Summer 2019 Vol

International Bear News

Tri-Annual Newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) and the IUCN/SSC Bear Specialist Group Summer 2019 Vol. 28 no. 2

Bears with suspected mange (credit: Pennsylvania Game Commission). See page 26 for more on surveillance and management considerations for mange in black bears.

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 Communications 6 Bear Conservation Could Learn from the 33 Book: What Bears Teach Us – Invitation to Game of Thrones Contribute

IBA Member News Reviews 8 2019 IBA Election Information 34 Book Review: Scientific English Writing: 10 Transition News How to Write Scientific Papers in English, by Malcolm Fitz-Earle, 2018 Conservation 11 Fate of Orphaned Bears in Iran Workshop Reports 13 Sun Bear Global Status Review and 35 Summary of the 24th Eastern Black Bear Conservation Action Plan Launched Workshop 15 Distribution and Conservation Status of Tien-Shan Brown Bear in the Kyrgyz Conference Announcements Republic 37 27th International Conference On Bear 18 Bear Release in Iraqi Kurdistan Must Stop Research & Management, September 21 – 25, 2020, Kalispell, Montana, United States Human-bear conflicts 20 Working for Andean Bear Conservation Workshop Announcements in Peru: Joining Forces for Human–Bear 38 First International Workshop on Developing Conflict Reduction Population Monitoring Guidelines for Asian 22 Arrival of a Brown Bear on a Remote Island Bears November 4-8, 2019, Taipei, Taiwan of Hokkaido, Japan 38 Human-Bear Conflict Conference, October 4-7, 2021, Lake Tahoe, Nevada, United Biological Research States 24 Does a Bear Poop in the Road? A Call for 38 25th Eastern Black Bear Workshop, 2021. Greater Attention to the Influence of Wisconsin Forest Roads on a Large Carnivore’s Stress Response Student Forum 26 Surveillance and Management 39 Truman Listserv and Facebook Page Considerations for Mange in Black Bears Publications Manager’s Corner 39 Recent Bear Literature 29 Multi-Agency Effort in Lake Tahoe to Streamline Response to Human-Bear IBA Officers & Council Conflicts 45 Executive Council Members and Ex-Officio 30 Wildlife Human Attack Response Training Members (WHART) 31 Help with the Human Side of Human-Bear BSG Expert Team Chairs Conflicts 46 Bear Specialist Group Team Chairs

2 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 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) Merrill Maben (Proofing) Alpha Graphics, Bozeman, MT, USA (Printing and Distribution) Coordinated by: Jennapher Teunissen van Manen, 907 Jessie Way Bozeman, MT 59715 Email: [email protected]

Website: www.bearbiology.org Back issues are available at www.bearbiology.org 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: [email protected] Zoo and Captive Bear Organizations: Jordan Schaul, Email:[email protected] Bear Specialist Group: Dave Garshelis, Email:[email protected] Manager’s Corner: Carl Lackey, Email: [email protected] All other submission and/or inquiries: Mark Edwards, Email: [email protected] Consult website for submission guidelines. Deadline for the Fall 2019 issue is 05 October 2019.

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 Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 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]

The major challenges facing bears… Most IBA members will remember the 2016 Strategic Membership Survey. Although the results of this survey were presented at the IBA conference in Anchorage, Alaska, USA, in 2016, some of the insights from this survey are worthwhile re-visiting. We received 125 anonymous responses, or a 20.3% (based on 616 members) return rate. One of the most important questions was “What are the 3 major challenges facing bears and their ecosystems in your research area in the next decade?”. Answers varied widely, ranging from global issues, such as climate change to very local issues, such as pressure from emotional environmental groups. However, some very clear trends were obvious. The 4 major challenges (≥ 20% support among respondents) facing bears and their ecosystems in the next decade according to IBA members are habitat degradation (73%), human-bear conflicts (49%), climate change (31%), and illegal trade in bear parts and poaching (29%). Not surprisingly, habitat degradation and loss were recognized by the vast majority of the respondents as the most important challenge facing bears in the future. As one respondent eloquently formulated: “Habitat loss! This is a problem just about everywhere. Of particular concern is habitat loss in developing countries, due to expansion of agriculture and human harvest of timber products, legally and illegally.” Habitat degradation and loss, and climatic change are maybe the most important challenges facing almost all mammals. Due to their charismatic image and their large space requirements, bears are excellent model species to understand and find potential solutions for these challenges that benefit not just bears, but also many other species. In general, human-wildlife conflicts are a major management and conservation issue. Due to the fact that bears can and sometimes do injure or kill people, they present a special challenge. Another issue specific to bears, and a few other mammals, is their value as animal pharmacy. The healing powers assigned to bear gall bladders leads to poaching of wild animals and the farming of bears, often under horrible conditions.

…and how IBA was asked to assist members in their work to face these challenges. The logical follow-up to the question on major challenges facing bears was “How can IBA be of more direct assistance to you in your work?” A wide variety of answers were provided, however, the 3 major forms of assistance (≥ 20% support) members suggested were financial (30%), improvement of internal communication among members (27%), and that IBA should become a more pro-active authority and leader on bear-related topics (20%). In general, respondents seemed to struggle with finding funds for bear-related research as well as for conference atten- dance. A respondent stated: “Financial support is always a limiting factor, so of course more opportunities for funding are welcome.” Respondents generally understand and support that most grant and travel support go to “developing” countries, however, some respondents also pointed out the need for increased funding opportunities available to managers and researchers in North America. As you’ve likely read in our monthly email updates, Council has begun the process to hire an Executive Director. One of the main responsibilities for the Executive Director will be to increase IBA fundraising activities and by extension, increase the grants program. Very recently Council also adopted a Strategic Plan that aims to add regional strategies and priorities in all parts of the world. The goal is to allow grant applicants to be assessed based on regional needs and priorities so that members from North America or western Europe are not competing for funds with members in South America, Asia, or eastern Europe. More details on this plan will be provided in the next President’s column. A response that nicely summarizes how IBA should go about communication: “Communication, communication, communication. Provide ways to find out what colleagues are learning, communicate with them, info on what works and what doesn’t, the recent bear literature in IBN is excellent, etc.”. As for steps that are on the way to better communication, in addition to our conferences, Ursus and IBN, IBA has a Facebook page and has created a new and more interactive website. Our Director of Transition and new IBA Communication Team (Jennapher Teunissen van Manen, Agnieszka Sergiel, and Alexander Kopatz) recently started to provide monthly updates and eblasts with information on the latest IBA activities and news. These eblasts have resulted in much positive feedback and interactions between IBA and its membership, but also

4 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 IBA President among members. An excellent example is the eBlast that was sent out in June about the proposed Pebble Mine project in southwest Alaska, USA. In response to the eBlast two members that have projects in the area contacted IBA and were able to collaborate with Council and other IBA members that were in the process of preparing an official letter for comment on the proposed project. In general, respondents suggest that a more visible and active IBA playing a larger political role, would assist them (and by extension, bears and their management and conservation issues) in their work. Several respondents mentioned also position statements, as summarized by this comment: “Developing white papers, or position statements, on major issues such as climate change, human-bear conflict, etc. might assist many bear managers in their jobs, because there would be the clout of a respected international group behind the position statements”. There is often a fine line between objective position statements based on rigorous scientific evidence and advocacy, and IBA strictly aims to provide objective statements based on the best science available. A request for a position statement must fulfill several strict criteria for Council to consider it; these criteria can be found on our website in our Policy Guidance Document (https://www.bearbiology.org/wp-content/ uploads/2019/05/Policy-Guidance-for-the-International-Association-of-Bear-Research-and-Management-Final-Website-Ver- sion.pdf) . The Policy Guidance Document is an official process that was voted in by the Council of 2016 to provide guidance for future Councils when reviewing requests for position statements or letters. A good example is our most recent position statement on radio-collaring of bears in close cooperation with the IUCN Bear Specialist Group. The above feedback by members have helped Council shape a direction for IBA to move forward to in the future, to be better informed to fulfill our mission statement (https://www.bearbiology.org/about/#missionstatement) and for IBA to better understand the world’s 8 bear species through scientific research and collaboration with communities, conservationists, managers, students, and partnerships with like organizations across the globe. Internally, we refer to this process as “transition”; computer scientists may be better served with the term “upgrade”, while ecologists may better understand the term “evolution” of IBA. In whatever way you refer to it, the goal of this process is to grow as an organization but to remain the inclusive organization that has made IBA able to thrive for 45+ years as an all-volunteer professional society of colleagues and friends and, to create a win-win situation that will benefit our members, our partner organizations, and most of all bears and their management and conservation world-wide.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 5 IUCN BSG Co-Chairs Bear Conservation Could Learn from the Game of Thrones

Dave Garshelis Co-Chair IUCN Bear Specialist Group Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USA Email: [email protected]

The Game of Thrones was a wildly popular television series, aired over 8 seasons (with the season finale just a few weeks before this writing). It was derived from a series of fantasy novels authored by George R. R. Martin. Occurring in a fictitious “realm” of medieval Europe — with many castles, kings, queens, armored knights, horses, and countless sword fights — required filming in multiple countries, with elaborate sets, and an enormous cast of characters. Each of the 73 episodes reportedly cost $6-15 million to produce. One extensive battle scene was estimated to have cost $8 million. How did they raise so much money? Imagine if we could have gotten just $1 million of this to devote to bear conservation. Is it a perversity of our culture, or of human nature, that we value entertainment so much more than conservation of one of the most charismatic fauna on earth? Here, I argue the unorthodox and uncomfortable view that it’s not necessarily valuing entertainment over conservation, but valuing completed projects that touch people’s lives. What do we have in the “bear conservation portfolio” that we can show as successful, captivating products to entice potential investors and collaborators? It seems that so much of what is labelled as products of bear conservation are simply published papers or reports. Papers are used as a sort of professional currency, but it’s very much an in-house currency (like chips in a casino). Papers may recommend some follow-up conservation action, but typically authors of papers pass that off as someone else’s responsibility. To be clear, I am not arguing that sharing science is unimportant; nor am I arguing that solid science doesn’t play an integral role in conservation. Indeed, many of the elements of the newly-completed Sun Bear Conservation Action plan (Crudge et al. 2019, and see pages 13-14 in this issue) call for more research to better understand solutions to the threats, to help prioritize sites for conservation action, and to improve monitoring procedures so we can more reliably ascertain what works and what doesn’t. But ultimately, the conservation product should be populations that were saved: declines that were reversed. At the IBA conference in Ljubljana, the BSG held a session titled “What would have been without us?” The idea was to highlight conservation success stories using the counterfactual approach (i.e., pretend we weren’t there, and imagine how much worse things would have been). Frankly, it was tough to do even that. That is not to say that bear conservation has been without successes, or that the many biologists who have dedicated their professional lives to bears haven’t made a difference. Bear numbers across North America and in many parts of Europe are thriving, where once they were disappearing. But it is very difficult to clearly link most of this success to the activities of bear biologists. We can probably assume that years of gaining more knowledge and “educating the public” have paid off in swaying public and governmental attitudes and actions more positively towards bears. But, with a few exceptions (such as populations that have been reintroduced), it is hard to draw a straight line connection between the work of bear biologists and a population brought back from the brink. If one of us was asked to put together an 18-minute TED talk on “How We’re Saving Bears — And What We Could Do With $1 Million”, what would it say? The peer-reviewed literature is inundated with bear papers emphasizing continued severe threats and projecting dire consequences for the future. Our Red List accounts indicate that 75% of bear species are globally Vulnerable to extinction, and more than half the brown bear populations around the world are Endangered or Critically Endangered. Many commit- ted bear biologists are doing their best against severe obstacles. But we need to be able to highlight a list of clear achieve- ments, not a list of obstacles. Nobody would be talking about The Game of Thrones if all we knew about were obstacles that prevented the completion of filming. Doing conservation is daunting. It’s much harder than doing a study and writing a paper. But in movie terms, most of what we’ve done as bear biologists might be likened to the gathering of background material and ideas. For the most part, we don’t yet have the full “script”. And, generally, we have yet to get commitments for conservation actions from country governments (akin to movie “production companies”). One further lesson for success is the value of a focused, collaborative effort, involving many people working toward the same end product. The Game of Thrones cast and extensive crew became a sort of family, all fully invested in the final prod-

6 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 IUCN BSG Co-Chairs uct, and emotionally as well as professionally connected to each other, some for more than a decade. Likewise, bear biologists could make greater strides in conservation by working in multidisciplinary, coordinated teams, with a common well- defined objective. Grants of $30,000 to aid in the recovery of threatened species aimed at “specific and defensible priority actions” (like those defined in the sun bear conservation plan) are available through a new partnership between the IUCN SSC and the National Geographic Society (https://www.nationalgeo- graphic.org/funding-opportunities/grants/what-we-fund/ species-recovery/). It might not yet be $1 million, but positive Bear conservation could look to the highly acclaimed and popular television series Game of Thrones to understand the value of a polished finished product with engaging stories as a outcomes can snowball. model for success. Pictured: “Ursus thibetanus on horseback” from the book “Bruin” Swaisgood and Sheppard by novelist Captain Mayne Reid (1860). (2010) argued that conservation needs “stories that inspire and encourage, that lift our spirits and justify our efforts.” That’s the point I’m trying to make here, using an odd but hopefully memorable analogy. Much of the intrigue of the Game of Thrones arose from the many complex characters, story lines, and impossible odds that were conquered. We need attention-grabbing stories of conquering impossible odds. We’re striving for something more noble than a throne. But whatever the cause, people prefer to back winners.

Literature Cited Crudge, B., C. Lees, M. Hunt, R. Steinmetz, G. Fredriksson, and D. Garshelis. 2019, editors. Sun bears: Global status review & conservation action plan, 2019-2028. IUCN SSC Bear Specialist Group / IUCN SSC Conservation Planning Specialist Group / Free the Bears / TRAFFIC. http://bit.ly/SunBearActionPlan_2_1 Mayne Reid, C. 1860. Bruin, or the grand bear hunt. Routlage and Sons, London. Swaisgood, R.R., and J. K. Sheppard. 2010. The culture of conservation biologists: show me the hope! BioScience 60: 626–630.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 7 IBA Member News 2019 IBA Election Information

Jennapher Teunissen van Manen Director of Transition International Association for Bear Research and Management Email: [email protected] Phone: +1.530.379.5476

The 2019 IBA Election for your Council is upon us. This year, there are three Officer positions: President, Vice-President (Americas), and Treasurer, and two Council positions open. The term for each position is 3-years, begins on January 10th, 2020 and ends on January 9th, 2023. In accordance with the bylaws, a nominations committee was formed in May 2019 by the IBA President. The Chair of the nominations committee is Frank van Manen and members are Marta De Barba, Alex Kopatz, and Martyn Obbard. The nominations committee has selected the following members as candidates for the 2019 election:

President: John Hechtel Retired Alaska Department of Fish and Game United States of America

Vice President, Americas: Mark Edwards Royal Alberta Museum University of Alberta Canada

Karyn Rode U.S. Geological Survey, Alaska Science Center United States of America

Treasurer: Jennifer Fortin-Noreus (Incumbent) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service United States of America

Council Seats 1 and 2: Anne Hertel Senckenberg Biodiversity and Climate Research Centre University of South-Eastern Norway, Department of Natural Sciences and Environmental Health Germany (Working in collaboration with Norway and Sweden()

Lorraine Scotson International Association for Bear Research and Management Member IUCN SSC Asian Wild Cattle Specialist Group Soala Working Group Scotland (Working in Lao PDR & Vietnam)

Sandeep Sharma University of Göttingen, Göttingen, Germany Germany (Working in South Asia, primarily India)

Dave Telesco Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission United States of America

8 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 IBA Member News Konstantin Tirronen Laboratory of Zoology, Institute of Biology Karelian Research Center of Russian Academy of Sciences Russian Federation

Odbayar Tumendemberel University of South-Eastern Norway Mongolia and Norway

Member Nominations IBA is an inclusive organization and we value member input and encourage all members to participate however they can. The elections are no exception. Part of the nomination process is an open period, during which members can either nominate other members or self-nominate if interested in getting more involved through Council participation. The Nominations committee published their candidate list on the IBA website August 8th, 2019 and announced opening of the period for member nominations. An email was sent to all current members on August 9th announcing the open nomination period and nominations committee candidate list. The deadline for member nominations is September 8th, 2019. A member can nominate another member as long as the person’s membership is current, they have agreed to run for office and agree to serve if elected. To nominate a member, you will need to email the IBA Secretary, Alex Kopatz at: alexander.kopatz@ bearbiology.org no later than September 8th, 2019 with the nominee’s name, Council position they are being nominated for, and copying the nominee. The Secretary will contact all nominees to certify that they agree to run and serve if elected, and their names will be placed on the ballot with the candidates from the nomination committee. Balloting Voting will be done electronically through our online membership system. As the election approaches, we will provide instructions and all necessary information via emails and published on our website. Member Voting Eligibility In 2016 the membership ratified the current bylaws that made some changes to the voting eligibility requirement for members. The new requirement states that anyone joining IBA for the first-time or whose membership has been expired for ≥ 3 years, must establish membership ≥3 months prior to the distribution of ballots. The ballots will open between Novem- ber 1st and 15th, 2019. Emails have been going out since early June to make members aware of these requirements so if you have not received these emails, you will need to log in to your IBA membership account and verify that you have provided us with your current email address. If your email address is current and you still have not received any emails, then you will need to check your email account system and verify that our emails are not going to your junk folder. For any questions about your account, you can contact me at: [email protected] Specialist Group Memberships As was announced in June, IBA Council voted to change the terms of the complimentary memberships that any Polar Bear or Bear Specialist (PBSG or BSG) group member has been eligible to receive from IBA. The previous type of membership was indefinite and included voting privileges but did not include access to our peer-reviewed journal, URSUS. The new type of membership, an Introductory Specialist Group Non-Voting Membership, will now include a subscription to all IBA publications, including URSUS, will be for 1-year, but will not include voting privileges. If a Specialist Group member would like to vote in IBA elections, an IBA membership can be purchased. If you are currently receiving an Introductory Specialist Group Non-Voting Membership and would like to purchase an IBA voting membership, you can log into your account on the IBA website and select ‘My Membership’ from the drop-down menu and renew. From there you will be able to select the type of membership you would like to join with. If there are any issues with the system, please contact me and I will get it fixed. For detailed information on IBA elections, nominations, and voting, please refer to the IBA bylaws on our website at: https://www.bearbiology.org/about/bylaws-organization-structure/

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 9 IBA Member News Transition News

Alexander Kopatz Agnieszka Sergiel Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) Institute of Nature Conservation of Polish Academy of Trondheim, Norway Sciences, Krakow, Poland IBA Secretary, Co-chair of Communications team IBA Council Member, Co-chair of Communications team Email: [email protected] Member: European Brown Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Group Email: [email protected]

Dear IBA Members, As promised, here we are back with updates on the IBA transition process to keep you posted. We have a few highlights for you:

The search for an Executive Director The all-volunteer Search Committee was finalized with the Director of Transition providing support to carry out the process of finding an Executive Director. The announcement for this position was circulated and published on various webpor- tals for jobseekers for 30 days with August 15th, 2019 being the application deadline. The Search Committee received over 40 applications and is in the process of reviewing them. Soon potential applicants will be contacted for the selection and interview process. Watch for updates in your email and on the IBA website.

We received a new grant for the transition process Thanks to the efforts of Karen Noyce we received an additional $100,000 grant specifically donated for the IBA transition process. Our main focus now will be the search for and hiring of an Executive Director (ED). By hiring an ED, the all-volunteer Council will be relieved of much of the workload that will be required to implement IBA’s short and long-term transition as guided by the strategic development that was first developed by the Oliver Wyman Management Consulting firm and adapted by the Strategic Development ad-hoc committee IBA, reviewed and voted in by Council . The Director of Transition (DT) will support the new ED, who will mainly focus on fundraising and strategic development, while the DT will focus on the logistics and implementation of the transition and continue with the day-to-day operations of IBA for the membership.

We have a new email platform for IBA Council, Committee Chairs, and Employees As part of the transition process, IBA council has decided to develop a more professional image and workspace, and part of this “branding” is the use of a professional email platform. Thanks to the tireless efforts of Jack Beardsley, our Website Technical Manager, we now are able to use the professional Google GSuite platform free of charge. The new email addresses were included in the April monthly e-blast, have been updated on the IBA website and in the released Spring IBN.

One more note for you all. We very much appreciate and welcome your input. Please do not hesitate to contact us with suggestions or questions about the transition process.

10 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Conservation Fate of Orphaned Bears in Iran Danial Nayeri Alireza Mohammadi Faculty of Natural Resources, Faculty of Natural Resources, Department of Environmental Sciences, Department of Environmental Sciences, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Two species of bears are present in Iran, the Syrian brown bear (Ursus arctos syriacus) and the Asiatic black bear (and its classification as Iranian or Baluchistan black bear) (U. thibetanus gedrosianus). The Syrian brown bear inhabits the Alborz and Zagros mountains and appears to be higher in density and has wider distribution across Iran. The status of brown bear in Iran in contrast to some other populations in the world is of particular concern due to conflict with local communities such as livestock depredation, orchard damages, beehive attacks, and human mortalities. The Baluchistan black bear has the most western distribution among the 7 subspecies of this species (Hwang et al. 2008). Information about both of these subspecies is limited, especially in Iran. The Syrian brown bear is the largest carnivore in the country and the Baluchistan black bear, classified as critically endangered (CR), is the second most priority species for conservation in Iran (Farhadinia et al. 2016). Both species are often poached and that is one of the reasons why young orphaned cubs end up in rehabilitation centers. During the last 5 years, 3 orphaned Asiatic black bears have been found and delivered to the Department of Environment (DoE), twins from Qal e Ganj, Kerman Province and a 2 months old male cub from Rudan, Hormozgan province which was approaching villages in search of food and water. They died shortly due to unknown reasons. Also, 6 brown bears were found: one of them from Shaft, Gilan province died due to injuries caused by a flood, while the others were transferred to Pardisan Rehabilitation Center (PRC) in Tehran, the capital of Iran. Furthermore, 3 more bears from Ardabil in the northwest, Lorestan in the west and Gilan in the north were also taken to PRC. All these bears have been living together in PRC, as recommended by bear rehabilitation and release specialists (Beecham et al. 2016). In 2015, Dena, a female brown bear from the Zagros mountains, was delivered to PRC and then sent to a zoo in Hamedan province. In 2016, another female was delivered to the center. Successful releases of rehabilitated bears are limited in the Middle East and Central Asia, and post-release monitoring is often the challenge of these projects. One example is the rehabilitation and release of 2 brown bears in Tajikistan (Rosen et al. 2015). Given the complexity of rehabilitating large carnivores with a view of releasing them in the wild, there is need for greater data on what makes a successful release (Beecham et al. 2016). In Iran, there are no programs in place to rehabilitate bears with a view to release them, and so all the orphaned bears are expected to end their life in zoos or rehabilitation centers. Captive rearing needs facilities and requirements such as standard enclosures and appropriate care and diet. Contact with care takers should be minimized and only limited to a specific person, not a variety of people, otherwise they will become habituated which makes their release much more difficult (Beecham et al. 2016). Most of the orphaned bears referred to DoE or rehabilitation centers in Iran are found by local people, often after their mothers have been poached, but

there are potentially situations Danial Nayeri when that is not the case and 3 Orphaned brown bears living with each other at Pardisan Rehabilitation Center. the mothers might still be alive.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 11 Conservation In order to avoid the need in the first place for rehabilitating bears, education and raising awareness among local communities about bears and especially not touching every lonely cub in the nature is very important. Developing conflict mitigation projects to reduce human-bear conflict as one of the major causes of brown bear mortalities in Iran is also of the highest priority.

Acknowledgments We would like to thank Tanya Rosen for the editorial review of the paper. Furthermore, we are grateful to Ali Ammarloei and Farnaz Heidari for providing invaluable data.

Literature Cited Beecham, J.J., Loeffler, K.l., Beausoleil, R.A., Strategies for captive rearing and reintroduction of orphaned bears. 2016. Journal of Wildlife Rehabilitation Volume 36, Number 1 Farhadinia M. S., Mohammadi A. R., Ashrafi S., Ashrafzadeh M. R. & Mohammadi H. 2016. Conservation prioritiza- tion of Iranian mammals for effective management. Orphaned twin Baluchistan black bears from Qal e Ganj, Kerman Province. Iranian Journal of Natural Environment 68, 461-475. (In Persian) Gutleb, B., Ziaie, H., 1999. On the distribution and status of brown bears Ursus arctos and the Asiatic black bear, U. thibetanus in Iran. Zool. Middle East 18 (1), 5–8. D.S. Hwang, J.S. Ki, D.H. Jeong, B.H. Kim, B.K. Lee, S.H. Han, J.S. Lee, A comprehensive analysis of three Asiatic black bear mitochondrial genomes (subspecies ussuricus, formosanus and mupinensis), with emphasis on the complete mtDNA sequence of Ursus thibetanus ussuricus (Ursidae) Full length Research Paper, DNA Seq. 19 (4) (2008) 418–429. Rosen, T. M., Atabaev,M. (2015). A Tale of Two Bears: the release of two brown bear cubs in the High Pamirs of Tajikistan. Int. Bear News Vol. 24 no.2

12 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Conservation Sun Bear Global Status Review and Conservation Action Plan Launched

Brian Crudge Matt Hunt Member: Sun Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair Asiatic Black Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Research Programme Manager, Free the Bears Group PO Box 723, Phnom Penh, Cambodia Chief Executive, Free the Bears Email: [email protected] PO Box 015, Luang Prabang, Lao PDR Email: [email protected] Dave Garshelis Co-Chair IUCN Bear Specialist Group Caroline Lees Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Program Officer, IUCN SSC Conservation Planning Specialist Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USA Group Email: [email protected] c/o NZCCM, Auckland Zoological Park Private Bag, Grey Lynn, Auckland, New Zealand Email: [email protected]

On June 4, 2019, the IUCN SSC Bear Specialist Group, in collaboration with the Conservation Planning Specialist Group, Free the Bears, and TRAFFIC in Southeast Asia officially launched a 10-year action plan for the conservation of sun bears (Helarctos malayanus). This is the first range-wide conservation strategy for any of the terrestrial bear species. It integrates conservation of sun bear populations in the wild throughout their range (in situ) and in good zoos and sanctuaries throughout the world (ex situ). The action plan (Crudge et al. 2019) is an output of the first International Symposium on Sun Bear Conservation & Manage- ment, held in September 2017, which brought together 100 delegates from over 50 organizations, including researchers, conservationists, people working with sun bears in captive care centers, and governmental representatives. The symposium fed into a conservation planning workshop during which 25 delegates worked collaboratively to draft a 10-year range-wide conservation action plan. A small team of editors, with input from the wider group of symposium participants, worked for over a year to develop the final document. The document includes an extensive but not exhaustive status review for in situ and ex situ populations. This provides justifica- tion for the conservation actions identified, including research needs, especially where information is lacking or conflicting. This document is intended as a resource to be used by all stakeholders, including: range state governmental agencies, to help guide and inform the development of national or local action plans and initiatives; individuals, institutions and ex situ

facilities working with sun bears, to help inform their priorities; TRAFFIC. the Bears / / CPSG Free Bear Specialist Group non-governmental conservation organizations and community Cover of Sun bears: Global status review & groups, to guide and inform their priorities and work plans; the conservation action plan, 2019-2028. IUCN SSC Bear Specialist Group, to help direct conservation- related research and actions, as well as track and support progress with the directions and priorities agreed for sun bears; and donor organizations, to guide priority actions for funding support. The plan details 19 objectives and 63 actions aimed at attaining 5 overarching goals: (1) eliminating illegal exploitation; (2) protecting and restoring habitats and populations; (3) devising and employing reliable monitoring methods; (4) maximizing

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 13 Conservation ex situ contributions to conservation; and (5) increasing cross-sectoral support and collaboration for sun bear conservation. The implementation of actions in this plan will be monitored and coordinated by an Implementation Task Force comprised of Focal Point persons for each range state and each of the five overarching goals. The Focal Points will serve as con- tacts for anyone conducting or wishing to conduct recommended actions within range states or on working group themes. The action plan is intended to provide a unified strategy to which disparate individuals and organizations, typically working with limited resources, can contribute over the next 10 years in order to achieve the long term vision for sun bear conservation, developed by symposium participants: Sun bears thrive as a functional component of all natural ecosystems in which they occur in each of the eleven range countries. Human societies coexist with wild sun bears throughout the range with political and cultural appreciation of their intrinsic value as living beings. Wild sun bear populations are no longer threatened. Captive sun bears are maintained under high welfare standards and contribute to conservation through advocacy, education, research, and where appropriate, release back to the wild. Conservation of sun bears aids in the conservation of other species and ecosystems in Southeast Asia.

Acknowledgements This initiative was supported by: Wildlife Reserves Singapore Group; Perth Zoo Wildlife Conservation Action grant; Taronga Conservation Society Australia; TRAFFIC Southeast Asia; Bornean Sun Bear Conservation Centre; Hauser Bears; and the International Association for Bear Research & Management, Research and Conservation Grant.

Literature Cited Crudge, B., C. Lees, M. Hunt, R. Steinmetz, G. Fredriksson, and D. Garshelis, editors. 2019. Sun bears: Global status review & conservation action plan, 2019-2028. IUCN SSC Bear Specialist Group / IUCN SSC Conservation Planning Specialist Group / Free the Bears / TRAFFIC. Available from http://bit.ly/SunBearActionPlan_2_1 (Unabridged) and http://bit.ly/ SunBearActionPlan_Abridged_2_0 (Abridged)

14 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Conservation Distribution and Conservation Status of Tien-Shan Brown Bear in the Kyrgyz Republic

Maksatbek Anarbaev Askar Davletbakov Institute of Geographical Sciences Biology Institute Centre for Development Studies National Academy of Science Freie University Berlin, Malteserstr. 74-100, 12249, Kyrgyz Republic Berlin Germany Email: [email protected] Shigeyuki Izumiyama Institute of Mountain Science Joldoshbek Kyrbashev Shinshu University Naryn State Nature Reserve Japan Kyrgyz Republic

The brown bear (Ursus arctos) is the largest mammal of the Central Asian Mountains. In the Kyrgyz Republic (hereafter Kyrgyzstan) occurs its subspecies, Tien-Shan brown bear (U. a. isabellinus) also known as Himalayan brown bear. Beyond the region, the bear also inhabits the Gobi, Hindukush and Himalayan highlands (McLellan et al. 2017:7). The special char- acteristic of this subspecies are the “white claws”, and therefore for a long time it was called U. a. leuconyx Severtzov, 1873 (Leuconyx – verbatim white claws in Greek) (Kuznetsov, 1948:97; Novikov, 1956:98) or other synonyms (Wilson and Reeder, 2005). Brown bears are considered iconic, valuable and rare. Nevertheless, since the 1980s little is known about their status, except recent short reports on poaching cases in the country. In Kyrgyzstan brown bears inhabit almost all main mountain ranges and highland valleys. Traditionally brown bears are associated with forest landscapes, however, under certain conditions found in the region they also occur in highland steppes (Yanushevich et al. 1972:326). For instance, there is evidence of their presence in syrt zones, in alpine meadows of Khan-Tengiri mountains, Ak-Sai and Arpa highland valleys in Kyrgyzstan. Locally called as “aiu” and used in many place names such Aiu-Bulak (spring of bear), Aiu-Tör (highland pasture of bear) or Aiu-Üngkür (cave of bear), indicating their much wider geographic presence in the past. Before 1963 when hunting was forbidden, brown bears were legally harvested in Kyrgyzstan. According to Yanushevich et al. (1972:330), from 1940-1960 38 pelts were harvested, with up to 27 pelts in 1955 and a single pelt in 1960. The number of brown bears killed could have been higher, due to the high demand for meat, fat and gallbladders, which are used for traditional medicine. Moreover, pelts are considered as a valued present, and used as decorations and carpets in houses. Therefore, many of the bears killed stayed in the hands of hunters and were not recorded. Hunting regulations were not sufficient to stabilize the decreasing bear population, and since 1975 the species has been included in the Red list of Kyrgyz SSR. Moreover, the Tien-Shan brown bear as the subspecies was listed under CITES Appendix I. With the purpose to decrease poaching, in 2017 the Kyrgyz Government increased the penalty to 1,000,000 KGS (14.400 USD). The bear was threatened by the intensive use of pastures, development projects and mining. They are most numerous in Protected Areas. Within Kyrgyzstan, in many places the habitat range of brown bears overlaps with the range of snow leopards (Panthera uncia) estimated at 105,400 km2 (Koshkarev, 1989:91) while brown bears’ habitat area is about 115,000 km2 (see also Su et al. 2018) or more. In the late 1980s, So- kolov (1986) and Sosnov- kiy (1987) reported on the brown bear’s status in the region and highlighted the territory of Brown bear habitat in Kyrgyzstan. Credit: M. Anarbaev, 2019.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 15 Conservation

(left) Brown bear on sensor camera in the Naryn State Nature Reserve. Credit:“Kaiberen” wildlife research and conservation program, 2015. (right) Bear scats in the Saimaluu-Tash State Nature Park. Credit: M. Anarbaev, 15.06.2014

Kyrgyzstan as main habitat with maximal population. According to the literature, at the end of the 1980s there were greater numbers in comparison to today. Nevertheless, the territory of Kyrgyzstan remains important habitat for brown bears in the region. Therefore, brown bear conservation plan is necessary. As reported by State Agency on Environmental Protection and Forestry (2018), within hunting concessions and Protected Areas, the number of Tien-Shan brown bears is estimated at up to 440 individuals. In the 1980s, an average population density of brown bears in Kyrgyzstan was estimated at 0.15 bears (Aizin et al. 1985:20). High density was reported in the fruit-walnut forests with 0.6-0.8 individuals per 1000 hectares (ha) of suitable habitats (Davletbakov, 2006:499). During field work in 2014, within the territory of the Saimaluu-Tash State Nature Park (32,000 ha) the presence of 7 bears was estimated, or in other words 0.22 density, which is much lower in comparison to the 1980s. How- ever, considering that the Nature Park was established in 2001, it is an important refuge in the area. Prior to establishment of the Naryn State Nature Reserve in 1983, studies (1977-1979) confirmed about 6 bears in the territory of 90,000 ha. Based on our field works (2014-2018), we have estimated up to 15 bears within the reserve’s core zone. The brown bear is an omnivore and therefore uses a variety of available foods depending on local environment (Wu et al. 2013:20). There are geographic and seasonal variabilities in food habits. According to many authors, plant food predomi- nates in the diet of bears. Nevertheless, in the diet of brown bears, as well as snow leopards and wolves (Canis lupus), wild ungulates and marmots play an important role. In Kyrgyzstan there are 3 marmot subspecies (Marmota menzbieri, M. caudata, M. baibacina). The bears eat them in many numbers in spring and autumn, after and before denning. Food habits in Central Asia are only briefly described in the work of Vereschagin (1974:333), and that study was Estimated population numbers of brown bear (Ursus a. isabellinus) in mostly in forested areas. Therefore, further detailed Central Asia. Source: Sokolov, 1986:282 [CA]; Chernogaev et al. 1996 [UZ]; study on seasonal food habits in other geographic Dyakin, 2007 [UZ]; Loginov, 2012:25 [KZ]; CEP, 2015 [TJ]; locations is necessary, which could contribute in SAEPFS, 2016:111 [KG]; Bizhanova et al. 2017:100 [KZ] improving the efficiency of conservation measures and prioritize further activities. Due to high poaching pressure, as a rule, brown bears avoid contact with humans. In the 1950s 2 cases of bear attacks on humans were recorded and were associated with hunting (Yanushevich et al. 1972:327). It is known that autumn is an important season to accumulate mass before denning. Therefore, most of human-bear conflicts take place during this time. Traditionally brown bears were rarely blamed for livestock depredation. In 2015, we took note of 4 sheep killed in Saimaluu- Tash National Park. Informants reported about 5 bears killed, including 1 female with 2 cubs. Later in 2018, 2 bears attacked a flock of sheep inside a corral in Alaiku Mountains. Also, in recent years the damages on apiaries have become more

16 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Conservation frequent especially in the southern Kyrgyzstan. Beekeepers are asking for assistance in solving this issue. Nevertheless, despite low population numbers, the territory of the republic is still an important natural habitat for brown bears in Central Asia. Therefore, it is necessary to focus on further research, protection of their habitat ranges, and to consider conflict mitigation measures, awareness creation among local population and other related activities.

Literature Cited Aizin, B.M. et al. 1985. Tianshanskiy buryi medved’. Pages 19-21 in Red data book of Kirghiz SSR. Frunze. [In Russian.] Bizhanova, N.A. et al. 2017. Rasprostranenie, chislennost’ i nekotorye osobennosti ekologii krupnyh khischnyh mleko- pitaiuschih v Kazakhstane: analiticheskiy obzor. Eurasian Journal of Ecology. No.3 (52). pp.97-111. Al-Farabi Kazakh National University. [In Russian.] CEP. 2015. Committee on Environmental Protection of Tajikistan. Bioraznoobrazie. [In Russian.] http://www.biodiv.tj/ single?cat=22&id=3. Accessed 08 Jan 2019 Chernogaev, E.A. et al. 1996. Sovremennoe sostoyanie i chislennost‘ zhivotnyh v zapovednikah Uzbekistana. Trudy zapovednikov Uzbekistana. Vyp.1. Tashkent. [In Russian.] Davletbakov, A. 2006. Brown bear. Pages 498-499 in Red data book of the Kyrgyz Republic. Second edition. Bishkek Dyakin, B. 2007. Khotite znat‘o medvedyah bol’she? Ekologicheskiy vestnik. No.7. Tashkent. [In Russian.] Koshkarev, E.P. 1989. Snezhnyi bars v Kirgizii. Ilim. Frunze [In Russian.] Kuznetsov, B.A. 1948. Zveri Kirgizii. Moskva. [In Russian.] Loginov, O. 2012. Status and Conservation of Two Brown Bear Subspecies in Kazakhstan. International Bear News. Febru- ary 2012. Vol. 21. No. 1. pp.24-26. McLellan, B.N. et al. 2017. Ursus arctos (amended version of 2017 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017. https://www.iucnredlist.org/species/41688/121229971 Novikov, G.A. 1956. Khishnye mlekopitaiushie fauny SSSR. Moskva. [In Russian.] SAEPFS. 2016. State Agency on Environmental Protection and Forestry Service of the Kyrgyz Republic. Natsional’nyi doklad o sostoyanii okruzhaiuschei sredy Kyrgyzskoi Respubliki za 2011-2014 gody. Bishkek. [In Russian.] Sokolov, V.E. 1986. Redkie i ischezaiushie zhivotnye. Mlekopitaiushie. Vysshaya shkola. Moskva. [In Russian.] Sosnovskiy, I.P. 1987. Redkie i ischezaiuschie zhivotnye: po stranitsam Krasnoi knigi SSSR. Energoatomizdat. Moskva. [In Russian.] Su, J. et al. 2018. Decreasing brown bear (Ursus arctos) habitat due to climate change in Central Asia and the Asian Highlands. Ecol Evol. 8:11887–11899. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.4645 Vereschagin, N.K. 1974. The Brown Bear in Eurasia, Particularly the Soviet Union. Ursus. Vol.3. pp.327-335. Wilson, D.E and D.M. Reeder, editors. 2005. Mammal Species of the World. A Taxonomic and Geographic Reference (3rd ed), Johns Hopkins University Press, 2,142 pp. https://www.departments.bucknell.edu/biology/resources/msw3/ browse.asp?id=14000980 Wu, L. et al. 2013. Seasonal Food Habits and Human Conflict of Brown Bears in the Sanjiangyuan Nature Reserve, Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, China. International Bear News. Fall 2013. Vol. 22. No. 3. pp.20-21. Yanushevich, A.I. et al. 1972. Brown bear – Ursus arctos L. (1958). Pages 325-330 in Gromov, I.M., and A.I. Yanushevich, editors. Mlekopitaiushie Kirgizii. Ilim, Frunze. [In Russian.]

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 17 Conservation Bear Release in Iraqi Kurdistan Must Stop

Hana Raza Project Manager, Persian Leopard Conservation; Nature Iraq Email: [email protected] Website: www.natureiraq.org

Since April 2017, a program has been initiated by the Kurdish-American Cooperation Organization to release bears back into the wild in Iraqi Kurdistan. The first comprised the release of 4 bears in Choman District, near the Halgurd-Sakran Na- tional Park on April 8, 2017, one of whom was reportedly killed by locals a few days upon release. The bears were purchased from either private owners or zoos from Kirkuk, Slaimani, Erbil, and Dohuk. “The bears were adopted by some local people from the Kurdistan Region in their homes” (Dolamari M., personal communication, 2017). The second release was of 2 bears on Gara Mountain on March 4, 2018. One bear was 3 years old and pregnant, and one was 7 years old and imported from Russia (Dr. Tameer S., personal communication, March 12, 2018). This raises a question of how well these bears will genetically fit into the population they are released into and the possible unfavorable behaviors they might have developed during captive care. The first local complaint after the second release was reported on March 12, 2018, which stated that one of the bears had not left human settlements and was wan- dering around near a police station. The report, which is published on Rudaw Media Network, had taken statements from the police mentioning that the bear was starving and constantly coming to them for food. The purpose of the release of these bears was to restore the brown bear population, but it was not done based on scientific approaches (they did not follow the IUCN guidelines) and without studying whether they belong in the same species’ “population”. Also the areas where the bears were released were not studied. It was not assessed whether there were other bears around or if they would have enough food to survive and would not interact with villagers. Although there are different opinions among experts about this and different regions in the world require different approaches, it can be concluded that it is extremely challenging to rehabilitate and release hand-reared orphaned wild cubs in such a way that they will develop all the skills necessary for life in the wild and to behave appropriately in relation to humans and other bears. Releasing captive born bears is even more challenging. Generally, young cubs that have been in captivity for longer periods of time, in close presence of people, will get habituated and will not be suitable for release back into the wild. The delicate process of rehabilitation and release back into their former wild habitat requires expert guidance, proper facilities and food, and remoteness from human disturbance to have a higher chance of success. Given the situation in Kurdistan and the lack of these important aspects, it can be concluded that it is highly unlikely orphaned bear cubs will be able to survive in the wild. Rudaw Tv / Amir Atrooshi / Amir Tv Rudaw Rudaw Tv /KNN Channel @KNN.ENGLISH Tv Rudaw Iraq Hashim Mahmood,/Nature (left)One bear returning to the district a few days after it was released (April 2017). (lower right) One bear attacking one of the participants during the release event (March 2018). (upper right) Two bear cubs, bought and imported from Iran for $4000.

18 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Conservation In addition, captive hand reared bears who are too young (and small) when released will not be able to defend themselves against attacks from adult bears. Older bears who get released might not be fearful of humans and may wander into human areas, possibly approach people and if they feel threatened, they will attack. They will become nuisance or ‘problem’ bears and end up being shot. They lack the experience to defend themselves against wild bears that will protect their home ranges from these newcomers or male bears who might kill young bears when they have the op- One of the released bears appears in Haji Omran town. portunity. However, if the released (Photos: Kurdistan24 @kurdistan24.official) bear is old enough (approximately 2 years of age) and gets released in an area with an abundance of food and have undergone the intensive training they need to be successfully released back in the wild, the chances of attacks from other bears are reduced. Another point that needs to be considered is public and governmental involvement. One cannot just release bears into an area without informing the local communities of the plan, why these animals are released, that people should keep away from them and there should also be a financial incentive program in case the bears start killing domesticated farm animals. The existing captive population should be given the best possible care and be used as ambassadors to raise public awareness about the situation of free-living conspecifics and the threat of human-bear conflicts.

Regarding rehabilitation and release of bears, the following general suggestions are made: • Inappropriate rehabilitation methods without long-term monitoring of released animals and the wild original population should be discouraged; • A pre-release investigation should take place on the status of the wild population; in all cases of rehabilitation of bears, the recommendations of the IUCN-Reintroduction Specialist Group (RSG), must be followed. Organizations, which plan to release bears, should also provide funding for long-term post-release monitoring to define the fate of the released bears. Long-term studies enable defining survival rate and the consequences for the existing wild population and (local) species conservation; • Public interest should be considered; • Local authorities/communities should be involved in the program; • Sufficient funding for the entire project including pre- and post-release activities should be available; • A database (of rehabilitation projects and their results) should be set up to get a better overview on existing rehabilitation efforts and to broaden our knowledge on rehabilitation methods; • Rehabilitation of bears should not only be a welfare issue, but also a conservation issue. Although saving an individual bear is important when there are available resources and a good plan that leads to the actual protection of the animal even if it does not contribute to the conservation of a population. However, it may be recommended to shift one’s attention to direct species (habitat) conservation.

Literature Cited Clark, J. D., Huber, D. and Servheen, C. 2002. Reintroducing bears: lessons and challenges. Ursus 13: 153-163. IUCN. (2013). Guidelines for reintroductions and other conservation translocations. IUCN SSC, Gland,Switzerland, ed. 1.0. Available from https://portals.iucn.org/library/sites/library/ﬁles/documents/2013-009.pdf.Accessed 15 May 2019. McLellan, B.N., Proctor, M.F., Huber, D. & Michel, S. 2017. Ursus arctos (amended version of 2017 assessment). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017:e.T41688A121229971. http://dx.doi. org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2017-3.RLTS.T41688A121229971.en. Downloaded on 20 May 2019.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 19 Human-Bear Conflicts Working for Andean Bear Conservation in Peru: Joining Forces for Human–Bear Conflict Reduction

Roxana Rojas-VeraPinto Roberto Gutiérrez Member: Andean Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist National Protected Areas Service (SERNANP) Group Museum of Natural History – Universidad Nacional de San Frankfurt Zoological Society Peru Agustín de Arequipa - Perú Urbanización Entel C-1, Wanchaq-Cusco Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Yuri Beraún Rosa E. Zegarra Ministry of Environment of Peru (MINAM) Forestry and Wildlife National Service (SERFOR) Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Major threats to the Andean bear (Tremarctos ornatus) include habitat fragmentation and anthropogenic-caused mortality related to hunting and human–bear conflicts (HBC). The Andean bear is listed as vulnerable (VU) globally (Vélez-Liendo and García-Rangel 2017), and also under Peruvian law, but conservation efforts are increasing. In Peru, these efforts are synthesized under the National Conservation Plan for the Andean bear (Serfor 2016). The plan emphasizes the need to raise awareness about its biology, ecology, and interactions with humans, in order to develop strategies for participatory management. Specifically, it aims to address negative perceptions by local people triggered by the negative impact of Andean bears on traditional economic activities, like cattle and maize production, sometimes prompting retaliatory hunting (Amanzo et al. 2007; Figueroa et al. 2013; Figueroa 2013, 2015).

Beginning of Inter-Institutional Work Over the last year, the Frankfurt Zoological Society (FZS) and Peruvian government agencies (the National Forestry and Wildlife Service [SERFOR], the National Protected Areas Service [SERNANP] and the Ministry of Environment [MINAM]) have worked together to develop baseline information on conflicts. Data were collected from case reports in Natural Protected Areas (PAs) and buffer zones. In 2018, 2 workshops were carried out, involving wildlife specialists from SERFOR, SERNANP, MINAM and non-governmental organizations (NGOs) involved in Andean bear conservation and human–wildlife interactions. SWOT (strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and threats) analysis was used to examine the role of institutions that attend to HBC inside PAs (SERNANP) and outside (SERFOR and Regional Governments). Also, management concepts and tools related with the topic were developed. Information about HBC in Peru was gathered by reviewing available documents and conducting a survey of PA staff and researchers who had knowledge of field reports involving HBC.

First Guide on Andean Bear Conflicts for Peru A handbook titled “Living with the Andean bear in Peru. Diagnostic and guidelines for the management of human-bear conflicts” (Rojas et al. 2019), launched this May, summarizes the results of the 2018 workshops. The first part of the book provides basic information about HBC concepts, legal framework for management actions, and SWOT analysis results. It tabulates reports of HBC in at least 16 of 31 PAs: all but 1 of these involved cattle and all but 4 involved bears raiding corn. The second part of the handbook presents a stakeholders diagram (in a local and national scale responses to HBC), a pro- posal for the best official channels to record conflict events, and registration forms of HBC events which can be used for all government agencies. It also includes guidelines for short and long-term solutions, as well as ideas for alternative economic activities. Official presentation of the handbook took place in Lima with the participation of head offices of MINAM, SERNANP and SERFOR, and included 3 workshops in different regions of Peru: Rioja (north), Oxapampa (central) and Cusco (south) cities. The purpose was to maximize the scope of the document in the largest number of areas with HBC. The target audience was wildlife management specialists inside and outside PAs (SERNANP, SERFOR and regional government), representatives of private and regional conservation areas, conservation NGOs, local governments, and some researchers. These workshops were attended by around 90 professionals and were an important opportunity to share experiences between participants about HBC management, to guide new actions, and to collect more information about bear presence and interactions with humans. Bear specialists from Peru (Roxana Rojas-VeraPinto) and Ecuador (Andrés Laguna) presented their research in maize damage and bear-cattle interaction, respectively.

20 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Human-Bear Conflicts Next Steps The information collected during the 3 workshops will be provided in a new document to be published later. Also, FZS and government agencies will develop 3 pilot projects in PAs and buffer zones where they will test field techniques shown in the handbook, with the participation of local and national stakeholders. Finally, it is necessity to include new stakeholders who can further help to reduce the risks of conflict through better agricultural and cattle management practices. Acknowledgments We thank FZS Peru staff for the support during activities, especially Jeovana Cruz, Julio C. Ramos, Ingrid Chalán and Leydi Auccacusi for their support in all workshops. We appreciate all reviewers of the guide and people who provided information and photos about bear presence and interaction in Peru; SERNANP, SERFOR and MINAM staff for their help during these 2 years; and the participants to the workshops. Special thanks to Andrés Laguna and Alexander Mossbrucker (human–elephant conflict specialist from FZS Sumatra) who shared their experiences in the workshops. These activities were funded by the kind support of KfW Stiftung and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Literature Cited Amanzo, J., C. Chung, M. Zagal, and V. Pacheco. 2007. Evaluación del Oso Andino Tremarctos ornatus en Piura y Cajamarca. INRENA, Lima, Perú. [In Spanish.] Figueroa, J. 2013. El hermano oso andino. Su presencia en la cultura National Protected Areas in Peru, highlighting those occupied by Andean de América. AICB, Lima, Perú. [In bears and those with reports of human–bear conflicts. Spanish.] Figueroa, J. 2015. Interacciones humano-oso andino Tremarctos ornatus en el Perú: consumo de cultivos y depredación de ganado. Therya 6: 251-278. Figueroa, J., M. Stucchi, and R. Rojas-VeraPinto. 2013. La conservación del bosque seco del Marañón (Cajamarca- Amazonas, Perú). Cooperación Técnica Alemana (GIZ) and Asociación para la Investigación y Conservación de la Biodiversidad (AICB), Lima, Perú. [In Spanish.] Rojas-VeraPinto, R., R.E. Zegarra, R. Gutiérrez, and Y. Beraún. 2019. Conviviendo con el oso andino en el Perú. Pautas para su manejo y reducción del conflicto humano-oso. FZS Peru, Lima, Perú. [In Spanish.] SERFOR. 2016. Plan Nacional de Conservación del Oso Andino (2016-2026). SERFOR, Lima, Perú. [In Spanish.] Velez-liendo, X. and S. García-Rangel. 2017. Tremarctos ornatus. The IUCN Red List of Threat- ened Species 2017: e.T22066A123792952.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 21 Human-Bear Conflicts Arrival of a Brown Bear on a Remote Island of Hokkaido, Japan

Tsutomu Mano Research Biologist - Director, Nature Conservation Division, Institute of Environmental Sciences Environmental and Geological Research Department, Hokkaido Research Organization Kita-19 Nishi-12 Kita-ku, Sapporo, 060-0819, Japan E-mail: [email protected]

Rishiri Island, which means “high mountain” in the Ainu language, is one of the northernmost remote islands of Japan located off the northwestern coast of Hokkaido. Herein, I present the story of landfall of a brown bear on the island in May 2018. Rishiri Island is a 182-km2 cone-shaped volcanic island with the highest peak at 1,721 m known as Rishiri-zan Mountain. As of 2019, the human population is about 4,500. The minimum distance from Hokkaido mainland to Rishiri Island is about 19 km. The Tsushima current flows through the channel from south to north. In addition, coastal fisheries and tourism are the primary industries on this island. Generally, there are no bears on the island. An angler found the footprints of an unknown animal on the southernmost coast of the island and reported this to the police. I received an inquiry from the Soya sub-prefectural office of Hokkaido the same evening, and considering the footprints were 15–16 cm in width, I identified them to be from an adult male brown bear. The mating season of the brown bears in Hokkaido is from May to July; thus, the adult male may have swum across the channel from Hokkaido mainland in search of a mating partner. This is not the first case of a bear arriving on the island. On May 22, 1912, 106 years ago, a large male brown bear swam across the channel from Hokkaido mainland and was found by the islanders (Hatta 1912). The bear landed on the island once and escaped to the sea, then finally was beaten to death with an ax at sea. A photograph of the animal was taken at the time. The season, gender, and age-class of the animal in both incidents are the same. The municipal government officials on the island were frightened by the bear and planned to kill it. However, because the bear was in the thick forest with understories, it would be very difficult or nearly impossible to kill the bear with a gun. Furthermore, widely-dispersed succulent herbs are the main food items in early summer; thus, it seemed unlikely to catch the bear with box traps at a specific site. Therefore, we focused more on minimizing the chance of human–bear encounters and avoiding food-conditioning the bear by inappropriate food and garbage storages than on catching the bear. After the bear was first reported on May 30, 2018, other residents reported having found bear scat on May 28. They had never dreamed that the signs were from a bear before learning about the incident. By mid-June, 5 camera traps were installed in the forested area by the national forest office and 2 municipal town offices. The first image taken at midnight on June 22 confirmed that the bear was an adult male from its size and shape. By July 12, 30 bear signs and images were obtained from all the cameras in the island. Accord- ing to the findings, the bear had roamed around the entire island over 2 weeks between May 28 and June 19. In Hokkaido, intensive killing of subadult male bears has been occurring for a long time. Such killing creates a strong selection pressure upon the young males displaying an incautious attitude toward humans. Consequently, only cautious individuals survive to become large adults. Thus, I was Mr. Toyojiro Terasima / Rishiri-fuji Town Board of Education Board Town / Rishiri-fuji Terasima Toyojiro Mr. optimistic that no conflict would A brown bear that was killed after it swam across to Rishiri Island on May 24, 1912.

22 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Human-Bear Conflicts occur if people responded to the bear properly. Furthermore, I hoped that the bear would swim back to the mainland after real- izing there are no mating partners on the island. Impressively, no bear sightings occurred, and all the images taken during the night confirmed that the bear would be nocturnal and cautious. Attempts in late September using honey to attract the bear to an oak stand or salmon spawning fresh water area, which are important foraging sites in the fall, were unsuccessful. We concluded that the bear might no longer exist on the island due to its departure or death; thus, we ceased our management actions on Novem-

ber 7. As of June 5, 2019, no further Management Station Forest National Soya evidence of the bear has been A brown bear roaming in the forest of Rishiri Island at midnight on June 22, 2018. found. We planned to declare the end of this incident at the end of the month. From this incident, we are now aware of the swimming ability of brown bears. The minimum distance between Hokkaido mainland and Rishiri Island is 19 km. The bear swam an even longer distance if we consider the current in the channel. For brown bears in the Kodiak archipelago, Alaska, the longest reported swim across channels is 6–9 km (Van Daele, personal communications). Thus, the distance in this case was more than two-fold greater. The sea surface temperature around the channel in late May 2018 was about 10 °C (Japan Coast Guard 2018). The brown bear density in the northern district of Hokkaido, where the bear originated, significantly decreased from 1960s to 1980s (Aoi 1990). This event might imply that the intense male dispersal occurrence was caused by the current increasing population density in the district.

Literature Cited Aoi, T. 1990. The effects of hunting and forest environmental change upon the population trend for brown bears (Ursus arctos yesoensis Lydekker) in northern Hokkaido. Research Bulletins of the College Experiment Forests, Hokkaido University 47:249-298. (in Japanese with English summary) Hatta, S. 1912. A brown bear across the sea. Zoological Magazine 24(288):A1-A3. (in Japanese.) Japan Coast Guard. 2018. Quick bulletin of ocean conditions of the 1st Coast Guard Headquarters No. 12. (in Japanese). https://www1.kaiho.mlit.go.jp/KAN1/kaisyou/soho/2018/1hq_qboc1812.pdf. Accessed 5 June 2019.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 23 Biological Research Does a Bear Poop in the Road? A Call for Greater Attention to the Influence of Forest Roads on a Large Carnivore’s Stress Response

Connor Kurz Undergraduate Student, College of Forestry & Conservation, Department of Wildlife Biology University of Montana, Missoula, MT 59801 Email: [email protected]

Bears have large home ranges that often overlap with human influences. The stress response a bear exhibits to these influences on their habitat, such as forest roads, has been shown to have negative physiological effects on black bears (Ursus americanus) and grizzly bears (U. arctos). Roads constitute the largest human induced effect on wildlife habitat. Therefore, we wanted to study the effect of open and closed forest roads on the stress response of bears in northwest Montana. Cortisol is the hormone that is released during a stress response of a mammal such as a human or a bear. This response is virtually always a sign of an adverse condition of their daily and/or seasonal life history. In recent decades, American black bear populations have been expanding geographically (Scheick and McCown 2014), and in the process have come into greater contact with human-modified landscapes. The black bear and grizzly bear are Montana big game animals whose habitat is managed by federal and tribal agencies along with private landowners while their populations are managed by state wildlife agencies. Although traffic is greater on these roads during hunting season, our road transects are forest roads with inclines, declines, and curves and the traffic volume does not compare with paved motorized use roads. Being able to understand how traffic on these roads during hunting season affects the stress response of bears that use them as travel corridors, will assist managers in access-restriction management and land-use planning to overall benefit bears and other large carnivores. In our study areas, the primary source of mortality is hunter harvest. Motorized use roads provide hunter access to the landscape; these roads are noisy and smelly which should have the larger negative effects on a bear’s stress response. Whereas on a non-motorized use road, the direct impact with a human is greater, but there is no potential for impact with a motorized vehicle. This should have less of a negative effect on a bear’s stress response. Our objectives are intended to evaluate the details of how large carnivores respond to different types of road management interventions. In collaboration with the University of Montana, the Bureau of Land Management Missoula Field Office, MPG Ranch, and Working Dogs for Conservation we will evaluate the stress response of black bears and grizzly bears interacting with roads that fracture their natural habitat. We will shed light into the physiological stress response of a large mammal using a new and innovative non-invasive survey technique. We will evaluate the stress response of bears using different types of land with different levels of use and access restrictions. To measure these responses, we will use scat detection dogs in the Lower Blackfoot Valley of western Montana to collect black bear and grizzly bear scat. In the Bitterroot Valley, a human observer will opportunistically collect scat by check- ing and back-tracking black bear sightings at wildlife game cameras. In the Lower Blackfoot, we will relate this response to opposing levels of road management and traffic during the spring black bear hunting season following den emergence. On MPG Ranch we want to be able to elucidate the stress response of bears using the property to determine if current levels and patterns of use are sustainable for the individual’s persistence. Using cortisol concentrations that we obtain from the scat samples, we will C. Kurz M. Parker address the following questions: 1) do (left) Tule, the scat-detection dog, following a successful bear scat detection. (right) Project lead Connor Kurz collecting a sample of the scat and scat-detection bears exhibit a stress response to roads?; dog with her reward after a successful detection of the bear scat. 2) if so, does the stress response vary

24 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Biological Research C. Kurz (left) Non-motorized use road in the Lower Blackfoot. (right) Predicted cortisol concentrations.

among the levels of access restrictions?; 3) does stress response vary between individuals or species?; and lastly 4) do males or females show a greater stress response?. We hypothesize that motorized use roads will cause a bear to have an increased stress response greater than both non-motorized use roads and our control group. If this is true, then we predict that when a bear encounters motorized use roads, we will observe the largest spike in cortisol concentrations. Whereas, when a bear encounters a non-motorized use road, we believe the observed cortisol concentrations will be greater than our control group but less than the motorized use group. Regardless, we will obtain baseline fecal glucocorticoid levels from the Wales Creek Wilderness Study Area. We are using a non-invasive scat-detection dog survey methodology to collect scat and assess the stress response of black bear and grizzly bears in the Lower Blackfoot Valley and the Bitterroot Valley of western Montana during the spring and summer of 2019. In the Lower Blackfoot Valley study area, we surveyed 4-km transects of either open or closed forest road with a buffer of either 800 m or 400 m using scat-detection dogs. These buffer distances amount to the spatial extent where a road begins to affect bear behavior (Quigley 1982; Carr and Pelton 1984; Hellgren et al. 1991; Clark et al. 1993; Rudis and Tansey 1995; Reynolds-Hogland and Mitchell 2007). Each road transect was selected following an extensive mapping of the study areas and analyses of traffic type, road length, and topography. On MPG Ranch in the Bitterroot Valley, we opportunistically collected scat that was detected by a human observer at and between the 30 camera trap sites. Only scats deemed to be less than 48 hours old will be included in our analyses due to hormone degradation. In addition to collecting scat for cortisol analyses, we will be collecting a portion for fecal DNA analyses. This will allow us to obtain data on sex, ID, and species data from the individual who deposited the scat. Although our study is limited in scope, our results will help provide insights into a bear’s use of open and closed forest roads based on their stress responses. We believe that this data will be useful for land and wildlife management agencies to better facilitate a balance for improving road management and reducing adverse impacts to wildlife, while maintaining and or improving access to our federal lands, especially to outdoor recreationalists. Ultimately, benefiting the co-existence of humans and bears in western Montana.

Literature Cited Carr, P. C., and M. R. Pelton. 1984. Proximity of adult female black bears to limited access roads. Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 38:70-77. Clark, J. D., J. E. Dunn, and K. G. Smith. 1993. A multivariate model of female black bear habitat use for a geographic information system. Journal of Wildlife Management 57:519-526. Hellgren, E. C., M. R. Vaughan, and F. Stauffer. 1991. Macrohabitat use by black bears in a southeastern wetland. Journal of Wildlife Management 55:442-448. Quigley, H. B. 1982. Activity patterns, movement ecology, and habitat utilization of black bears in the Great Smoky Moun- tains National Park, Tennessee. Thesis, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, USA. Reynolds-Hogland, M. J., and M. S. Mitchell. 2007. Effects of roads on habitat quality for bears in the southern Appalachians: a long-term study. Journal of Mammalogy 88:1050-1061. Rudis, V. A., and J. B. Tansey. 1995. Regional assessment of remote forests and black bear habitat from forest resource surveys. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:170-180. Scheick, B. K., and W. McCown. 2014. Geographic distribution of American black bears in North America. Ursus 25:24-33.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 25 Biological Research Surveillance and Management Considerations for Mange in Black Bears

Kevin D. Niedringhaus Justin D. Brown Southeastern Cooperative Wildlife Disease Study, Pennsylvania State University, Department of Veterinary and University of Georgia, College of Veterinary Medicine Biomedical Sciences, University Park, Pennsylvania, USA Athens, Georgia, USA Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Mark A. Ternent Pennsylvania Game Commission Harrisburg, Pennsylvania, USA Email: [email protected]

Sarcoptic mange is a parasitic skin disease that affects many mammal species globally caused by the mite Sarcoptes scabiei. In North America, the disease has historically been common in canids, but in the last 3 decades there have been increasing reports of sarcoptic mange in black bears in the eastern U.S. (Niedringhaus et al. 2019a). Consequently, mange should be considered by biologists when developing management and research protocols. The goal of this article is to highlight important topics pertaining to mange and provide recommendations for prevention, risk mitigation, or response based on our experiences in Pennsylvania. We hope by providing a brief list of suggestions and topics to consider, wildlife personnel will be better equipped to develop their own protocols.

Surveillance and Diagnostics Skin or fur abnormalities are commonly observed in wildlife and can represent a diagnostic challenge because multiple parasites, diseases, and normal physiologic changes cause lesions that are grossly indistinguish- able. In black bears (Ursus americanus), alopecia (hair loss) or a thin coat may be associated with molt, mange from several species of mites, or other diseases. The significance and management implications vary dramati- cally between each of these causes and, consequently, it is important to identify the cause through appropriate sampling and testing. First, agencies should determine if their laboratory or health/disease personnel have the capability to diagnose mange and discuss recommended protocols for sample collection. They should also develop handling guidelines and assemble supplies before receiving reports of clinically-ill bears. Active mange is diagnosed by identifying mites or their DNA. Detecting mite DNA requires coordination with an experienced laboratory, whereas identifying mites microscopically can be done with appropriate training Expansion of clinical mange in black bears in the eastern USA.

26 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Biological Research and equipment. However, it is recommended to collaborate with a parasitologist to confirm the species of mite, as there are several mite species that can cause mange in bears that look morphologically similar but have different implications. The preferred sample for mites or their DNA in bears is a skin scrape (Peltier et al. 2018). For mite detection, scraped material is smeared on a glass slide and examined in the lab or field for mites. Mange is diagnosed by identifying a mite in a bear with skin lesions; however, not seeing a mite doesn’t rule-out mange as mite burden can be very low even with severe lesions. Prior exposure to S. scabiei, regardless of whether lesions are present, can be diagnosed with antibody testing (Peltier et al. 2018). Antibody testing has limitations that make it unreliable for diagnosing mange in an individual, but it is a useful tool for monitoring exposure to S. scabiei in a population, including those where mange exists (to monitor seroprevalence over time) or where it does not (to detect spread) (Niedringhaus et al. 2019b). Treating Individuals The decision to treat animals with mange is one that should be made based on individual circumstances and guided by pre-established goals and protocols of each agency. Factors to consider are many: treatment to use; route of administra- tion; ability to administer multiple doses; co-infections with other microorganisms; relocation; whether other wildlife (i.e., canids) are treated; and proximity to hunting season. Regarding the latter, there are regulatory implications associated with withdrawal times, records, and tagging requirements that must be followed. If decisions are made to euthanize bears with mange, proper disposal must be considered. Biosecurity Biosecurity measures reduce the risk of transmitting S. scabiei between bears and other animals. While little can be done regarding natural transmission, steps can be taken to mitigate risk of human-associated transmission during capture work and carcass disposal. Mange biosecurity should be incorporated into protocols before any trapping effort is initiated. Mite survival in the environment or on a carcass varies with temperature (Niedringhaus et al. 2019c). Thus, bear carcasses with suspected mange should not be left available to scavenging. Rather, carcasses should be buried, placed in approved landfills, incinerated, or placed in a freezer for several days, as freezing temperatures have been shown to kill mites (Niedringhaus et al. 2019c). Trap bedding should be disposed, the trap interior cleaned with soap or disinfectant, and the trap closed for at least 1 week to kill residual mites. In cooler weather (i.e., 4 ºC), traps may need to be closed for up to 2 weeks. Attractants should be removed from the trap site for the same length of time. Handling equipment that was in contact with the bear, such as blindfolds, ground mats, hobbles, or backpacks can be placed in a freezer overnight or put through a wash-dry cycle; instru- ments or other equipment should be thoroughly washed and treated with a disinfectant. A spare set of capture equipment for use only with suspect bears is recommended. Trucks or trailers used to transport carcasses should be washed and left in direct sun to dry. If possible, handle bears with mange last and do not relocate suspect bears, even after a negative diagnosis due to imperfect tests. Kevin Niedringhaus Pennsylvania Game Commission Pennsylvania (left) Skin scrapes are collected from immobilized or dead bears by scraping superficial skin cells and surface crust with a scalpel blade into a collection container. Scraped material can be stored in ethanol or frozen. When in doubt, it is preferable to collect scrapes from multiple areas of affected skin. The best areas to perform scrapes are at the junction between normal and abnormal skin. Whole patches of skin can also be collected during field necropsy, kept cool, and scraped later at the lab. (right) Mange mite Sarcoptes scabiei observed under the microscope from a bear with clinical disease.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 27 Biological Research Pennsylvania Game Commission Pennsylvania Bears with suspected mange. It can be assumed that the bedding in this image is now contaminated.

Knowledge of transmission risks should also be passed on to the public, including advice on removing wildlife and bird feeders where bears with mange have been sighted. Also include biosafety measures as contaminated feeders may be a transmission risk to people and pets.

Biosafety Like biosecurity, it is important to minimize the risk of S. scabiei transmission to personnel. When humans are infected with the non-human adapted strain of S. scabiei, they may develop a mild, itchy, self-limiting rash. Staff may also transmit mites to family members and pets by bringing home contaminated clothes and equipment. Consequently, field protocols that minimize exposure along with personal protective equipment (PPE) should be established before bears with mange are encountered. Anyone handling bears suspected of mange should limit exposed skin and diligently wear disposable gloves. Coveralls, shoulder-length exam gloves, long sleeves, and tucked pant-cuffs provide additional protection. Immediately afterwards, used gloves should be bagged and hands/arms washed with soap. Exterior clothing should be changed, and contaminated equipment and clothing should either be washed and machine-dried with heat or placed in a freezer overnight.

Literature Cited Niedringhaus, K.D., J.D. Brown, M. Ternent, W. Childress, J.R. Gettings, and M.J. Yabsley. 2019a. The emergence and expansion of sarcoptic mange in American black bears (Ursus americanus) in the United States. Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports 17:100303. Niedringhaus K.D., J.D. Brown, M. Ternent, S.K. Peltier, P. VanWick, and M.J. Yabsley. 2019b. The use of serology to investi- gate sarcoptic mange in American black bears. Journal of Wildlife Diseases (In review). Niedringhaus K.D., J.D. Brown, M.A. Ternent, S.K. Peltier, and M.J. Yabsley. 2019c. Effects of temperature on survival of black bear-origin Sarcoptes scabiei. Parasitology Research (In review). Peltier, S. K., J.D. Brown, M.A. Ternent, H. Fenton, K.D. Niedringhaus, and M.J. Yabsley. 2018. Assays for detection and identification of the causative agent of mange in free-ranging black bears (Ursus americanus). Journal of Wildlife Diseases 54:471-479.

28 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Manager’s Corner Multi-Agency Effort in Lake Tahoe to Streamline Response to Human-Bear Conflicts

Heather Reich Game Biologist Nevada Department of Wildlife Email: [email protected]

The Lake Tahoe Basin (Basin) in the northern Sierra Nevada is home to an increasing number of black bears. In the early 2000s, on Nevada’s south shore of Lake Tahoe, bears existed at the second highest density (120 bears/100 km²) ever recorded in North America (Beckmann and Berger 2003). Coupled with increased development in the form of both full-time and part-time residences, and tourist visitation that was 7.7 million in 2017 (National Visitor Use Monitoring Program, Stephanie Cappeto/USFS personal communication), human-bear conflicts have increased steadily in the last 3 decades. The Basin is separated by California on the west side and Nevada on the east side, with a mix of public and private land ownership. In addition to these state boundaries, numerous jurisdictional boundaries exist, including 5 counties bordering the Basin, several cities and townships, General Improvement Districts, state parks and private residences. Further complicating the jurisdictional authority in the Basin, the Tahoe Regional Planning Agency (TRPA) has basin-wide regulatory authority over many aspects of land use, development and recreation. This is all surrounded by United States Forest Service (USFS) managed lands (78% of the Basin). The USFS and state park lands contain numerous campgrounds, cabins, resorts and day use areas run by contract concessionaires. All of these jurisdictions depend upon the state wildlife management agencies for response to human-bear conflicts. Response to these conflicts varies widely by jurisdiction even though the same individual bear(s) are often involved. Partly due to these jurisdictional differences the USFS, with state agency support, has initiated an interagency effort to help streamline the courses of action that may be taken in response to human-bear conflict on any land in the Basin. Mem- bers of this group include the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, California State Parks, the Nevada Department of Wildlife, Nevada State Parks, the TRPA and the USFS. The first of many action items for this group is the development of an operations plan that outlines the responsibilities of the land managing agencies in securing any bear attractants, as well as guidance for Forest Service and state parks employees, concessionaires or permittees on how to respond to a situation involving a bear; who to call, when to call them and what to expect in response. Another action item for the group is to create an information gathering tool in the form of a web-based application that can be used by visitors and residents alike to help log human-bear conflicts and sightings. While this tool will not replace a call to the appropriate state wildlife agency, it will provide data on areas in the Basin that may benefit from additional conflict mitigation efforts, such as increased public education. Ultimately a report will be put together, based on the data collected, and delivered to the TRPA, which is run by a governing board of representatives from both Nevada and California. The hope is that a comprehensive report of human-bear conflict hot-spots and the efforts of the various land and wildlife managing agencies will urge TRPA to use their authority to mandate better stewardship among residents and visitors to the Basin. This could come in the form of requiring bear-resistant garbage containers, stronger regulations on vacation rentals and greater enforcement for violations of the county ordinances already in place. The interagency effort includes a united messaging campaign from the group to help educate residents and visitors to the Basin. An interagency website will provide education materials along with PSAs on resort and local television channels. With visitation and development showing no indications of slowing down in the Lake Tahoe Basin, the hope is that this interagency effort will help streamline responses to human-bear conflict, educate visitors and residents alike, and pass sweeping mandates requiring proper garbage storage Basin-wide. While human-bear conflict mitigation ultimately comes down to the individuals visiting or residing in the Tahoe Basin, a united effort from an interagency group with the resources to educate on a broad stage is a crucial aspect of bear management.

Literature Cited Beckmann, J.P., and J. Berger. 2003. Using black bears to test ideal-free distribution models experi- mentally. Journal of Mammalogy 84:594–606. National Visitor Use Monitoring Program. United States Forest Service. 2017. https://www.fs.fed.us/ recreation/programs/nvum/

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 29 Manager’s Corner Wildlife Human Attack Response Training (WHART)

David Battle Wildlife Biologist, Alaska Department of Fish and Game Email: [email protected]

Everywhere humans and wildlife share space there lies the potential for conflicts. The vast majority of time when a person encounters a wild animal, that encounter ends with no injury to either party. However rare, wildlife attacks on humans do occur. In the Anchorage area alone, during summer 2017, there were 3 bear maulings involving injury (one of which involved 3 people) and 1 fatality; in June 2018 there was 1 injury and 1 fatality. Agencies that respond to these attacks need the knowledge, skill, and training to handle them professionally and competently. No one has more experience and knowledge in dealing with wildlife attacks on humans than the British Columbia Conservation Officer Service. British Columbia not only has both black bears (Ursus americanus) and grizzly bears (U. arctos), it has the highest density of cougars (Puma concolor) in the world, as well as some other species that have occasionally been involved in attacks, such as wolves (Canis lupus) and coyotes (C. latrans). Wildlife Human Attack Response Training (WHART) is a week-long in-depth combination of lecture, break-out sessions, and hands-on training offered by a group of BC Conser- vation Officers. It covers every possible aspect of agency response to wildlife attacks, including establishing response teams, assigning roles and responsibilities to different team members, tactical entering of the scene, animal behavior, attack scene investigation, sample collection, and interviewing victims and witnesses. Throughout the training, students have multiple opportunities to practice media relations by participating in mock news interviews complete with video cameras and pushy “reporters”. The week culminates in an immersive scenario exercise in which students put all the facets of training together. The Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADF&G), like other agencies that deal with wildlife attacks, is constantly attempting to improve responses to these incidents. In 2018, 8 ADF&G staff attended the WHART workshop in Reno, NV. We were all so impressed that we were determined to bring it to Alaska in 2019 so more of our employees, as well as personnel from other agencies, could gain access to this invaluable training. Held in Girdwood, Alaska during the last week of April, the 2019 Alaska WHART Workshop was attended by personnel from a wide variety of agencies including ADF&G, Alaska State Troopers, Alaska State Parks, Anchorage Police Department, National Park Service, US Forest Service, Parks Canada, and several from Canadian and lower 48 state wildlife departments. A little over half the participants were from Alaska, but some other regions of the United States and Canada were also well represented. Although Alaska is the largest state in terms of land mass, the population is clustered in communities scattered throughout the state with hundreds of unpopulated miles between; many accessible only by boat and/or airplane. Often, one agency does not have enough personnel available to properly respond to one of these incidents, so responses to maulings are often a collaboration between different agencies including the Alaska State Troopers, ADF&G, and possibly others such as Alaska State Parks, municipal law enforcement, or federal agencies. WHART students are organized into teams of 7 or 8 people, each with an instructor, and every effort is made to tailor team makeup so that personnel that are likely to be working together on actual wildlife attacks are on the same team, whether or not they actually work for the same agency. Having been through the training in spring 2018 and, unfortunately, having had 2 chances to put the theories into practice during summer 2018, I can attest to its value. It is by far the most comprehensive, realistic course that I have seen and is an invaluable investment for any department with personnel responsible for responding to wildlife/human attacks. I strongly encourage you to take advantage of it if at all feasible. When a wildlife attack on a human has occurred, it is always a stressful time for agency personnel. There is a tremendous amount of pressure, both from within the agency and without, to do a lot of things right…all at the same time. Did you find all the evidence that was available at the scene? Did you ask the right questions to get all the information you could have from the witnesses and victims? Did you put the agency’s best foot forward with the media, assuring the public they have the right people working this incident? If an animal needs to be removed, did you remove the right one? Waiting until a wildlife attack occurs is not the time to start thinking about proper procedures. Quality training and practice are essential. As was frequently stated during the training, “don’t practice until you do it right…practice until you can’t do it wrong.”

30 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Manager’s Corner Help with the Human Side of Human-Bear Conflicts

Linda Masterson Author, Living with Bears Handbook www.livingwithbears.com Phone: 970-231-7500 Email: [email protected]

Could you use a tool that cheerfully and accurately answers all those bear questions you get asked a million times a year, motivates people to change their behavior and is never tired, overworked, politically incorrect or at a loss for words? Since the first edition of Living with Bears Handbook came out back in 2006, bear managers have been among the book’s most enthusiastic users. Their books are often dog-eared, post-it-noted, highlighted and coffee-stained. That’s because they don’t sit on a shelf collecting dust. But when Carl Lackey (IBA Management Committee Chair) asked me to write about how bear managers could use my book and pocket guides, I resisted. It seemed self-serving. But Carl convinced me they’d welcome help managing the human side of human-bear conflicts. Carl should know, since he uses Bear Smart Pocket Guides with Nevada’s agency logo as handouts at info booths, public events and whenever they talk to residents or visitors about bears and when they post High Bear Activity signs in neighborhoods. In Florida, Bear Management Program Coordinator Dave Telesco provides the book to his staff of 8, his 25 Bear Response Contractors and 16 – 20 college interns each year to help them better understand bears and human-bear conflicts. “You clearly consulted with many respected professionals in the field of bear management. The book is easy to read but still comprehensive enough to cover the many aspects of the challenging task of managing people and bears.” Or as one of Florida’s Bear Response Contractors told me, “Reading the book really helped me understand why bears do what they do when people don’t do what they are supposed to.” “The Living with Bears Handbook is science-based, yet easy to read and very engaging”, says Colleen Olfenbuttel, Black Bear Biologist with NC Wildlife Resources Commission. “I purchase this book for any new biologist hired by my agency who

Living with Bears Handbook, completely updated in 2016, is very popular with the public and widely used as a reference guide by wildlife agency staffs throughout North America. The accompanying Bear Smart Pocket Guides can be custom branded so agencies, parks, HOAS and communities can personalize them with logos, websites and other info.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 31 Manager’s Corner will be providing technical guidance about preventing and resolving bear conflicts. The book not only provides effective solutions they can share with the public, but the science and biology behind that solution. I also include it in the BearWise Technical Guidance Boxes we use at public events. It is a book I am confident in recommending to the public as a tool they can use to learn more about responsibly living with bears.” The Colorado Division of Wildlife gave books to their wildlife officers, PIOs and Bear Aware volunteers, donated copies to libraries and included books in the bear info crates they used for presentations, fairs and other forms of outreach. Their (now retired) large carnivore biologist Jerry Apker kept a well-thumbed copy on his desk and recommended the book as essential reading for young officers in training. In Pennsylvania, Dr. Gary Alt spent years studying the bears of Hemlock Farms, a forested, rural community with 3,200 homes, 10,000 residents and a bear density of about 2.5 per square mile. Director of the HFCA Department of Community Conservation Marian Keegan has the book and custom-imprinted pocket guides available in the mail room and offices; their public relations firm gives the Visiting Bear Country guide to local realtors. I was delighted to allow them to feature the book’s “Ladder of Progression,” (pg. 21) that illustrates how quickly bears can go from wild to a statistic, in their community newspaper. Rich Beausoleil, Bear and Cougar Specialist with Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife (WDFW) served as the chief scientific advisor, and wrote the foreword, for the 2nd edition. “Linda has once again spent an enormous amount of time researching the scientific literature, establishing and maintaining dialogue with respected bear biologists around the country and distilling an incredible amount of scientific information down the most pertinent educational take-home messages for anyone interested in being part of the real solution and stop- ping the cycle of human-bear conflict. And it’s still a fun read,” says Rich. Rich ordered 140 copies of the book for WDFW’s district wildlife and conflict staff, not only to educate staff but also to standardize the most important messages they give the public. WDFW has already distributed more than 10,000 pocket guides to residents. Rich had this to say to his fellow bear managers: “Ultimately, the essential and lasting answers don’t reside with the management agencies, they reside with the people. If you apply yourself and work with others to prevent human-bear conflicts, I know you can make a difference and affect change, for people and for bears.”

SPECIAL IBA DISCOUNT Use IBA special Coupon Code BEAR12PRO to save $12 on a copy of the updated and revised second edition of Living with Bears Handbook (2016). Buy books and pocket guides at wholesale prices with a purchase order or credit card at LivingWithBears.com. For information on ordering custom-branded pocket guides, contact publisher LaVonne Ewing (303- 810-2850 or [email protected]).

32 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Communications Book: What Bears Teach Us – Invitation to Contribute

Sarah Elmeligi, PhD Alberta Parks Planner 200-186 Kananaskis Way, Canmore, AB T1W 0A2 Email: [email protected]

Like all of you reading this, I am fascinated by bears. As a researcher, I have focused efforts trying to understand grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) habitat choices and behaviors in response to recreationists. As a person living and recreating in bear habitat, I am intrigued by so much more than can be conveyed in my data and management recommendations. So, this year, I am writing a book to put both the science and my love for bears into words that may be compelling for others to improve their understanding of bears. I have partnered with renowned wildlife photographer, John Marriott, to create a coffee table style book. The book, What Bears Teach Us, is targeting people who live and recreate in bear habitat, or who have an interest in bears. The content of the book will focus on science, management implications, and what we as residents and recreationists can learn from that. Ultimately, I hope this book will contribute to an individual person’s willingness to better coexist with bears. Each chapter will focus on specific bear behaviors, such as tolerance, resiliency, and individuality. The first part of the chapter will share the latest scientific research pertaining to that behaviour – how we measure it, monitor it, or manage it. The second part of the chapter will contain various Stories from the Field where we, as biologists and managers, witnessed a bear exhibiting a particular behavior or where we learned something new. I am looking for your stories from the field to complement these chapter topics: 1. Patience and Tolerance. This chapter explores the differences between and management implications of tolerance, habituation, and food-conditioning. The chapter also shares some of the differences between coastal and interior bears and how their access to foraging resources affects their level of tolerance (bear to bear, and bear to human). 2. Adaptation and Coexistence. This chapter discusses how bears adapt to coexist with human communities or not. It will explore into the differences between black and grizzly bears and how they use habitat around human development. 3. When to Walk Away and When to Stand Your Ground. This chapter focuses on human-bear interactions and when bears may decide to walk away or stand their ground. Although this chapter will discuss negative encounters between bears and people, it will also discuss neutral and even positive encounters. The chapter will also discuss bear to bear interactions, like females defending cubs from potentially infanticidal males. 4. Resiliency. This chapter will focus specifically on polar bears and the impacts of climate change. I will share research about how polar bears are changing their behaviour and habitat use patterns to adapt to an unpredictable climate. 5. How to Live in the Present Based on Lessons from the Past. This chapter explores how bears learn from their mother and from other events in their past. These learnings affect their present decisions, which in turn may affect how we manage them. I will share research about aversive conditioning, human use predictability on the landscape, and other management tactics that influence bear behaviour. 6. Just Be Yourself. This chaper discusses the inherent individuality we see in bears through our data and experiences. The chapter will explore how individual variation can affect management planning and tactics on the ground. Each chapter will close with a few thoughts asking the reader to consider their relationship with bears. The reader will be encouraged to think about their own assumptions and if the book has altered their perceptions of bears and of themselves as residents and recreationists in bear habitat. The book will be published by Rocky Mountain Books in 2020, and I hope to bring copies to the next IBA conference in Montana. Every IBA conference I have attended has been a massive learning experience, not only from the many amazing talks, but the stories shared over meals and beers. I am seeking contributions from you for that portion of the book. People make all kinds of assumptions about bears and their behavior, but they don’t often have the same opportunities as us to really know bears. Stories where you witnessed something that tested your own personal assumptions of bear behavior, where you learned something about yourself through your work, or where you connected with a bear in a meaningful way are great. These stories can help people understand bears a little more like we do, which hopefully contributes to coexistence. Contributions should be 500-1000 words and be turned in by September 2019. Although the book is focusing on black (U. americanus), grizzly, and polar bears (U. maritimus), I welcome stories about all bear species. Ideally, stories will match chapter themes, but this is not necessary. If you are interested in contributing or have any questions, please email me (grizzlyresearchrockies@ gmail.com). Please feel free to share this invite with others who might be interested.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 33 Reviews Book Review: Scientific English Writing: How to Write Scientific Papers in English, by Malcolm Fitz-Earle, 2018

Jon E. Swenson Editor-in-Chief of Ursus Faculty of Environmental Sciences and Natural Resource Management Norwegian University of Life Sciences Postbox 5003, NO-1432 Aas, Norway [email protected]

Malcom Fitz-Earle has written an eBook entitled “Scientific English writing: how to write scientific papers in English”. This eBook is meant primarily for students who will be writing their first scientific manuscript in English, and particularly for students who do not have English as their first language. Neverthe- less, the eBook is an excellent reference for anyone who writes scientifically in English. Professor Fitz-Earle, a professor emeritus at Capilano University in Canada, is well qualified to author a book like this, because he also has taught at a number of universities in Asia. This book can be used in a classroom or for independent study. It is divided into several parts, including basic writing principles, writing clearly and concisely, specific points about science and technology writing, and how to write peer-reviewed papers in English. Additional sections give advice on preparing and presenting PowerPoint and poster presentations and writing a review of manuscripts and presentations. Professor Fitz-Earle’s eBook is written clearly and concisely and contains many helpful examples of what to do and not to do. In addition, it has a large number of exercises (the answers are provided at the back), which make the students think of how to apply the principles that have been discussed. There are also “Message” boxes that reinforce the most important principles. I have taught classes in writing scientific English and most of my students have not been native English speakers. In addition, I am now the Editor-in-Chief of Ursus. Based on this experience, I clearly recognize the usefulness of this book. I would recommend it particularly to all Master’s students who will write their thesis in English and submit it to a scientific journal, which I firmly believe should be every Master’s student’s goal. Beyond that, I recommend the advice given about English usage in this book to all non-native English speakers, and even to most native speakers, who are writing their first manuscripts in English. I see many manuscripts submitted to Ursus that would have benefited from the advice given in this eBook. In fact, I would like more authors to use it. I know that there are more comprehensive books on this subject (this eBook is only 110 pages long, in a large font), but this book is written in easily understandable English and gives all of the important principles. Those who wish to pursue some questions in more depth may wish to refer to these more comprehensive books. Scientific English writing: how to write scientific papers in English is available in EPUB format (for display on a wide variety of devices) and as a PDF (that can be printed). It is also available as an Amazon Kindle download (displayable on various devices with a free Kindle app). Details about purchasing options are available at www.malcolmfitzearle.com. There is a paperback version, but it is only available in Japanese at this time.

34 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Workshop Reports Summary of the 24th Eastern Black Bear Workshop

Laura Conlee Furbearer Biologist Missouri Department of Conservation Email: [email protected]

The Missouri Department of Conservation (MDC) hosted the 24th Eastern Black Bear Workshop from April 22–25 at the YMCA of the Ozarks Trout Lodge in Potosi, Missouri. The purpose of the Eastern Black Bear Workshop (EBBW) is to bring together biologists and researchers to discuss issues important to the management, conservation, and perpetuation of those black bear (Ursus americanus) populations in the eastern US. Over the course of the workshop, 104 attendees came from 35 states (including several western states), the District of Columbia and 2 Canadian Provinces. Attendees included state, federal, and provincial biologists, bear researchers, and students conducting work on black bears. If you were unable to attend, you can download a copy of the proceedings from this meeting (available soon) or past meetings at: www.bearbiology.org/ events/workshops/black-bear-workshops/ On the first day, following a welcome from MDC Resource Science Division Chief Jason Sumners, Colleen Olfenbuttel gave a wonderful tribute to Dr. Mike Vaughn who passed away in December 2018. Dr. Vaughn mentored 45 graduate students over the course of his career with the VA Coopera- tive Fish and Wildlife Research Unit, established the Black Bear Research Center at Virginia Tech and was active with the IBA and the EBBW. Dr. Vaughn made significant contributions to bear research and management throughout his career and will be missed. Follow- ing the tribute, Dave Telesco (FWC) presented a summary of state/provincial status reports. Every 2 years, bear managers in the east provide information for this summary which includes items such as harvest methodologies and numbers, population estimates, The majority of EBBW attendees come from the eastern US and Canadian Provinces, how- monitoring techniques, and informa- ever, each year an increasing numbers of bear managers and researchers are coming from tion related to nuisance activity in each western states. jurisdiction. The rest of day 1 was packed with 4 sessions of invited speakers with a panel discussion following each session. In Session 1, Colleen Olfenbuttel (NCWRC), Colin Carpenter (WVDNR), Nathan Roberts (WIDNR) and Harry Spiker (MDDNR) provided presentations on innovative harvest strategies which included discussions about baiting, informing and eliminating quota systems and using 2 bear limit to distribute harvest. In Session 2 (New Research Techniques/Innovations), attendees were provided a variety of information, which included the use of BAM for immobilizing bears, as well as population monitoring, and modelling techniques related to spatial capture-recapture and statistical population reconstruction. Session 3 (Research Updates) shifted gears from research techniques, to updates on some ongoing bear research projects and included some entertaining videos from bear collar cams (Dr. Marcella Kelly – Virginia Tech). The final session of the day shifted gears entirely and focused on Outreach and Education, with presentations related to digital marketing, talking points and the use of social media. During this session and subsequent panel discussion, many bear managers were provided valuable information that can be shared with their relevant communications counterparts. Day 1 closed out with a poster session in which there were 7 poster presenters. Day 2 started out with a hot-topic among bear managers – Does harvest play a role in addressing human-bear conflicts. Nathan Roberts (WIDNR), Mark Ternent (PGC), Janel Scharhag (UWSP), Mike Madonia (NJDFW) and Dave Garshelis (MNDNR) all provided their perspectives and data on the topic and as the title of Dave’s talk indicated: The relationship between

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 35 Workshop Reports Colleen Olfenbuttel Colleen Colleen Olfenbuttel Colleen (left) EBBW attendees watch a presentation about SEAFWA’s BearWise program presented by Linda Masterson and LaVonne Ewing. (right) Mark Ternent (Pennsylvania Game Commission) conducts a demonstration on mange field applications for EBBW attendees. harvest and human-bear conflicts is complex- that doesn’t mean there is none. During Session 6, Dr. Justin Brown (Pennsylvania State) provided a retrospective analysis of black bear mortalities, Dr. Kevin Niedringhaus (SCWDS) provided an update on mange in black bears and Dr. Chris DePerno (NC State) presented on confirmation of Listeria monocytogenes in bears. Following the disease discussions, attendees were provided an update on the Southeast Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies’ BearWise program and an update from the IBA. To learn more about BearWise, visit BearWise.org.

The afternoon of Day 2 was a first for the Eastern Black Bear Olfenbuttel Colleen Workshop. Session 7 – Challenges of implementing bear-resistant Ryan Williamson (Great Smoky Mountains National Park) trash cans – provided an opportunity for states/municipalities conducts a demonstration on using snares for bear and industry professionals to present their various perspectives capture for EBBW attendees. and provide opportunity for discussion among attendees. Several states/municipalities discussed the challenges and successes they have had with implementing bear-resistant trash can programs. Patti Sowka (WMI) presented on the challenges of testing bear- resistant cans and representatives from Rehrig Pacific Company and Kodiak Products were able to provide an industry perspective related to the challenges and successes of developing and delivering bear-resistant cans for consumers. The session and subsequent panel discussion highlighted that there is still a long road ahead for addressing this issue at a large scale, but good

strides are being made. Olfenbuttel Colleen Day 2 concluded with a series of outdoor demonstrations that Laura Conlee of the Missouri Department of Conservation showcased the use of snares, traps, aversive conditioning tech- passes on the EBBW Welcome Bear to the next host, Nathan niques, electric fencing, bear spray and mange field applications Roberts of the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. and sample collection. Attendees had opportunities to shoot pyrotechnics, deploy inert bear spray donated by Counter Assault, and collect skin scrapes from a bear carcass. On the final day, students, researchers, and bear managers covered a variety of topics during the submitted presentations session. The EBBW concluded with a seminar by Dr. Mike Clawson (University of MT) on the use of statistical population reconstruction as a tool for monitoring bear populations. During the seminar, bear managers were able to gain a better understanding of the modelling approach, the types of data that would be needed, and what type of information can be gained. We would like to thank all the sponsors that supported the 24th Eastern Black Bear Workshop through financial support and participation in Workshop Sessions. Thank you to: Counter Assault, Kodiak Prod- ucts, Northland Products Inc., Nexstar Media Group, Inc., Rehrig Pacific Company, Safari Club Interna- tional Foundation, and Vectronics Aerospace. Wisconsin will be hosting the 25th Eastern Black Bear Workshop in 2021. Details will be posted at www.easternblackbearworkshop.org as they become available.

36 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Conference Announcements 27th International Conference On Bear Research & Management September 21 – 25, 2020, Kalispell, Montana, United States

Lori Roberts 27th IBA Conference organizing committee chair Montana Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, 490 N Meridian, Kalispell, Montana, USA 59901 E-mail address: [email protected]

In 1977, just two years after grizzly bears were listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act, the 4th IBA conference was held in Kalispell, Montana. It was a place and time where and when grizzly bear ecology, management, and politics had reached an emotional pitch. Over forty years later, the 27th IBA conference will again be held in Kalispell, with the theme “Conserving Bears in a Changing World”. Forty-five years after the grizzly bear was originally listed as endangered, substantial progress on their recovery has been made and work towards delisting the grizzly bear in two of six ecosystems in the lower 48 states is well under way. By hosting the conference once again in Kalispell, we hope to highlight the management, research, victories, and policies associated with grizzly bears that, despite numerous challenges, have led to the recovery of this iconic species.

Located in Northwest Montana, Kalispell is home to a population of approximately 23,000 people. Fall in the Flathead Valley is arguably the most beautiful time of year. The native aspen, birch, and larch trees turn the green mountains into a firework display of colors, and the weather is comfortable. Kalispell is surrounded by National Forest Land and several waterbodies with numerous recreational opportunities; Glacier National Park is only an hour away. It also sits on the western border of the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem which has the largest population (over 1,000) of grizzly bears in the lower 48 states.

The conference committee is busy planning an awesome conference, so come and share your knowledge, learn new

information about all species of bears, and engage with other bear Kalispell Chamber of Commerce researchers and specialists. Look for more details on lodging, air travel, and registration, as well as the first call for papers, on our official website. (www.iba2020MT.com)

Important Dates: • First Call for Papers Mid-July 2019 • Registration Opens September 15, 2019 • Abstracts Due December 15, 2019

(left) Grizzly bear in a snare. (center) Courtyard of Red Lion Hotel (conference venue). (right) Grizzly bear cub. Credits: left, right: Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks ; center: Lori Roberts

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 37 Workshop Announcements First International Workshop on Developing Population Monitoring Guidelines for Asian Bears November 4-8, 2019, Taipei, Taiwan

The Bear Specialist Group in association with the Taiwan Black Bear Conservation Association, and the National Pingtung University of Science & Technology Institute of Wildlife Conservation, Taiwan, are hosting the First International Workshop on Developing Population Monitoring Guidelines for Asian Bears, to be held at the Taipei Zoo, Taipei, Taiwan, November 4–8, 2019. The workshop will focus on practical methods to improve the monitoring of Brown bears, Asiatic black bears, Sun bears, and Sloth bears in Asia. Improved monitoring methods are essential to (1) direct conservation efforts to areas of most need, and (2) to assess whether conservation efforts are working. We will focus on 4 methods, all of which are currently used to an extent in Asia: interviews (with local people and officials), sign surveys (claw-marked trees, scats, digging, etc.), camera trapping (relative abundance, occupancy, and mark-recapture), and genetic monitoring (DNA from hair or scats). Our aims are to: (1) compare pros and cons and when best to use each method or combination of methods (decision tree); (2) develop best operating procedures, including field and analytical methods; (3) highlight potential biases and methods for reducing biases; and (4) provide guidance on interpreting results and employing the methods for improved conservation. The eventual goal is to produce a book that can be used by governments, NGOs, researchers, and students, to guide bear monitoring so that it can be undertaken in a more rigorous, system- atic, uniform, and efficacious way. This will be conducted as a true workshop, mixing short presentations and open dialogue. We have invited 20 experts in population monitoring, of bears and other species, who have actively worked in Asia or who have unique expertise that we felt would be valuable in producing these guidelines for those working in Asia. Several of the invited participants are foremost quantitative biologists, and we expect the workshop discussion to be at a high level. We have 8-10 more slots open for other participants with experience or a keen interest in this subject matter. There is no registration cost, and we will cover the costs of a 1 day fieldtrip at the end of the workshop (Nov 8) into the central mountains of Taiwan. Additionally, after the workshop there is an optional forum (Nov 9) with protected area staff in Taiwan to discuss population monitoring of bears and human-bear conflicts, and public talks about bear conservation (Nov 10). If you have an interest in attending, please send me an email explaining your interest. We cannot exceed 30 total people (and we already have 20). Contact Dave Garshelis at [email protected] or [email protected]

Human-Bear Conflict Conference October 4-7, 2021, Lake Tahoe, Nevada, United States

Carl Lackey Chair - IBA Management Committee Game Biologist, Nevada Department of Wildlife, Minden, Nevada Email: [email protected]

Save the Date! The next Human-Bear Conflict (HBC) Conference will be October 4-7, 2021 at Harrah’s Resort, Lake Tahoe, Nevada. The conference will be hosted by the Nevada Department of Wildlife. More information will be posted at a later date.

25th Eastern Black Bear Workshop 2021. Wisconsin, United States

Save the Date! Wisconsin will be hosting the 25th Eastern Black Bear Workshop in 2021. Details will be posted at www.easternblackbearworkshop.org as they become available.

38 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 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: https://www.bearbiology.org/membership/students/ - 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/

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: • Fall Issue: 5 October: Marion Schneider: [email protected] • Spring Issue: 5 February: Agnieszka Sergiel: [email protected] • Summer Issue: 5 June: Agnes Pelletier: [email protected]

For easy access to articles, we are including the DOI citation, as well as the email contact of one coauthor 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 Aguilar-Lopez, M., J. L. Monter-Vargas, C. Cornejo-Latorre, and A. Hernandez-SaintMartin. 2019. First photo evidence of the Ameri- can black bear (Ursus americanus) in the southwestern limit of its distribution. Western North American Naturalist 79: 124–129. Email: [email protected] Archibald, K. E., K. Baltutis, M. K. Stoskopf, and C. S. Bailey. 2019. Testicular activity and epididymal sperm collection from American black bears in November. Ursus 29: 101–110. DOI: 10.2192/URSUS-D-18-00015.1. Arnaudo, M. E., N. Toledo, L. Soibelzon, and P. Bona. 2019. Phylogenetic signal analysis in the basicranium of Ursidae (Carnivora, Mammalia). PeerJ 7: e6597. DOI: 10.7717/PEERJ.6597. Email: [email protected] Bard, S. M., and J. W. Cain. 2019. Pathogen prevalence in American black bears (Ursus americanus amblyceps) of the Jemez Moun- tains, New Mexico, USA. Journal of Wildlife Diseases: In press. DOI: 10.7589/2018-12-286. Email: [email protected] Bautista, C., E. Revilla, J. Naves, J. Albrecht, N. Fernández, A. Olszańska, M. Adamec, T. Berezowska-cnota, P. Ciucci, C. Groff, S. Härkönen, D. Huber, K. Jerina, M. Jonozovič, A. A. Karamanlidis, S. Palazón, P. Quenette, R. Rigg, J. Seijas, J. E. Swenson, T. Talvi, and N. Selva. 2019. Large carnivore damage in Europe: analysis of compensation and prevention programs. Biological Conserva- tion 235: 308–316. DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOCON.2019.04.019. Email: [email protected] Becker, E., and A. Christ. 2019. Rejection of Schmidt et al.’s estimators for bear population size. Ecology and Evolution 9: 6157–6164. DOI: 10.1002/ECE3.5134. Email: [email protected] Bellucci, L., I. Biddittu, M. Brilli, J. Conti, M. Germani, F. Giustini, D. A. Iurino, I. Mazzini, and R. Sardella. 2019. First occurrence of the short-faced bear Agriotherium (Ursidae, Carnivora) in Italy: biochronological and palaeoenvironmental implications. Italian Journal of Geosciences 138: 124–135. DOI: 10.3301/IJG.2018.31. Email: [email protected] Berman, E. E., N. C. Coops, S. P. Kearney, and G. B. Stenhouse. 2019. Grizzly bear response to fine spatial and temporal scale spring snow cover in Western Alberta. PLoS ONE 14: e0215243. DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PONE.0215243. Email: [email protected]

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 39 Publications Biddlecombe, B. A., A. E. Derocher, E. S. Richardson, and I. Stirling. 2019. Behaviour and characteristics of mating polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the Beaufort Sea. Polar Biology 42: 919–929. Email: [email protected] Bled, F., and J. L. Belant. 2019. demetR: a Bayesian population simulation web-application for harvest management. Ursus 29 (2): 82–92. DOI: 10.2192/URSUS-D-18-00012.1. Bombieri, G., J. Naves, V. Penteriani, N. Selva, A. Fernández-Gil, J. V. López-Bao, H. Ambarli, C. Bautista, T. Bespalova, V. Bobrov, V. Bolshakov, S. Bondarchuk, J. J. Camarra, S. Chiriac, P. Ciucci, A. Dutsov, I. Dykyy, J. M. Fedriani, A. García-Rodríguez, P. J. Garrote, S. Gashev, C. Groff, B. Gutleb, M. Haring, S. Härkönen, D. Huber, M. Kaboli, Y. Kalinkin, A. A. Karamanlidis, V. Karpin, V. Kastrikin, L. Khlyap, P. Khoetsky, I. Kojola, Y. Kozlow, A. Korolev, N. Korytin, V. Kozsheechkin, M. Krofel, J. Kurhinen, I. Kuznetsova, E. Larin, A. Levykh, V. Mamontov, P. Männil, D. Melovski, Y. Mertzanis, A. Meydus, A. Mohammadi, H. Norberg, S. Palazón, L. M. Pătrașcu, K. Pavlova, P. Pedrini, P. Y. Quenette, E. Revilla, R. Rigg, Y. Rozhkov, L. F. Russo, A. Rykov, L. Saburova, V. Sahlén, A. P. Saveljev, I. V. Seryodkin, A. Shelekhov, A. Shishikin, M. Shkvyria, V. Sidorovich, V. Sopin, O. Støen, J. Stofik, J. E. Swenson, D. Tirski, A. Vasin, P. Wabakken, L. Yarushina, T. Zwijacz-Kozica, and M. M. Delgado. 2019. Brown bear attacks on humans: a worldwide perspective. Scientific Reports 9: 8573. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-44341-W. Email: [email protected] Brown, S. P., H. E. Davis, L. McGladrey, L. Brooks, and A. K. Lorentzen. 2019. Psychological care augmented by telemedicine after a polar bear encounter at an Arctic research station: a case report. Telemedicine and e-Health: Ahead of Print. DOI: 10.1089/ TMJ.2019.0008. Email: [email protected] Candler, E. M., W. J. Severud, and J. K. Bump. 2019. Who takes the bait? Nontarget species use of bear hunter bait sites. Human- Wildlife Interactions 13: 98–110. Chazarin, B., K. B. Storey, A. Ziemianin, S. Chanon, M. Plumel, I. Chery, C. Durand, A. L. Evans, J. M. Arnemo, A. Zedrosser, J. E. Swenson, G. Gauquelin-Koch, C. Simon, S. Blanc, E. Lefai, and F. Bertile. 2019. Metabolic reprogramming involving glycolysis in the hibernating brown bear skeletal muscle. Frontiers in Zoology 16: 12. DOI: 10.1186/S12983-019-0312-2. Email: fbertile@unistra. fr Chetri, M., M. Odden, O. Devineau, and P. Wegge. 2019. Patterns of livestock depredation by snow leopards and other large carnivores in the Central Himalayas, Nepal. Global Ecology and Conservation 17: e00536. DOI: 10.1016/J.GECCO.2019.E00536. Email: [email protected] Crespo-Gascón, S., and J. Guerrero-Casado. 2019. The role of the spectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatus) as an umbrella species for Andean ecoregions. Wildlife Research 46(2): 176–183. DOI: 10.1071/WR18056. Cristescu, B., C. Domokos, K. J. Teichman, and S. E. Nielsen. 2019. Large carnivore habitat suitability modelling for Romania and associated predictions for protected areas. PeerJ 7: e6549. DOI: 10.7717/PEERJ.6549. Email: [email protected] Cubaynes, S., J. Aars, N. G. Yoccoz, R. Pradel, Ø. Wiig, R. A. Ims, and O. Gimenez. 2019. Modeling the demography of species providing extended parental care: a capture-recapture approach with a case study on polar bears. BioRxiv: preprint first posted online Apr. 2, 2019. DOI: 10.1101/596437. Cutler, D. C., H. Bissel, C. Wang, and S. Rivera. 2019. Serum trace nutrient values in four captive giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine 50: 176–182. DOI: 10.1638/2017-0063. Email: [email protected] Czerwik-Marcinkowska, J., T. Zwijacz-Kozica, W. Pusz, and A. Wojciechowska. 2019. The relationship between presence of brown bear (Ursus arctos) and diversity of airborne algae and cyanobacteriain the Glowoniowa Nyża cave, Tatra Mountains, Poland. Journal of Cave and Karst Studies 81: 57–67. DOI: 10.4311/2018MB0121. Email: [email protected] Davis, E. O., J. A. Glikman, B. Crudge, V. Dang, M. Willemsen, T. Nguyen, D. O’Connor, and T. Bendixsen. 2019. Consumer demand and traditional medicine prescription of bear products in Vietnam. Biological Conservation 235: 119–127. DOI: 10.1016/J.BIO- CON.2019.04.003. Email: [email protected] Davis, O. E., B. Crudge, T. Lim, D. O’Connor, V. Roth, M. Hunt, and J. A. Glikman. 2019. Understanding the prevalence of bear part consumption in Cambodia: a comparison of specialised questioning techniques. PLoS ONE 14: e0211544. DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL. PONE.0211544. Email: [email protected] Douches, R., N. Nannini, A. Fontana, F. Boschin, J. Crezzini, F. Bernardini, C. Tuniz, and G. Dalmeri. 2019. Archeological bone injuries by lithic backed projectiles: new evidence on bear hunting from the Late Epigravettian site of Cornafessa rock shelter (Italy). Archaeological and Anthropological Sciences 11: 2249–2270. DOI: 10.1007/S12520-018-0674-Y. Email: [email protected] Ersmark, E., G. Baryshnikov, T. Higham, A. Argant, P. Castaños, D. Döppes, M. Gasparik, and M. Germonpré. 2019. Genetic turnovers and northern survival during the last glacial maximum in European brown bears. Ecology and Evolution 9: 5891–5905. DOI: 10.1002/ECE3.5172. Email: [email protected] Fan, Z., J. Liu, S. L. Pimm, L. Liu, C. Garcia, M. Songer, X. Shao, A. Skidmore, T. Wang, Y. Zhang, Y. Chang, X. Jin, M. Gong, L. Zhou, H. Xiangbo, G. Dang, and Q. Cai. 2019. The next widespread bamboo flowering poses a massive risk to the giant panda. Biological Conservation 234: 180–187. DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOCON.2019.03.030. Email: [email protected] Fico, R., A. Mariacher, A. Franco, C. Eleni, E. Ciarrocca, M. L. Pacciarini, and A. Battisti. 2019. Systemic tuberculosis by Mycobacterium bovis in a free-ranging Marsican brown bear (Ursus arctos marsicanus): a case report. BMC Veterinary Research 15: 152. DOI: 10.1186/S12917-019-1910-0. Email: [email protected] Figueirido, B., and A. H. van Heteren. 2019. The story continues: recent advances on the life and death of the Pleistocene cave bear. Historical Biology 31: 405–409. DOI: 10.1080/08912963.2018.1436426. Email: [email protected] Gantchoff, M. G., D. Beyer, and J. L. Belant. 2019. Reproductive class influences risk tolerance during denning and spring for Ameri-

40 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Publications can black bears (Ursus americanus). Ecosphere 10(4): e02705. DOI: 10.1002/ECS2.2705. Email: [email protected] Ghezta, N. K., Y. Bhardwaj, R. Ram, R. Ahsan, and S. Arya. 2019. Incidence pattern of bear-inflicted injuries to the maxillofacial region — soft and hard tissue injuries, their management, and sequelae. Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery 77: 1043.e1-1043.e15. DOI: 10.1016/J.JOMS.2018.12.029. Email: [email protected] Giroud, S., I. Chery, F. Bertile, J. Bertrand-Michel, G. Tascher, G. Gauquelin-koch, J. M. Arnemo, J. E. Swenson, N. J. Singh, E. Lefai, A. L. Evans, C. Simon, and S. Blanc. 2019. Lipidomics reveals seasonal shifts in a large-bodied hibernator, the brown bear. Frontiers in Physiology 10: 389. DOI: 10.3389/FPHYS.2019.00389. Email: [email protected] Gould, M. J., W. R. Gould, J. W. Cain III, and G. W. Roemer. 2019. Validating the performance of occupancy models for estimating habitat use and predicting the distribution of highly-mobile species: a case study using the American black bear. Biological Conservation 234: 28–36. DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOCON.2019.03.010. Email: [email protected] Grand, L. Le, N. H. Thorsen, B. Fuchs, A. L. Evans, T. G. Laske, J. M. Arnemo, S. Sæbø, and O.-G. Støen. 2019. Behavioral and physiological responses of Scandinavian brown bears (Ursus arctos) to dog hunts and human encounters. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7: 134. DOI: 10.3389/FEVO.2019.00134. Email: [email protected] Gudmannsson, P., and J. Berge. 2019. The forensic pathology of fatal attacks by the large mammals inhabiting the nordic wilderness — a literature review. Journal of Forensic Sciences: Online Version of Record before inclusion in an issue. DOI: 10.1111/1556 - 4029.13994. Email: [email protected] He, L., Q. Dai, Z. Yang, K. He, J. Qing, F. Huang, X. Gu, X. Yang, Y. Huang, D. Li, H. Zhang, and X. Zhou. 2019. Assessing the health status of released, captive-bred giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) through activity patterns. Folia Zoologica 68: 12–18. DOI: 10.25225/FOZO.054.2019. Email: [email protected] Hilderbrand, G. V, D. D. Gustine, K. Joly, B. Mangipane, W. Leacock, M. D. Cameron, M. S. Sorum, L. S. Mangipane, and J. A. Erlenbach. 2019. Influence of maternal body size, condition, and age on recruitment of four brown bear populations. Ursus 29(2): 111–118. DOI: 10.2192/URSUS-D-18-00008.1. Email: [email protected] Hilderbrand, G. V., K. Joly, M. S. Sorum, M. D. Cameron, and D. D. Gustine. 2019. Brown bear (Ursus arctos) body size, condition, and productivity in the Arctic, 1977–2016. Polar Biology 42: 1125–1130. DOI: 10.1007/S00300-019-02501-8. Email: ghilderbrand@usgs. gov Hughes, C., and S. E. Nielsen. 2019. ‘Bear are only the Lightning Rod’: ongoing acrimony in Alberta’s grizzly bear recovery. Society & Natural Resources 32: 34–52. DOI: 10.1080/08941920.2018.1502853. Email: [email protected] Jeong, D., J. Yang, M. Seo, A. Lee, and Y. Lim. 2019. Effectiveness of urethral catheterization under ultrasound guidance for semen collection from Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus). Theriogenology: 154–159. DOI: 10.1016/J.THERIOGENOLOGY.2019.02.032. Email: [email protected] Johansson, M., A. Flykt, J. Frank, and O.-G. Støen. 2019. Controlled exposure reduces fear of brown bears. Human Dimensions of Wildlife: Published online: 27 May 2019. DOI: 10.1080/10871209.2019.1616238. Email: [email protected] Johnson, A. C., K. A. Hobson, N. J. Lunn, D. McGeachy, E. S. Richardson, and A. E. Derocher. 2019. Temporal and intra-population patterns in polar bear foraging ecology in western Hudson Bay. Marine Ecology Progress Series 619: 187–199. Email: acj1@ualberta. ca Jung, T. S. 2019. Colour-blind: hunters do not select colourmorphs of black bears (Ursus americanus). European Journal of Wildlife Research 65: 35. Email: [email protected] Kester, K. A., J. Auger, B. L. Roeder, K. Bunnell, and H. L. Black. 2019. The effect of sex, age, and location on carnivory in Utah black bears (Ursus americanus). Oecologia 189: 931–937. Email: [email protected] Kirby, R., H. E. Johnson, M. W. Alldredge, and J. N. Pauli. 2019. The cascading effects of human food on hibernation and cellular aging in free-ranging black bears. Scientific Reports 9: 2197. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-38937-5. Email: [email protected] Koike, S., and T. Masaki. 2019. Characteristics of fruits consumed by mammalian frugivores in Japanese temperate forest. Ecological Reseach 34: 246–254. DOI: 10.1111/1440 -1703.1057. Email: [email protected] Krajcarz, M., and M. T. Krajcarz. 2019. Post-depositional bone destruction in cave sediments: a micromorphological study of the MIS 5a–d cave bear strata of Biśnik Cave, Poland. Journal of Quaternary Science 34: 138–152. DOI: 10.1002/JQS.3087. Email: magkraj- [email protected] Kristensen, T., M. Means, L. S. Eggert, K. G. Smith, and D. White. 2019. Demographics of American black bear populations following changes in harvest policy. Ursus 29(2): 147–162. DOI: 10.2192/URSUS-D-18-00002.1. Ladle, A., T. Avgar, M. Wheatley, G. B. Stenhouse, S. E. Nielsen, and M. S. Boyce. 2019. Grizzly bear response to spatio-temporal variability in human recreational activity. Journal of Applied Ecology 56: 375–386. DOI: 10.1111/1365-2664.13277. Email: ladle@ ualberta.ca Larsen, T. A., S. E. Nielsen, J. Cranston, and G. B. Stenhouse. 2019. Do remnant retention patches and forest edges increase grizzly bear food supply? Forest Ecology and Management 433: 741–761. DOI: 10.1016/J.FORECO.2018.11.031. Email: tlarsen@friresearch. ca Larson, W. G., and T. S. Smith. 2019. Predicting black bear activity at back-country campsites in Bryce Canyon National Park, Utah. Human-Wildlife Interactions 13: 125–141. Lee, D. C., V. J. Powell, and J. A. Lindsell. 2019. Understanding landscape and plot-scale habitat utilisation by Malayan sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) in degraded lowland forest. Acta Oecologica 96: 1–9. DOI: 10.1016/J.ACTAO.2019.02.002. Email: david.lee@

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 41 Publications southwales.ac.uk Li, Z., X. Liu, J. Zhao, Y. Liu, H. Xu, C. Li, T. Ma, B. Wang, Y. Lu, B. Padalino, and D. Liu. 2019. Prospective study on the excretion of mucous stools and its association with age, gender, and feces output in captive giant pandas. Animals 9: 264. DOI: 10.3390/ ANI9050264. Email: [email protected] Liu, H., C. Zhang, Y. Liu, and H. Duan. 2019. Total flavonoid contents in bamboo diets and reproductive hormones in captive pandas: exploring the potential e ff ects on the female giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Conservation Physiology 7: coy068. DOI: 10.1093/CONPHYS/COY068. Email: [email protected] Ma, X., Y. Jiang, C. Wang, Y. Gu, S. Cao, X. Huang, Y. Wen, Q. Zhao, R. Wu, X. Wen, Q. Yan, X. Han, Z. Zuo, J. Deng, Z. Ren, S. Yu, L. Shen, Z. Zhong, G. Peng, H. Liu, and Z. Zhou. 2019. Identification, genotyping, and pathogenicity of Trichosporon spp. isolated from giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). BMC Microbiology 19: 113. DOI: 10.1186/S12866-019-1486-7. Email: [email protected] Macdonald, C., and J. Wester. 2019. Public perceptions of the hybridization of polar (Ursus maritimus) and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis). Human Dimensions of Wildlife: 1–18. DOI: 10.1080/10871209.2019.1581859. Email: [email protected] Mala, T. A., S. R. Ahmad, and S. A. Malla. 2019. Pattern and management of bear maul injuries in tertiary hospital in Kashmir. Interna- tional Surgery Journal 6: 1729–1732. DOI: 10.18203/2349-2902.ISJ20191898. Marciszak, A., C. Schouwenburg, G. Lipecki, S. Talamo, A. Shpansky, D. Malikov, and W. Gornig. 2019. Steppe brown bear Ursus arctos “priscus” from the Late Pleistocene of Europe. Quaternary International: Available online 2 March 2019. DOI: 10.1016/J. QUAINT.2019.02.042. Email: [email protected] Mateo-Tomás, P., P. P. Olea, J. V. López-Bao, P. González-Quirós, and P. Peón. 2019. Different criteria for implementing sanitary regulations lead to disparate outcomes for scavenger conservation. Journal of Applied Ecology 56: 500–508. DOI: 10.1111/1365- 2664.13293. Email: [email protected] McLellan, M., B. N. McLellan, and R. Sollmann. 2019. Divergent population trends following the cessation of legal grizzly bear hunting in southwestern British Columbia, Canada. Biological Conservation 233: 247–254. DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOCON.2019.02.021. Email: [email protected] Meloro, C., and A. M. de Oliveira. 2019. Elbow joint geometry in bears (Ursidae, Carnivora): a tool to infer paleobiology and functional adaptations of quaternary fossils. Journal of Mammalian Evolution 26: 133–146. DOI: 10.1007/S10914-017-9413-X. Email: [email protected] Metwally, S., S. M. Comesaña, M. Zarzyka, P. K. Szewczyk, J. E. Karbowniczek, and U. Stachewicz. 2019. Thermal insulation design bioinspired by microstructure study of penguin feather and polar bear hair. Acta Biomaterialia 91: 270–283. DOI: 10.1016/J. ACTBIO.2019.04.031. Email: [email protected] Miller, Z. D., W. Freimund, E. Metcalf Covelli, N. Nickerson, and R. B. Powell. 2019. Merging elaboration and the theory of planned behavior to understand bear spray behavior of day hikers in Yellowstone National Park. Environmental Management 63: 366–378. Email: [email protected] Mumma, M. A., G. Bastille-Rousseau, S. E. Gullage, C. E. Soulliere, S. P. Mahoney, and L. P. Waits. 2019. Intrinsic traits of woodland caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou calves depredated by black bears Ursus americanus and coyotes Canis latrans. Wildlife Biol- ogy: wlb.00494. DOI: 10.2981/WLB.00494. Email: [email protected] Murphy, S. M., J. T. Hast, B. C. Augustine, D. W. Weisrock, J. D. Clark, D. M. Kocka, C. W. Ryan, J. L. Sajecki, and J. J. Cox. 2019. Early genetic outcomes of American black bear reintroductions in the Central Appalachians, USA. Ursus 29(2): 119–133. DOI: 10.2192/ URSU-D-18-00011.1. Nie, Y., F. Wei, W. Zhou, Y. Hu, A. M. Senior, Q. Wu, L. Yan, and D. Raubenheimer. 2019. Giant pandas are macronutritional carnivores. Current Biology 29: 1677-1682.e2. DOI: 10.1016/J.CUB.2019.03.067. Email: [email protected] Nie, Y., W. Zhou, K. Gao, R. R. Swaisgood, and F. Wei. 2019. Seasonal competition between sympatric species for a key resource: implications for conservation management. Biological Conservation 234: 1–6. DOI: 10.1016/J.BIOCON.2019.03.013. Email: weifw@ ioz.ac.cn Niedringhaus, K. D., J. D. Brown, M. Ternent, W. Childress, J. R. Gettings, M. J. Yabsley, and A. 2019. The emergence and expansion of sarcoptic mange in American black bears (Ursus americanus) in the United States. Veterinary Parasitology: Regional Studies and Reports 17: 100303. DOI: 10.1016/J.VPRSR.2019.100303. Email: [email protected] O’Brien, E., M. C. Esteso, C. Castaño, A. Toledano-Díaz, P. Bóveda, L. Martínez-Fresneda, A. López-Sebastián, E. Martínez-Nevado, R. Guerra, M. López Fernández, R. S. Vega, F. G. Guillamón, and J. Santiago-Moreno. 2019. Effectiveness of ultra-rapid cryopreser- vation of sperm from endangered species, examined by morphometric means. Theriogenology 129: 160–167. DOI: 10.1016/J. THERIOGENOLOGY.2019.02.024. Email: [email protected] Ohnishi, N., T. Osawa, T. Yamamoto, and R. Uno. 2019. Landscape heterogeneity in landform and land use provides functional re- sistance to gene flow in continuous Asian black bear populations. Ecology and Evolution 9: 4958–4968. DOI: 10.1002/ECE3.5102. Email: [email protected] Pagano, A. M., and T. M. Williams. 2019. Estimating the energy expenditure of free-ranging polar bears using tri‐axial accelerom- eters: a validation with doubly labeled water. Ecology and Evolution 9: 4210–4219. DOI: 10.1002/ECE3.5053. Email: apagano@ usgs.gov Pagano, A. M., A. Cutting, N. Nicassio-Hiskey, A. Hash, and T. M. Williams. 2019. Energetic costs of aquatic locomotion in a subadult polar bear. Marine Mammal Science 35: 649–659. DOI: 10.1111/MMS.12556. Email: [email protected]

42 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 Publications Palanivelrajan, M., A. S. Arun, M. G. Jayathangaraj, K. Vijayarani, B. R. Latha, and P. Sridevi. 2019. Prevalence, molecular diagnosis and management of Klebsiella species in captive sloth bears (Melursus ursinus). Journal of Animal Research 9: 179–183. DOI: 10.30954/2277-940X.01.2019.25. Email: [email protected] Palei, H. S., S. Debata, and H. K. Sahu. 2019. Diet of sloth bear in an agroforest landscape in eastern India. Agroforestry Systems: 1-11 [First Online: 19 April 2019]. Email: [email protected] Panthi, S., A. Aryal, and S. C. P. Coogan. 2019. Diet and macronutrient niche of Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus) in two regions of Nepal during summer and autumn. Ecology and Evolution 9: 3717–3727. DOI: 10.1002/ECE3.4926. Email: [email protected] Parra-Romero, A., R. Galindo-Tarazona, J. F. González-Maya, and M. Vela-Vargas. 2019. Not eating alone: Andean bear time patterns and potential social scavenging behaviors. Therya 10: 49–53. DOI: 10.12933/THERYA-19-625. Email: [email protected] Pérez-Ramos, A., K. Kupczik, A. H. Van Heteren, G. Rabeder, A. Grandal-D’Anglade, F. J. Pastor, F. J. Serrano, and B. Figueirido. 2019. A three-dimensional analysis of tooth- root morphology in living bears and implications for feeding behaviour in the extinct cave bear. Historical Biology 31: 461–473. DOI: 10.1080/08912963.2018.1525366. Email: [email protected] Proctor, M. F., W. F. Kasworm, K. M. Annis, A. G. Machutchon, J. E. Teisberg, T. G. Radandt, and C. Servheen. 2018. Conservation of threatened Canada-USA trans-border grizzly bears linked to comprehensive conflict reduction. Human-Wildlife Interactions 12: 348–372. Ramírez-Pedraza, I., C. Tornero, S. Pappa, S. Talamo, D. C. Salazar-García, R. Blasco, J. Rosell, and F. Rivals. 2019. Microwear and isotopic analyses on cave bear remains from Toll Cave reveal both short-term and long-term dietary habits. Scientific Reports 9: 5716. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-42152-7. Email: [email protected] Ramsey, A. B., M. A. Sawaya, L. S. Bullington, and P. W. Ramsey. 2019. Individual identification via remote video verified by DNA analysis: a case study of the American black bear. Wildlife Research: Published online: 27 May 2019. DOI: 10.1071/WR18049. Email: [email protected] Reimer, J. R., M. Mangel, A. E. Derocher, and M. A. Lewis. 2019. Modelling optimal responses and fitness consequences in a changing Arctic. Global Change Biology: First published: 11 May 2019. DOI: 10.1111/GCB.14681. Email: [email protected] Reljić, S., A. Sergiel, N. P. Babić, A. Beck, S. Kužir, B. Radišić, R. Maślak, M. Bednarski, T. Piasecki, D. Huber, and Đ. Huber. 2019. Determi- nation of reproductive span through morpho-histological studies on the ovaries of captive brown bears (Ursus arctos) - a short communication. Veterinarski Arhiv 89: 233–246. DOI: 10.24099/VET.ARHIV.0471. Email: [email protected] Rey-Iglesia, A., A. García-Vázquez, E. C. Treadaway, J. van der Plicht, G. F. Baryshnikov, P. Szpak, H. Bocherens, G. G. Boeskorov, and E. D. Lorenzen. 2019. Evolutionary history and palaeoecology of brown bear in North-East Siberia re-examined using ancient DNA and stable isotopes from skeletal remains. Scientific Reports 9: 4462. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-40168-7. Email: ardelaiglesia@ snm.ku.dk Rosell, J., R. Blasco, M. Arilla, and Y. Fernández-Jalvo. 2019. Very human bears: wild brown bear neo-taphonomic signature and its equifinality problems in archaeological contexts. Quaternary International: Available online 11 May 2019. DOI: 10.1016/J. QUAINT.2019.05.013. Email: [email protected] Rothenburger, J. L. 2019. Tracheobronchopathia osteochondroplastica: a rare tracheal lesion in a free-ranging grizzly bear. Journal of Veterinary Diagnostic Investigations: [Epub ahead of print]. DOI: 10.1177/1040638719844553. Email: jamie.rothenburger@ usask.ca Routti, H., M. K. Berg, R. Lille-langøy, L. Øygarden, M. Harju, R. Dietz, C. Sonne, and A. Goksøyr. 2019. Environmental contaminants modulate the transcriptional activity of polar bear (Ursus maritimus) and human peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (PPARA). Scientific Reports 9: 6918. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-43337-W. Email: [email protected] Ruiz-Villar, H., A. Morales-González, G. Bombieri, A. Zarzo-Arias, and V. Penteriani. 2019. Characterization of a brown bear aggrega- tion during the hyperphagia period in the Cantabrian Mountains, NW Spain. Ursus 29(2): 93–100. DOI: 10.2192/URSU-D-29-1.1. Sakurai, R. 2019. Studies on the human dimensions of black bear management in Japan. Pages 25–68 in: Human Dimensions of Wildlife Management in Japan. Sato, T. 2019. A zooarchaeological study of the formation process of the Ainu bear-sending ceremony. Pages 389–408 in: Animals and their Relation to Gods, Humans and Things in the Ancient World. Scharf, H. R., M. B. Hooten, R. R. Wilson, G. M. Durner, and T. C. Atwood. 2019. Accounting for phenology in the analysis of animal movement. Biometrics: [First published: 11 March 2019]. DOI: 10.1111/BIOM.13052. Email: [email protected] Scotson, L. 2019. Exploring potential range connectivity of sun bear (Carnivora: Ursidae: Ursinae). Raffles Bulletin of Zoology 67: 67–76. DOI: 10.26107/RBZ-2019-0006. Email: [email protected] Scotson, L., S. Ross, and T. W. Arnold. 2019. Monitoring sun bears and Asiatic black bears with remotely sensed predictors to inform conservation management. Oryx: Published online: 27 May 2019. DOI: 10.1017/S0030605318001187. Email: [email protected] Senchik, A. V., A. M. Pavlov, Y. S. Guretskaya, M. A. Bormotov, H. Igota, and Y. Sato. 2019. The influence of the brown bear (Ursus arctos) population increase on the populations of wild ungulates in the Republic of Buryatia and the Amur region. Asian Journal of Water, Environment and Pollution 16: 41–48. DOI: 10.3233/AJW190005. Email: [email protected] Skibins, J. C., and R. L. Sharp. 2019. Binge watching bears: efficacy of real vs. virtual flagship exposure. Journal of Ecoturism 18: 152–164. DOI: 10.1080/14724049.2018.1553977. Email: [email protected] Skrbinšek, T., R. Luštrik, A. Majić-Skrbinšek, H. Potočnik, F. Kljun, M. Jelenčič, I. Kos, and P. Trontelj. 2019. From science to practice: genetic estimate of brown bear population size in Slovenia and how it influenced bear management. European Journal of

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 43 Publications Wildlife Research 65: 29. DOI: 10.1007/S10344-019-1265-7. Email: [email protected] Sponheimer, M., M. Clauss, and D. Codron. 2019. Dietary evolution: the panda paradox. Current Biology 29: R417–R419. DOI: 10.1016/J.CUB.2019.04.045. Email: [email protected] Spörndly-Nees, E., L. Holm, F. M. van Beest, A. Fakhrzadeh, E. Ekstedt, R. Letcher, U. Magnusson, J. Desforges, R. Dietz, and C. Sonne. 2019. Age and seasonal variation in testis and baculum morphology in East Greenland polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in relation to high concentrations of persistent organic pollutants. Environmental Research 173: 246–254. DOI: 10.1016/J.EN- VRES.2019.03.036. Email: [email protected] Stokke, S., J. M. Arnemo, and S. Brainerd. 2019. Unleaded hunting: are copper bullets and lead-based bullets equally effective for killing big game? Ambio: [First Online: 27 March 2019]. DOI: 10.1007/S13280-019-01171-4. Email: [email protected] Suel, H. 2019. Brown bear (Ursus arctos) habitat suitability modelling and mapping. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 17: 4245–4255. DOI: 10.15666/AEER/1702_42454255. Email: [email protected] Sukanan, D., and B. P. Anthony. 2019. Community attitudes towards bears, bear bile use, and bear conservation in Luang Prabang, Lao PDR. Journal of Ethnobiology and Ethnomedicine 5: 15. DOI: 10.1186/S13002-019-0292-5. Email: daruneesukanan@yahoo. com Tang, B., X. Huang, C. Han, L. Li, K. Xie, X. Li, C. Bao, Y. Huang, B. Luo, Z. Huang, M. Wei, H. Zhang, and J. Wang. 2019. SNP detection of GnRHR gene and its association with litter size traits in giant panda. Journal of Animal & Plant Sciences 29: 461–466. Email: [email protected] Ueda, M., and L. S. Bell. 2019. Assessing dual hair sampling for isotopic studies of grizzly bears. Rapid Communications in Mass Spectrometry: First published 30 May. DOI: 10.1002/RCM.8495. Email: [email protected] Van Heteren, A. H., and B. Figueirido. 2019. Diet reconstruction in cave bears from craniodental morphology: past evidences, new results and future directions. Historical Biology 31: 500–509. DOI: 10.1080/08912963.2018.1547901. Email: Borja.figueirido@uma. es Wang, H., W. Zhang, S. Yang, N. Kong, H. Yu, H. Zheng, F. Gao, W. Tong, L. Li, X. Wang, X. Deng, E. Delwart, and T. Shan. 2019. Asian black bear (Ursus thibetanus) picornavirus related to seal aquamavirus A. Archives of Virology 164: 653–656. DOI: 10.1007/ S00705-018-4101-6. Email: [email protected] Wang, Q., X. Shi, and Z. Li. 2019. A short remark on Ren–Hu’s modification of He’s frequency–amplitude formulation and the temperature oscillation in a polar bear hair. Journal of Low Frequency Noise, Vibration and Active Control: 1–4. DOI: 10.1177/1461348419831478. Email: [email protected] Weese, J. S., F. Salgado-Bierman, M. Rupnik, D. A. Smith, and P. van Coeverden de Groot. 2019. Clostridium (Clostridioides) difficile shedding by polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the Canadian Arctic. Anaerobe 57: 35–38. DOI: 10.1016/J.ANAEROBE.2019.03.013. Email: [email protected] Whittington, J., P. Low, and B. Hunt. 2019. Temporal road closures improve habitat quality for wildlife. Scientific Reports 9: 3772. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-40581-Y. Email: [email protected] Widman, M., M. Steen, and K. Elofsson. 2019. Indirect costs of sheep depredation by large carnivores in Sweden. Wildlife Society Bulletin 43: 53–61. DOI: 10.1002/WSB.951. Email: [email protected] Wigg, Ø., P. Henrichsen, T. Sjøvold, E. W. Born, K. L. Laidre, R. Dietz, C. Sonne, and J. Aars. 2019. Variation in non-metrical skull traits of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) and relationships across East Greenland and adjacent subpopulations (1830 – 2013). Polar Biology 42: 461–474. Email: [email protected] Wilson, A. E., D. L. Sparks, K. K. Knott, S. Willard, A. Brown, and Z. Zhang. 2019. Field air analysis of volatile compounds from free- ranging giant pandas. Ursus 29(2): 75–81. DOI: 10.2192/URSUS-D-18-00009.1. Yan, X., H. Zhang, D. Li, D. Wu, S. Zhou, M. Sun, H. Hu, X. Liu, S. Mou, S. He, M. A. Owen, and Y. Huang. 2019. Acoustic recordings provide detailed information regarding the behavior of cryptic wildlife to support conservation translocations. Scientific Reports 9: 5172. DOI: 10.1038/S41598-019-41455-Z. Email: [email protected] Yancey, F. D., and M. W. Lockwood. 2019. First record of the American black bear (Ursus americanus) from the Chinati Mountains of Western Texas. The Southwestern Naturalist 63: 133–152. DOI: 10.1894/0038-4909-63-2-133. Yu, J. H., K. L. Durrant, S. Liu, E. P. Carlin, C. Wang, J. Rodriguez, A. Bratthauer, T. Walsh, M. Valitutto, L. Fine, S. Murray, and R. C. Fleisher. 2019. First report of a novel hepatozoon sp. in giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). EcoHealth: First Online: 30 May 2019. DOI: 10.1007/S10393-019-01416-4. Email: [email protected] Zhao, Y., Y. Chen, A. M. Ellison, W. Liu, and D. Chen. 2019. Establish an environmentally sustainable Giant Panda National Park in the Qinling Mountains. Science of the Total Environment 668: 979–987. DOI: 10.1016/J.SCITOTENV.2019.03.070. Email: chenyp@ieecas. cn Zhu, H., B. Yang, K. He, J. Qing, Z. Zhang, K. Zhang, B. Tang, Z. Yang, Q. Dai, X. Gu, X. Yang, Y. Huang, D. Li, and H. Zhang. 2019. Habitat utilization and release-site fidelity of translocated captive-bred giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Folia Zoologica 68: 26–34. DOI: 10.25225/FOZO.072.2019. Email: 245814007@ qq.com Zhu, Y., Q. Wan, H. Zhang, and S. Fang. 2019. Reproductive strategy inferred from major histocompatibility complex-based inter-individual, sperm-egg, and mother-fetus recognitions in giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Cells 8: 257. DOI: 10.3390/CELLS8030257. Email: [email protected]

44 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 IBA Officers & Council Executive Council Members

President, Andreas Zedrosser (Norway) Councillor, Nishith Dharaiya (India) University of South-Eastern Norway HNG University Dept of Life Sciences +47.3595.2765 [email protected] +91.999.898.1560 Term Ends: 09.January.2020 nishith.dharaiya@ bearbiology.org Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Vice President Americas, Marty Obbard (Canada) Ontario of Natural Resources Councillor, Yoshikazu Sato (Japan) +1.705.755.1549 [email protected] Rakuno Gakuen University Term Ends: 09.January.2020 +81.113.88.4602 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Vice President Eurasia, Mei-Hsui Hwang (Taiwan) National Pingtung University of Science & Technology Councillor, Gordon Stenhouse (Canada) +886.8.7740416 meihsui.hwang@ bearbiology.org fRI Research Term Ends: 09.January.2021 +1.780.865.8388 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Past-President, Karen Noyce (United States) Retired-Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Councillor, Shyamala Ratnayeke (Malaysia) +1.218.259.6686 [email protected] Sunway University Department of Biological Sciences Term Ends: 09.January.2020 +60.3.7491.8622 (x7177) [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2020 Secretary, Alexander Kopatz (Norway) Norwegian Institute for Nature Research (NINA) Councillor, Marta De Barba (France) +47.4513.2514 [email protected] Laboratoire d’Ecologie Alpine (LECA) Term Ends: 09.January.2021 +33.778574551 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2021 Treasurer, Jennifer Fortin-Noreus (United States) U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Councillor, Agnieszka Sergiel (Poland) +1.406.243.4994 [email protected] Institute of Nature Conservation Polish Academy of Sciences Term Ends: 09.January.2020 +48.12.370.35.64 [email protected] Term Ends: 09.January.2021 Ex-Officio Members

Ursus Editor, Jon Swenson (Norway) IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair, Dave Garshelis (United Email: [email protected] States) 1-218-328-8874 [email protected] Bear Conservation Fund Chair, Julia Bevins (United States) 1-907-223-3483 [email protected] IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair, Rob Steinmetz (Thailand) IBN Editor, Mark Edwards (Canada) +66-2-942-7691 [email protected] 1-780-453-9125 [email protected] IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group, Dag Vongraven (Norway) Student Representative, Amy Macleod (Canada) +47-7-775-0638 [email protected] [email protected] IUCN IUCN Red List Authority Focal Point, Bruce McLellan Webmaster, Nadine Bechstein (Germany) (Canada) [email protected] +1.604.452.3233 [email protected]

Director of Transition, Jennapher Teunissen van Manen (United States) +1.530.379.5476 [email protected]

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 45 BSG Expert Team Chairs BSG Co-Chairs Dave Garshelis Email: [email protected] Rob Steinmetz Email: [email protected]

BSG Deputy Chair Michael Proctor 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] Dave Garshelis John Beecham 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]

46 International Bear News Summer 2019, vol. 28 no. 2 This page is intentionally left blank.

International Bear News Summer 2019 vol. 28 no. 2 47 International Bear News Distribution c/o International Association for Bear Research and Management Jennapher Teunissen van Manen 907 Jessie Way Bozeman Bozeman, MT 59715 USA ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED Update Your Contact Information at: www.bearbiology.org

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 transla- tion 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 Fall 2019 issue is 5 October 2019