for early detection of grizzly bear predation. Ecology and Evolution 8(1): 382-395. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/ece3.3489. Email: [email protected]. Knapp, M. 2018. From a molecules’ perspective - contributions of ancient DNA research to understanding cave bear biology. Historical Biology. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/08912963.2018.1434168. Email: [email protected]. Kozakai, C., Y. Nemoto, A. Nakajima, S. Koike, N. Ohnishi and K. Yamazaki. 2017. Influence of food availability on matrilineal site fidelity of female asian black bears. Mammal Study 42(4): 219-230. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3106/041.042.0404. Email: c.kozakai@ affrc.go.jp. Ladle, A., R. Steenweg, B. Shepherd and M.S. Boyce. 2018. The role of human outdoor recreation in shaping patterns of grizzly bear- black bear co-occurrence. PLoS ONE: 13(2): e0191730. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191730. Email: ladle@ualberta. ca. Lamb, C.T., G. Mowat, A. Reid, L. Smit, M. Proctor, B.N. McLellan, S.E. Nielsen and S. Boutin. 2018. Effects of habitat quality and access management on the density of a recovering grizzly bear population. Journal of Applied Ecology DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/1365-2664.13056. Email: [email protected]. Lan, T., S. Gill, E. Bellemain, R. Bischof, M.A. Nawaz and C. Linqvist. 2017. Evolutionary history of enigmatic bears in the Tibetan Plateau-Himalaya region and the identity of the yeti. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 284(1868): 20171804. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1098/rspb.2017.1804. Email: [email protected]. Lara-Díaz, N.E., H. Coronel-Arellano, C.A. López-González, G. Sánchez-Rojas and J.E. Mártinez-Gómez. 2018. Activity and resource selection of a threatened carnivore: the case of black bears in northwestern Mexico. Ecosphere 9(1): e01923. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/ecs2.1923. Email: [email protected]. Laufenberg, J.S., J.D. Clark and R.B. Chandler. 2018. Estimating population extinction thresholds with categorical calssification trees

34 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Publications for Louisiana black bears. PLoS ONE 13(1): e0191435. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191435. Email: [email protected]. Lazarus, M., A. Sekovanić, T. Orct, S. Reljić, J. Jurasović and D. Huber. 2018. Sexual maturity and life stage influences toxic metal accumulation in Croatian brown bears. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology 74(2): 339-348. DOI: http:// dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00244-017-0487-5. Email: [email protected]. Lazarus, M., A. Sekovanić, T. Orct, S. Reljić, J. Kusak, J. Jurasović and D. Huber. 2017. Apex predatory mammals as biondicator species in environmental monitoring of elements in Dinaric Alps (Croatia). Environmental Science and Pollution Research 24(30): 23977- 23991. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0008-0. Email: [email protected]. Letcher, R.J., A.D. Morris, M. Dyck, E. Sverko, E.J. Reiner, D.A.D. Blair, S.G. Chu and L. Shen. 2018. Legacy and new halogenated persistent organic pollutants in polar bears from a contamination hotspot in the Arctic, Hudson Bay Canada. Science of the Total Enviroment 610-611: 121-136. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2017.08.035. Email: [email protected]. Li, B.V., S. Alibhai, Z. Jewell, D. Li and H. Zhang. 2018. Using footprints to identify and sex giant pandas. Biological Conservation 218: 83-90. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2017.11.029. Email: [email protected]. Li, R., M. Xu, R. Powers, F. Zhao, W. Jetz, H. Wen and Q. Sheng. 2017. Quantifying the evidence for co-benefits between species conservation and climate change mitigation in giant panda habitats. Scientific Reports 7: 12705. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/ s41598-017-12843-0. Email: [email protected]. Liu, Q., X. Ni, Q. Wang, Z. Peng, L. Niu, M. Xie, Y. Lin, Y. Zhou, H. Sun, K. Pan, B. Jing and D. Zeng. 2018. Investigation of lactic acid bacteria isolated from giant panda feces for potential probiotics in vitro. Probiotics and Antimicrobial Proteins: published online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12602-017-9381-8. Email: [email protected]. Malaney, J.L., C.W. Lackey, J.P. Beckmann and M.D. Matocq. 2018. Natural rewildling of the Great Basin: genetic consequences of recolonization by black bears (Ursus americanus). Diversity and Distributions 24(2): 168-178. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ ddi.12666. Email: [email protected]. Mangipane, L.S., J.L. Belant, D.J.R. Lafferty, D.D. Gustine, T.L. Hiller, M.E. Colvin, B.A. Mangipane and G.V. Hildebrand. 2017. Dietary plasticity in a nutrient-rich system does not influence brown bear (Ursus arctos) body condition or denning. Polar Biology: s00300-017-2237-6. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-017-2237-6. Email: mailto:[email protected]. Mesa-Cruz, J.B., K.K. Lahmers, S. Clark-Denner, N. Pavlisko and M.J. Kelly. 2017. Inguinal hernia causes mortality in an adult American black bear. Ursus 28(2): 131-134. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-17-00010.1. Email: [email protected]. Mezaki, Y., K. Nagatsuma, H. Yokoyama, J. H. Park, M. Nakamura, T. Masaki, R. Blomhoff, H. Senoo and T. Matsuura. 2017. Biochemical and histochemical analyses of lecithin:retinol acyltransferase from polar bear (Ursus maritimus) livers. Polar Biology: first online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-017-2241-x. Email: [email protected]. Miller, S.D., J.W. Schoen and C.C. Schwartz. 2017. Trends in brown bear reduction efforts in Alaska, 1980-2017. Ursus 18(2): 135-149. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-17-00002.1. Email: [email protected]. Nicolau, A., K. Lemberger, M. Mosca, A. Leclerc, A. Lécu and D. Pin. 2018. Clinical and histopathological aspects of an alopecia syndrome in captive Andean bears (Tremarctos ornatus). Veterinary Dermatology: early view. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/ vde.12522. Email: [email protected]. Obbard, M.E., E.J. Newton, D. Potter, A. Orton, B.R. Patterson and B.D. Steinberg. 2017. Big enough for bears? American black bears at heightened risk of mortality during seasonal forays outside Algonquin Provincial Park, Ontario. Ursus 28(2): 182-194. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-16-00021.1. Email: [email protected]. Pagano, A.M., G. M. Durner, K.D. Rode, T.C. Atwood, S.N. Atkinson, E. Peacock, D.P. Costa, M.A. Owen and T.M. Williams. 2018. High-energy, high-fat lifestyle challenges an Arctic apex predator, the polar bear. Science 359(6375): 568-572. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1126/science.aan8677. Email: [email protected]. Pagano, A.M., K.D. Rode and S.A. Atkinson. 2017. Evaluating methods to assess the body condition of female polar bears. Ursus 28(2): 171-181. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-16-00029.1. Email: [email protected]. Penteriani, V. M. del Mar Delgado, J.V. López-Bao, P. Vázquez García, J.S. Monrós, E. Vigón Álvarez, T. Sánchez Corominas and V.M. Vázquez. 2017. Patterns of movement of released female brown bears in the Cantabrian Mountains, northwestern Spain. Ursus 28(2): 165-170. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-16-00012.1. Email: [email protected]. Pusz, W., A. Baturo-Cieśniewska and T. Zwijacz-Kozica. 2018. Culturable fungi in brown bear cave dens. Polish Journal of Environ- mental Studies 27(1): 247-255. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.15244/pjoes/75172. Email: [email protected]. Qi, D., T. Shan, Z. Liu, X. Deng, Z. Zhang, W. Bi, J.R. Owens, F. Feng, L. Zheng, F. Huang, E. Delwart, R. Hou and W. Zhang. 2017. A novel polyomavirus from the nasal cavity of a giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Virology Journal 14: 207. DOI: https://doi. org/10.1186/s12985-017-0867-5. Email: [email protected]. Rajasegar, S.A.V., A.M. Yusof, S. Appalasamy, S.I. Mokhtar, T.D.C. Yung, D. Tao and J.Vijaya Kumaran. 2017. DNA Extraction and library preparation optimization for metagenomic analysis of giant panda in Malaysia. Journal of Tropical Resources and Sustainable Science 5: 117-120. Email: [email protected]. Rode, K., J. Olson, D. Egget, D.C. Douglas, G.M. Durner, T.C. Atwood, E.V. Regehr, R.R. WIlson, T. Smith and M. St. Martin. 2018. Den phenology and reproductive success of polar bears in a changing climate. Journal of Mammalogy 99(1): 16-26. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1093/jmammal/gyx181. Email: [email protected]. Rode, K.D., R.R. Wilson, D.C. Douglas, V. Muhlenbruch, T.C. Atwood, E.V. Regehr, E.S. Richardson, N.W. Pilfold, A.E. Derocher, G.M. Durner, I. Stirling, S.C. Amstrup, M. St. Martin, A.M. Pagano and K. Sismac. 2018. Spring fasting behavior in a marine apex preda-

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 35 Publications tor provides an index of ecosystem productivity. Global Change Biology 24(1): 410-423. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gcb.13933. Email: [email protected]. Robu, M., I. Mirea, A. Petculescu and S. Constantin. 2018. Palaeoichnology of an MIS 3 cave bear settlement – Urşilor Cave (Western Carpathians, Romania). Paleogeography, Paleoclimatology, Paleoecology 493: 126-135. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pal- aeo.2018.01.009. Email: [email protected]. Rovenchak, A. 2018. Telling apart Felidae and Ursidae from the distribution of nucleotides in mitochondrial DNA. Modern Physics Letters B: online ready. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217984918500574. Rowlands, O., H. Hokayem and D. Biediger. 2017. The case of polar bears. Science and Children 55(3): 60-65. Samojlik, T., N. Selva, P. Daukszewicz, A. Fedotova, A. Wajrak and D.P.J. Kuijper. 2018. Lessons from Białowieża Forest on the history of protection and the world’s first reintroduction of a large carnivore. Conservation Biology: accepted article. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1111/cobi.13088. Email: [email protected]. Schmidt, A. 2017. Retelling the polar bear story: Human responses to polar bear-human interactions in Churchill, Manitoba. PhD dissertation. University of Saskatchewan, Saskatoon, Canada. Schmidt, A.L. and D.A. Clark. 2018. “It’s just a matter of time:” Lessons from agency and community responses to polar bear-inflicted human injury. Conservation & Society: ahead of print. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.4103/cs.cs_16_94. Shih, C., S. Wu, M. Hwang and L. Lee. 2017. Evaluation on the effects of ageing factor, sampling and preservation methods on Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus) noninvasive DNA amplification. Taiwania 62(4): 363-370. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.6165/ tai.2017.62.363. Email: [email protected]. Strobel, A., W.G. Willmore, C. Sonne, R. Dietz and R.J. Letcher. 2017. Organophosphate esters in East Greenland polar bears and ringed seals: Adipose tissue concentrations and in vitro depletion and metabolite formation. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. chemosphere.2017.12.181. Email: [email protected]. Štrkolcová, G., M. Goldová, V. Šnábel, M., Špakulová, T., Orosová, M. Halán and J. Mojžišová. 2018. A frequent roundworm Baylisascaris transfuga in overpopulated brown bears (Ursus arctos) in Slovakia: a problem worthy of attention. Acta Parasito- logica 63(1): published online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/ap-2018-0019. Email: [email protected]. Tartu, S., J. Aars, M. Andersen, A. Polder, S. Bourgeon, B. Merkel, A.D. Lowther, J. Bytingsvik, J.M. Welker, A. Derocher, B.M. Jenssen and H. Routti. 2018. Choose your poison – Space-use strategy influences pollutant exposure in Barents Sea polar bears. Environ- mental Science & Technology: just accepted manuscript. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.7b06137. Tri, A.N., J.W. Edwards, C.W. Ryan, C.P. Carpenter, P.C. Carr, M.A. Ternent, M.P. Strager and J.T. Petty. 2017. Harvest rates and cause- specific mortality of American black bears in the wildland–urban interface of the Mid-Atlantic region, USA. Ursus 28(2): 195-207. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2192/URSU-D-16-00033.1. Email: [email protected]. Wagman, J.D., K.E. Lukas, P.M. Dennis, M.A. Willis, J. Carroscia, C. Gindlesperger and M.W. Schook. 2018. A work-for-food enrichment program increases exploration and decreases stereotypies in four species of bears. Zoo Biology 37(1): 3-15. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1002/zoo.21391. Email: [email protected]. Wagner, J., Q. Jiangzuo, J. Mauch Lenardić and J. Liu. 2017. Taxonomic revision of bears from the locality Šandalja I (Croatia) and its biostratygraphic conseqences. Fossil Imprint 73(3-4): 533-544. Email: [email protected]. Wang, X., N. Rybczyski, C.R. Harington, S.C. White and R.H. Tedford. 2017. A basal ursine bear (Protarctos abstrusus) from the Plio- cene High Arctic reveals Eurasian affinities and a diet rich in fermentable sugars. Scientific Reports 7: 17722. DOI: http://dx.doi. org/10.1038/s41598-017-17657-8. Email: [email protected]. Wilson, R.R., C. Perham, D.P. French-McCay and R. Balouskus. 2018. Potential impacts of offshore oil spills on polar bears in the Chukchi Sea. Environmental Pollution 235: 652-659. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envpol.2017.12.057. Email: ryan_r_wilson@fws. gov. Wintle, N.J. P., M.S. Martin-Wintle, X. Zhou and Hemin Zhang. 2018. Blood lead levels in captive giant pandas. Bulletin of Environ- mental Contamination and Toxicology100: 59–63. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00128-017-2221-4. Email: [email protected]. Xu, W., A. Viña, L. Kong, S.L. Pimm, J. Zhang, W. Yang, Y. Xiao, L. Zhang, X. Chen, J. Liu and Z. Ouyang. 2017. Reassessing the conservation status of the giant panda using remote sensing. Nature Ecology & Evolution 1: 1635-1638. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/ 10.1038/ s41559-017-0317-1. Yang, Z., X. Gu, Y. Nie, F. Huang, Y. Huang, Q. Dai, Y. Hu, Y. Yang, X. Zhou, H. Zhang, X. Yang and F. Wei. 2018. Reintroduction of the giant panda into the wild: a good start suggests a bright future. Biological Conservation 217: 181-186. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j. biocon.2017.08.012. Email: [email protected]. Yang, J.J., D.H. Jeong, S.M. Um, A.N. Lee, D.J. Song, S.B. Kim, J. Yang, Y. Yun and Y.K. Lim. 2017. Blood chemistry reference intervals of captive Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus). Veterinarni medicina 62(10): 533-540. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.17221/166/2016- VETMED. Email: [email protected]. Zhang, M., Z. Zhang, Z. Li, M. Hong, X. Zhou, S. Zhou, J. Zhang, V. Hull, J. Huang and H. Zhang. 2018. Giant panda foraging and movement patterns in response to bamboo shoot growth. Environmental Science and Pollution Research: published online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-017-0919-9. Email: [email protected]. Zhang, W., W. Liu, R. Hou, L. Zhang, S. Schmitz-Esser, H. Sun, J. Xie, Y. Zhang, C. Wang, L. Li, B. Yue, H. Huang, H. Wang, F. Shen and Z. Zhang. 2018. Age-associated microbiome shows the giant panda lives on hemicelluloses, not on cellulose. Multidisciplinary Journal of Microbial Ecology: published online. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41396-018-0051-y. Email: [email protected].

36 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 Publications Zhang, Y., P.D. Mathewson, Q. Zhang, W.P. Porter and J. Ran. 2018. An ecophysiological perspective on likely giant panda habitat responses to climate change. Global Change Biology 00: 1–13. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.14022. Email: [email protected]. Zhou, Z., F. Liu, X. Zhang, X. Zhou, Z. Zhong, H. Su, J. Li, H. Li, F. Feng, J. Lan, Z. Zhang, H. Fu, Y. Hu, S. Cao, W. Chen, J. Deng, J. Yu, W. Zhang and Guangneng Peng. 2018. Cellulose-dependent expression and antibacterial characteristics of surfactin from Bacillus subtilis HH2 isolated from the giant panda. PLoS ONE: 13(1): e0191991. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0191991. Email: [email protected]. Zhu, J., S. Arena, S. Spinelli, D. Liu, G. Zhang, R. Wei, C. Cambillau, A. Scaloni, G. Wang and P. Pelosi. 2017. Reverse chemical ecology: Olfactory proteins from the giant panda and their interactions with putative pheromones and bamboo volatiles. PNAS: published ahead of print. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1711437114. Email: [email protected]. Zyśk-Gorczyńska, E. and Z. Jakubiec. 2018. Multi-scale approach to brown bear (Ursus arctos) foraging on trees: chracteristisc of damage to trees and stands in the north-eastern Carpathians. Forestry: An International Journal of Forest Research: cpx052. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/forestry/cpx052. Email: [email protected]

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 37 IBA Officers & Council Council Members

President, Andreas Zedrosser (Norway) Councillor, Nishith Dharaiya (India) University of Southeast Norway HNG University Department of Life Sciences +47.3595.2765 [email protected] +91.999.898.1560 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Term Ends: 09.January.2020

Vice President Americas, Marty Obbard (Canada) Councillor, Yoshikazu Sato (Japan) Ontario of Natural Resources Rakuno Gakuen University +1.705.755.1549 [email protected] +81.113.88.4602 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Term Ends: 09.January.2020

Vice President Eurasia, Mei-Hsui Hwang (Taiwan) Councillor, Gordon Stenhouse (Canada) National Pingtung University of Science & Technology fRI Research +886.8.7740416 [email protected] +1.780.865.8388 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2021 Term Ends: 09.January.2020

Past-President, Karen Noyce (United States) Councillor, Shyamala Ratnayeke (Malaysia) Retired-Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Sunway University Department of Biological Sciences +1.218.259.6686 [email protected] +60.3.7491.8622 Ext: 7177 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Term Ends: 09.January.2020

Secretary, Jennapher Teunissen van Manen (United States) Councillor, Marta DeBarba (France) International Association for Bear Research and Management Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine (LECA) +1.530.379.5476 jennapher.teunissenvanmanen@outlook. +33.778574551 [email protected] com Term Ends: 09.January.2021 Term Ends: 09.January.2021 Councillor, Agnieszka Sergiel (Poland) Treasurer, Jennifer Fortin-Noreus (United States) Institute of Nature Conservation Polish Academy of Sciences U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service +48.12.370.35.64 [email protected] +1.406.243.4994 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2021 Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Ex-Officio Members

Ursus Editor, Jon Swenson (Norway) IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair, Dave Garshelis (United Norwegian University of Life Sciences States) Email: [email protected] Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1-218-328-8874 [email protected] Bear Conservation Fund Chair, Julia Bevins (United States) Anchorage AK 99508 USA IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair, Rob Steinmetz (Thailand) 1-907-223-3483 [email protected] WWF-Thailand +66-2-942-7691 [email protected] IBN Editor, Mark Edwards (Canada) Royal Alberta Museum IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, Dag Vongraven (Norway) 1-780-453-9125 [email protected] Norwegian Polar Institute +47-7-775-0638 [email protected] Student Representative, Amy Macleod (Canada) University of Alberta [email protected]

Webmaster, Nadine Bechstein (Germany) [email protected]

38 International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 BSG Expert Team Chairs BSG Co-chairs Dave Garshelis Email: [email protected] Rob Steinmetz Email: [email protected]

Red List Authority Focal Point Bruce McLellan Email: [email protected]

European Brown Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Giant Panda Expert Team Co-chairs Djuro Huber Ron Swaisgood Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Jon Swenson Dajun Wang Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Asian Brown Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Andean Bear Expert Team Co-chairs

Stefan Michel Ximena Velez-Liendo Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Bruce McLellan Russ Van Horn Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Michael Proctor Human-Bear Conflicts Expert Team Co-chairs Email: [email protected] Lana Ciarniello Asiatic Black Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Email: [email protected] Patti Sowka Dave Garshelis Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Matt Hunt Captive Bears Expert Team Co-chairs Email: [email protected] Lydia Kolter Sun Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Email: [email protected] Nicola Field Gabriella Fredriksson Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Rob Steinmetz Email: [email protected]

Sloth Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Harendra Bargali Email: [email protected] Nishith Dharaiya Email: [email protected]

International Bear News Spring 2018 vol. 27 no. 1 39 International Bear News Distribution 907 Jessie Way Bozeman, MT 59715 USA

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED Update Your Contact Information at: www.bearbiology.com/iba/contactinfo.html

About the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) The International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) is a non-profit tax-exempt organization open to professional biologists, wildlife managers, and others dedicated to the conservation of all bear species. The organization has approxmi- ately 500 members from over 50 countries. It supports the scientific management of bears through research and distribution of information. The IBA sponsors international conferences on all aspects of bear biology, ecology, and management. The proceedings are published as peer-reviewed scientific papers in the journal Ursus. IBA Mission Statement Goal: The goal of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) is to promote the conservation and restoration of the world’s bears through science-based research, management, and education. Objectives: In support of this goal, IBA’s objectives are to: 1. Promote and foster well-designed research of the highest professional standards. 2. Develop and promote sound stewardship of the world’s bears through scientifically based population and habitat management. 3. Publish and distribute, through its conferences and publications, peer-reviewed scientific and technical information of high quality addressing broad issues of ecology, conservation, and management. 4. Encourage communication and collaboration across scientific disciplines and among bear researchers and managers through conferences, workshops, and newsletters. 5. Increase public awareness and understanding of bear ecology, conservation, and management by encouraging the translation of technical information into popular literature and other media, as well as through other educational forums. 6. Encourage the professional growth and development of our members. 7. Provide professional counsel and advice on issues of natural resource policy related to bear management and conservation. 8. Maintain the highest standards of professional ethics and scientific integrity. 9. Encourage full international participation in the IBA through the siting of conferences, active recruitment of international members and officers, and through financial support for international research, travel to meetings, memberships, and journal subscriptions. 10. Through its integrated relationship with the Bear Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union (IUCN)/Species Survival Commission, identify priorities in bear research and management and recruit project proposals to the IBA Grants Program that address these priorities. 11. Build an endowment and a future funding base to provide ongoing support for IBA core functions and for the IBA Grants Program. 12. Support innovative solutions to bear conservation dilemmas that involve local communities as well as national or regional governments and, to the extent possible, address their needs without compromising bear conservation, recognizing that conservation is most successful where human communities are stable and can see the benefits of conservation efforts. 13. Form partnerships with other institutions to achieve conservation goals, where partnerships could provide additional funding, knowledge of geographical areas, or expertise in scientific or non-scientific sectors.

Deadline for the Summer 2018 issue is 05 June 2018