DOCSLIB.ORG

Ursus Arctos Horribilis) in the Lower 48 States: a Biological Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Ursus Arctos Horribilis) in the Lower 48 States: a Biological Report Peer Review Report Reviewer 4 Species Status Assessment for the Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) In the Lower 48 States: A Biological Report U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Grizzly Bear Recovery Office Missoula, Montana Version 1.0 – July 7, 2020 1 Reviewer 4 Peer Review of the Draft Species Status Assessment for the Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the Lower-48 States: A Biological Report. GENERAL COMMENTS 1. Is the Biological Report’s description and analysis of the species’ needs, biology, habitat, population trends, and historic and current distribution accurate and, if not, what information is missing and how is it relevant? Basically, these sections are basically complete as written except for the lack of information on adjacent populations in Canada. Four of the 6 grizzly bear ecosystems are transboundary and share bears and bear habitat with adjacent areas of Canada. It is not possible to fully address issues about the current status and biology of these bear ecosystems without including discussions about what is happening in adjacent areas of Canada. There is very little information throughout the document about these shared transboundary population issues. I have noted this problem in comments throughout the document. 2. Does the Biological Report provide adequate review and analysis of the factors relating to the overall viability of grizzly bears in the lower-48 States (e.g., demographics, habitat, disease and predation, and genetics) and, if not, what information is missing and how is it relevant? The sections on overall viability are adequate as written except for the lack of information about what is happening in adjacent areas of Canada for the 4 transboundary ecosystems. 3. Does the Biological Report provide accurate and adequate review and analysis of the current and projected future condition of the species? If not, what information is missing and how is it relevant? The projected future condition of the species sections have significant issues with flawed conclusions and unsupported expectations – particularly for scenario 1. I have detailed my comments on these problems in the text. I believe this section needs significant revision and clarification. 4. Does the Biological Report provide adequate review and analysis of stressors and other influences on grizzly bears in the lower-48 States? If not, what information is missing and how is it relevant? 2 The stressors section is basically complete except for the lack of information about certain cattle allotments where there are ongoing significant conflicts and concerning the complications of grizzly recovery while there is black bear baiting ongoing in the Bitterroot ecosystem. These issues need to be included in discussions of stressors and expected effects. These issues are noted in the text. 5. Are there any significant oversights, omissions, or inconsistencies in the Biological Report? The biggest oversight is the lack of inclusion of information about adjacent Canadian bear populations. These populations are shared by both countries and management authorities, and bears go back and forth across the border. The US and Canada have been cooperating on grizzly bears research, monitoring, and management for over 30 years, yet there is almost nothing about Canada and Canadian bears in this review. This is a significant oversight in this report and needs to be rectified. Comments about this deficiency are noted multiple times throughout the text. 6. Are the statements about current and future condition logical and supported by the evidence provided? I have significant disagreement with the conclusions reached in the future condition section, scenario 1 on all grizzly bear ecosystems and these concerns are detailed in the text. I do not believe that the scenario 1 conclusions reached in this analysis are logical or based on facts or evidence. The basic issue is that the conclusions reached in these scenario analyses are subjective and not repeatable. The conclusions on scenarios 2-5 are more logical and defensible, but they are still subjective. 7. Does the Biological Report include all the necessary and pertinent literature to support our assumptions/arguments/conclusions? I have suggested additional literature throughout the document, and these are noted in the text. 8. Are there demonstrable errors of fact or interpretation? Please provide the specifics regarding those particular concerns. The major issue of interpretation is the conclusions reached in future condition scenario 1. The rest of the conclusions are reasonable and acceptable. This is noted in the text. 9. Additional general comments. N/A SPECIFIC COMMENTS 3 Multiple specific comments and suggested literature are noted throughout the text in track changes [NOTE FROM EMPSi – the specific comments and revisions/text edits from the tracked changes version are copied below with page and line numbers as well as text from the review for location reference. The report with the reviewer’s tracked changes was also submitted as supplemental material.] P4 L16: “272 kilograms (600 pounds)” Comment: Bears over 800 pounds have been captured along the eastern edge of the NCDE in Montana. P5 L3: “There are no known populations in the North Cascades and Bitterroot (BE) ecosystems and no known populations outside these defined ecosystems” Comment: Should define the word “population the first time you use it since without a definition this statement is very unclear. P5 L6: “Outside the lower-48 States, approximately 55,000 grizzly bears exist in the largely unsettled areas of Alaska and northwestern Canada (Alaska Department of Fish and Game 2020, entire; COSEWIC 2012, p. vi).” Comment: I suggest saying western Canada since there are grizzly bears along the Canada-US border as well. P5-6: Comment: whole paragraph under Summary of Needs, suggest changes in red: Text edit: “In general, a grizzly bear’s individual habitat needs and daily movements are largely driven by the search for food, mates, cover, security, or den sites. All life stages need large intact blocks of land to breed, feed, shelter and disperse; cover to shelter; high-caloric foods to feed and reproduce; and dens as winter shelter. In order to be resilient, grizzly bears need sufficient abundance for genetic and demographic health, stable to positive population trends, high adult female survival, survival of subadults and adults to maintain stable to increasing populations, fecundity, and genetic diversity. Grizzly bears in the lower-48 States need multiple, resilient ecosystems distributed across a broad geographic range in order to be redundant and withstand catastrophic events. Additionally, grizzly bears in the lower-48 States need genetic and ecological diversity in order to preserve variation and the ability to adapt to changing conditions (Error! Reference source not found.).” P7 L6-10: Text edit: “These conservation efforts or mechanisms include: Habitat management and mortality management including land management status (i.e. the Wilderness Act and Inventoried Roadless Areas (IRAs)); attractant removal on private lands, food storage orders on public lands; conservation easements; information and education (I&E) programs; and augmentation or translocation programs. “ P14 L44: “the SE declines from moderate to very low, and the CYE declines from low to very low” Comment: It seems to me that if “conservation actions decrease significantly, largely through the termination or non-renewal of plans or regulations” the result would be elimination of grizzly bears 4 in the C/Y and the Selkirks. No plans or regulations or funding would result in significant declines in numbers and range of bears in the YEL and NCDE. That is my subjective assessment. See main section for more on this. P14 L44-46: “Although resiliency decreases, redundancy and representation remain the same under Scenario 1, with four ecosystems distributed similarly to current condition within their ecological types (Figure 6).” Comment: There is no basis for this conclusion other than someone’s subjective estimates. Making this statement in a 5-year review basically says FWS and others can significantly reduce conservation effort (i.e. eliminate FWS recovery positions, eliminate habitat management like road closures, stop augmentation, stop funding bear management specialists, do not enforce mortality management, and stop population monitoring) and the populations in the C/Y and the SEL will continue to exist. This is not a credible conclusion at all. P15 L13: “As a result, the NCDE and GYE remain in high resiliency, the SE stays moderate resiliency, but the CYE improves in overall resiliency from low to moderate (Table 3). ” Comment: This sounds reasonable. P15 L18-31: “Under Scenario 4, redundancy and representation improve, as both the BE and North Cascades shift from extirpated condition with no resiliency to low resiliency. The NCDE and GYE remain in high resiliency, the SE remains moderate, and the CYE improves from low to moderate resiliency (Table 3). Risk from potential catastrophic events is now spread across six instead of four ecosystems (redundancy) with additional ecological diversity gained at the northwestern and central extents of the overall range (representation) (Figure 6). Future Scenario 5 is an optimistic scenario under which conservation increases significantly. As a result, resiliency, redundancy, and representation for the grizzly bear improve. Under this scenario, the NCDE and GYE stay in high resiliency, but the CYE and SE improve to
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Morphometric Analyses of Cave Bear Mandibles (Carnivora, Ursidae)
    Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève (décembre 2018) 37 (2): 379-393 ISSN 0253-6730 Morphometric analyses of cave bear mandibles (Carnivora, Ursidae) Gennady F. BARYSHNIKOV1*, Andrei Yu. PUZACHENKO2 & Svetlana V. BARYSHNIKOVA1 1 Zoological Institute, Russian Academy of Sciences, Universitetskaya nab. 1, 199034 Saint Petersburg, Russia 2 Institute of Geography, Russian Academy of Sciences, Staromonetnyi per. 29, 109017 Moscow, Russia * Corresponding author: E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Morphometric variability of cave and brown bears and their ancestors (Ursus minimus and U. etruscus) is examined using multivariate statistics based on measurements of 679 mandibles from 90 localities in Northern Eurasia. The variability is dependent on sexual dimorphism in size: it is well seen in big cave bears (U. spelaeus, U. kanivetz = ingressus, U. kudarensis), whose males are nearly 25% larger than females. In the morphological space, we identified two main types of mandibles: the “arctoid” type [U. minimus, U. etruscus, U. arctos, U. rodei (?)], and the “spelaeoid” type (U. spelaeus spelaeus, U. s. eremus, U. kanivetz, U. kudarensis). The intermediate “deningeroid” type includes U. deningeri, U. savini, U. rossicus (males), and U. spelaeus ladinicus. An additional unit is formed by female sample of U. rossicus. The mandible bones are less informative for understanding of cave bear evolution, because in comparison to crania, they have a rather simple shape. Keywords Ursus, cave bears, morphometrics, variations, mandible, evolution, adaptation, Pleistocene. Résumé Analyse morphométrique de la mandibule chez les ours des cavernes. - La variabilité morphométrique des ours des cavernes, des ours bruns et de leurs ancêtres (Ursus minimus et U. etruscus) est étudiée à partir des mesures de 679 mandibules de 90 sites d’Eurasie du nord, à l’aide des méthodes d’analyses statistiques multivariées.
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Bear (Ursus Arctos) Animal Welfare
    Care For Us Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) Animal Welfare Animal welfare refers to an animal’s state or feelings. An animal’s welfare state can be positive, neutral or negative. An animal’s welfare has the potential to differ on a daily basis. When an animal’s needs - nutritional, behavioural, health and environmental - are met, they will have positive welfare. A good life in captivity might be one where animals can consistently experience good welfare - throughout their entire life. Understanding that animals have both sentient and cognitive abilities as well as pain perception, reinforces the need to provide appropriate husbandry provisions for all captive animals, to ensure positive welfare. In captivity, the welfare of an animal is dependent on the environment provided for them and the daily care and veterinary treatment they receive. The brown bear lives in forests and mountains in northern North America, Europe and Asia. It is the most widely distributed bear in the world. There are many subspecies of brown bear, with the largest bears found in the islands of the Kodiak Archipelago. The brown bear's global home range has significantly shrunk and local populations have been made extinct, but it is still listed as a least concern species by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Bears Like To Eat Bears are omnivores and feed on a huge range of different foods depending on availability and season. Much of their diet consists of nuts, berries, fruit, leaves, and roots. However they also eat invertebrates, fish and other mammals. A bear will spend a lot of energy and time searching or hunting for food.
    [Show full text]
  • LIFE and European Mammals Mammals European and LIFE
    NATURE LIFE and European Mammals Improving their conservation status LIFE Focus I LIFE and European Mammals: Improving their conservation status EUROPEAN COMMISSION ENVIRONMENT DIRecTORATE-GENERAL LIFE (“The Financial Instrument for the Environment”) is a programme launched by the European Commission and coordinated by the Environment Directorate-General (LIFE Units - E.3. and E.4.). The contents of the publication “LIFE and European Mammals: Improving their conservation status” do not necessarily reflect the opinions of the institutions of the European Union. Authors: João Pedro Silva (Nature expert), András Demeter (DG Environment), Justin Toland, Wendy Jones, Jon Eldridge, Tim Hudson, Eamon O’Hara, Christophe Thévignot (AEIDL, Communications Team Coordinator). Managing Editor: Angelo Salsi (European Commission, DG Environment, LIFE Unit). LIFE Focus series coordination: Simon Goss (DG Environment, LIFE Communications Coordinator), Evelyne Jussiant (DG Environment, Communications Coordinator). The following people also worked on this issue: Frank Vassen (DG Environment). Production: Monique Braem. Graphic design: Daniel Renders, Anita Cortés (AEIDL). Acknowledgements: Thanks to all LIFE project beneficiaries who contributed comments, photos and other useful material for this report. Photos: Unless otherwise specified; photos are from the respective projects. Cover photo: www. luis-ferreira.com; Tiit Maran; LIFE03 NAT/F/000104. HOW TO OBTAIN EU PUBLICATIONS Free publications: • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu); • at the European Commission’s representations or delegations. You can obtain their contact details on the Internet (http://ec.europa.eu) or by sending a fax to +352 2929-42758. Priced publications: • via EU Bookshop (http://bookshop.europa.eu). Priced subscriptions (e.g. annual series of the Official Journal of the European Union and reports of cases before the Court of Justice of the European Union): • via one of the sales agents of the Publications Office of the European Union (http://publications.europa.eu/ others/agents/index_en.htm).
    [Show full text]
  • Full Paper Download In
    Advances in Bioresearch Adv. Biores., Vol 6 (3) May 2015: 32-40 Advances ©2015 Society of Education, India Print ISSN 0976-4585; Online ISSN 2277-1573 in Journal’s URL:http://www.soeagra.com/abr.html CODEN: ABRDC3 Bioresearch ICV 7.20 [Poland] ORIGINAL ARTICLE Geographic Pattern of Cranial shape in Iranian Brown Bear Ursusarctos Linnaeus, 1758 using Geometric Morphometric approach Bagher Nezami1*, Mahmoud Karami1, 2, Soheil Eagdari2, Mohammad Kaboli2 1) Department of Environment and Energy, Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University (IAU), Tehran, Iran 2) College of Natural Resources, University of Tehran, Karaj, Iran Mailing address: Science and Research Branch, Islamic Azad University, Simon Bolivar, Tehran, Iran E-mail: [email protected] ABSTRACT The Iranian brown bear is distributed in north, west and northwest of Iran. This research was conducted to study the cranial shape variation of Iranian brown bear within their geographic distribution using Geometric Morphometric. Skulls were classified based on the geographical regions, age and gender. Sixty two skulls were studied based on species distribution in country. The skull morphology from three investigated area displayed phenotypic variation along its geographical distribution. Analysis of skull also indicated that the dorsal face is the best character to show cranial shape differences. Key words: Brown bear, Shape variation, Geometric Morphometric, Skull. Received 12/09/2014 Accepted 24/01/2015 ©2014 Society of Education, India How to cite this article: Bagher Nezami, Mahmoud Karami, SoheilEagdari, Mohammad Kaboli, Geographic pattern of cranial shape in Iranian Brown Bear Ursusarctos Linnaeus, 1758 using geometric morphometric approach, Adv. Biores., Vol 5 [4] December 2014: 243-251.
    [Show full text]
  • Last of the Wild
    as nature intended – best practice examples of wilderness management in the Natura 2000 network last of the wild OVERVIEW OF STATUS AND MONITORING OF SOME WILDERNESS RELATED SPECIES IN THE NATURA 2000 NETWORK last of the wild OVERVIEW OF STATUS AND MONITORING OF SOME WILDERNESS RELATED SPECIES IN THE NATURA 2000 NETWORK Published by PAN Parks Foundation 2009 supported by The sole responsibility lies with the author and the Commission is not responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained here. contents contents 2 2 foreword 4 introduction 6 background 6 wilderness and wildlife 6 large spaces – large species 7 wilderness conservation in the EU 7 impetus behind further re-wilding 8 species depending on wilderness 9 large herbivores chamois 10 CENTRAL BALKAN AND RILA NATIONAL PARKS, BULGARIA MAJELLA NATIONAL PARK, ITALY ibex 14 TRIGLAV NATIONAL PARK, SLOVENIA large carnivores brown bear 17 FULUFJÄLLET NATIONAL PARK, SWEDEN RILA NATIONAL PARK, BULGARIA MAJELLA NATIONAL PARK, ITALY wolf 22 MAJELLA NATIONAL PARK, ITALY FULUFJÄLLET NATIONAL PARK, SWEDEN SOOMAA NATIONAL PARK, ESTONIA eurasian lynx 26 FULUFJÄLLET NATIONAL PARK, SWEDEN SOOMAA NATIONAL PARK, ESTONIA TRIGLAV NATIONAL PARK, SLOVENIA birds of prey white-tailed eagle 31 ARCHIPELAGO NATIONAL PARK, FINLAND conclusion 34 last of the wild – overview of status and monitoring of some wilderness related species in the natura 2000 network There are many reasons why Europe should pay more attention to its wilderness areas. Most importantly, these territories are an invaluable refuge for many species such as large mammals like the brown bear, wolf or lynx - Photo: Tamas Gereczi/gt-photo.hu foreword 4 by Hans Kampf Executive Director Large Herbivore Foundation It is more than 40 years since I realised that I wanted Secondly, at a time when they wandered and migrated to work in the field of nature conservation, preservation in enormous numbers across our regions, they influenced and development.
    [Show full text]
  • The Maryland Zoo in Baltimore
    ZOOGRAM The Maryland Zoo in Baltimore SPRING 2017 CONTENTS Maryland Zoological 3 NEWS FROM THE ZOO Society, Inc. The Zoo is an A season of new: to the world, to the Zoo Chairman ever-changing place Hugo J. Warns III 4 RHINO INTRO Immediate Past Chair Meet Jaharo, our new southern white rhino Edwin Brake always looking Vice-Chairman to embrace new 5 PLAN YOUR NEXT VISIT James D. Witty It’s time for Brew at the Zoo! Secretary opportunities and W. Robert Zinkham 7 DOWN OFF THE MOUNTAIN Vice President possibilities for Orphaned grizzlies find a home here Anne L. Donahue Vice President the animals, our 12 KIDS PAGE Eric G. Orlinsky Know Your Bears Vice President visitors, and the Christopher A. Pope 13 AMERICA’S WILDCAT Treasurer community at large. Jennifer E. Lowry Bobcats in Maryland Wilderness Michael H. Aldrich 16 SUPPORT John J. Buckley, Jr. Calvin G. Butler, Jr. Given our mission and our magnificent residents, you can imagine that the Zoo is an Zoo receives AZA Exhibit Matthew S. Calhoun ever-changing place, always looking to embrace new opportunities and possibilities Design Award Edward Callahan for the animals, our visitors, and the community at large. We welcome change, and Chadfield B. Clapsaddle Richard J. Corcoran, Jr. right now you are looking at change in the form of a redesigned Zoogram. Gregory A. Cross Joanna D. Golden Last year, we updated our logos, signage, and graphic materials to give the Zoo a new Herbert J. Goldman signature, and we decided to do the same with Zoogram. Inside these pages, you will Ingrid A.
    [Show full text]
  • HUSBANDRY MANUAL for the BROWN BEAR Ursus Arctos
    HUSBANDRY MANUAL FOR THE BROWN BEAR Ursus arctos Author: Shontelle Lorenzo Date of preparation: November 2009 TAFE NSW- Richmond college Course name: Captive Animals Management Lecturer: Graeme Phipps TABLE OF CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION………………………………………………….…6 1.2 OH & S………………………………………………………….....6-8 2 TAXONOMY……………………………………………………….…9 2.1 Nomenclature……………………………………………………………….….9 2.2 Subspecies……………………………………………………………….....….9 2.3 Recent Synonyms………………………………………………………...….10 2.4 Other Common Names…………………………………………………..….11 3 NATURAL HISTORY………………………………………………12 3.1 Morphometrics……………………………………………….……12 3.1.1 Mass and Basic Body Measurement………………………………….12-13 3.1.2 Sexual Dimorphism………………………………………………...……..13 3.1.3 Distinguishing Features………………………………………….……13-15 3.1.4 Basic Anatomy………………………………………………………..……16 3.2 Distribution and Habitat……………………………………....16-18 3.3 Conservation Status……………………………………………18-19 3.4 Longevity…………………………………………………….……..19 3.5 Techniques Used to Determine Age in Adults……………….…..19 3.6 Physiological notes…………………………………………....……19 3.7 Hibernation/ Aestivation………………………………………19-20 4 HOUSING……………………………………………………………21 4.1 Exhibit/ Enclosure Design……………………………………..21-22 4.2 Holding Area Design………………………………………………22 4.3 Spatial Requirements………………………………………..…22-23 4.4 Position of Enclosure………………………………………....……23 4.5 Weather protection………………………………………….……..23 4.6 Temperature Requirements………………………………...…23-24 4.7 Substrate…………………………………………………..……24-26 4.8 Nesting/ Bedding…………………………………………..……24-26 4.9 Enclosure Furnishing…………………………………………..26-33
    [Show full text]
  • Summer Food Habits of Brown Bears in Kekexili Nature Reserve, Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau, China
    Summer food habits of brown bears in Kekexili Nature Reserve, Qinghai–Tibetan plateau, China Xu Aichun1,2,5, Jiang Zhigang2,6, Li Chunwang2, Guo Jixun1,7, Wu Guosheng3, and Cai Ping4 1Key Laboratory of Vegetation Ecology, Ministry of Education, Northeast Normal University, Changchun, China 130024 2Institute of Zoology, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Beijing, China 100080 3Qinghai–Tibetan Plateau Wildlife Rescue Center, Xining, China 810029 4Qinghai Province Wildlife and Nature Reserve Management Bureau, Xining, China 810029 Abstract: We documented food habits of brown bear (Ursus arctos) during summer 2005 in an important calving area for Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii) in the Kekexili Nature Reserve, Qinghai province, China. Fecal analysis (n ¼ 83) revealed that the plateau pika (Ochotona curzoniae) was the primary prey (78% occurrence, 46% dry weight), and that wild yak (Bos grunniens;39%, 31%) and Tibetan antelope (35%, 17%) were important alternative prey. Vegetation also occurred in bear feces (17% occurrence). Brown bears in this region were evidently primarily carnivorous, a survival tactic adapted to the special environment of Qinghai–Tibetan plateau. Key words: Bos grunniens, brown bear, diet, Ochotona curzoniae, Pantholops hodgsonii, pika, scavenge, Tibetan antelope, Ursus arctos, wild yak Ursus 17(2):132–137 (2006) The brown bear (Ursus arctos) has a Holarctic growing season of vegetation, lack of protective cover, distribution that stretches from Eurasia to North and extremes in weather. They may be particularly America. With such a wide geographic distribution, vulnerable to changes in food availability because of the food habits of brown bears differ substantially in short time they have to acquire energy necessary for different geographic areas, and seasonal variation in maintenance, growth, and reproduction prior to winter food selection is common (Welch et al.
    [Show full text]
  • Ecology of Brown Bear (Ursus Arctos)
    Saurashtra University Re – Accredited Grade ‘B’ by NAAC (CGPA 2.93) Rathore, Bipan Chand, 2008, “Ecology of Brown Bear (Ursus arctos) with Special Reference to Assessment of Human-Brown Bear Conflicts in Kugti Wildlife Sanctuary, Himachal Pradesh and Mitigation Strategies”, thesis PhD, Saurashtra University http://etheses.saurashtrauniversity.edu/id/eprint/597 Copyright and moral rights for this thesis are retained by the author A copy can be downloaded for personal non-commercial research or study, without prior permission or charge. This thesis cannot be reproduced or quoted extensively from without first obtaining permission in writing from the Author. The content must not be changed in any way or sold commercially in any format or medium without the formal permission of the Author When referring to this work, full bibliographic details including the author, title, awarding institution and date of the thesis must be given. Saurashtra University Theses Service http://etheses.saurashtrauniversity.edu [email protected] © The Author ECOLOGY OF BROWN BEAR (Ursus arctos) WITH SPECIAL REFERENCE TO ASSESSMENT OF HUMAN-BROWN BEAR CONFLICTS IN KUGTI WILDLIFE SANCTUARY, HIMACHAL PRADESH AND MITIGATION STRATEGIES. Thesis submitted to The Saurashtra University, Rajkot For the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy In Zoology (Wildlife Science) By Bipan Chand Rathore Under the supervision of Dr. N.P.S. Chauhan Wildlife Institute of India Post Box 18, Dehradun 248001 Uttarakhand, India 2008 Ecology of brown bear (Ursus arctos) with special reference to assessment of human- brown bear conflicts in Kugti Wildlife Sanctuary, Himachal Pradesh and mitigation strategies. Photograph by Bipan Chand Rathore March, 2008 Certificate I have great pleasure in forwarding the Ph.D.
    [Show full text]
  • International Bear News
    International Bear News Quarterly Newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) and the IUCN/SSC Bear Specialist Group November 2011 Vol. 20 no. 4 © ARCTUROS ARCTUROS rescues two brown bear cubs. To learn more about the organization’s efforts to rehabilitate the bears, see the story on page 43. IBA websites: www.bearbiology.org www.bearbiology.com Ursus website: www.ursusjournal.com Table of Contents Council News 36 On the Trail of Brown Bears in Tajikistan 3 From the President 39 Increased Awareness of Human-Bear 4 Experience and Exchange Grants: Conflict in Lao PDR Leads to Instant Applications Wanted Results of the Unexpected Kind 5 Research & Conservation Grants 41 Do Andean Bears Attack Mountain Tapirs? 5 Goodbye Janissa … for now 43 Bear Specialist Group Coordinating Committee 20th IBA Conference 6 Session 1: Status of the World’s Bears Eurasia – Threats and Conservation Measures 43 First Reintroduction Attempt of Brown 1 Session : Climate Change and Bears Bears in Greece 13 Session 3: Conservation Case Studies 14 Session 5: Ecology and Behavior of Polar Americas Bears 44 Nevada to Hold First Ever Black Bear Hunt 15 Session 6: Aboriginal and Traditional 45 Engaging Madison Valley Residents in Knowledge of Bears Grizzly Bear Conservation 16 Session 7: Bear Behavior 17 Session 8: Physiology of Bears Student Forum 17 Session 9: Population Estimation 47 Student Highlight: Agnès Pelletier 19 Session 10: Population Ecology of Bears 48 Truman’s List Serve 0 Panel on Bear Feeding 4 Session 1: Human–Bear
    [Show full text]
  • Brown Bear (Ursus Arctos)
    Species Factsheet 2: Brown bear (Ursus arctos) Brown bear in the Kodiak National Wildlife Refuge in Alaska (Steve Hillebrand/USFWS) OVERVIEW The brown bear is the most widely distributed of all bears and is widespread in the forests and mountains of North America, Europe and Asia with a relatively large global population that is currently stable. There are a number of sub-species. The bears’ principal range includes parts of Russia, the United States, Canada, the Carpathian region (especially in Romania), the Balkans, Sweden and Finland. Brown bears are omnivorous and typically are solitary animals, except for females with cubs. However, at times certain populations do congregate; for example large gatherings occur during the Alaskan salmon spawning run. Dozens of bears may gather to feed on the fish to rapidly build up energy stores for their winter hibernation and they will eat as much as 40 kilograms of food each day. The bears build winter dens for their hibernation and may lose as much as fifty percent of their body weight whilst hibernating. Pregnant females give birth during hibernation, in the den, usually to a pair of cubs. The cubs will remain with their mother for about two and a half years, during which time she will not become pregnant again. 1 Brown Bear Fact Sheet www.bearconservation.org.uk Working for Bears Worldwide STATUS Whilst not the most numerous bear species (that’s the American black bear) the brown bear is the most widespread and, as such, is classified as of “least concern” on the IUCN Red List (International Union for Conservation of Nature).
    [Show full text]
  • Bear TAG 4Th Edition
    Bear TAG 4th Edition Regional Collection Plan Regional Collection Plan 4th Edition December 2015 Bear Taxon Advisory Group Association of Zoos and Aquariums (AZA) www.aza.org Written by Rebecca Snyder, Ph.D., Oklahoma City Zoo and Debbie Thompson, Little Rock Zoo Bear TAG Regional Collection Plan Page 1 Table of Contents MISSION STATEMENT AND SUMMARY OF GOALS p. 3 BEAR TAG STRUCTURE p. 4 CONSERVATION STATUS OF BEARS p. 8 Table I: Conservation Status Summary p. 8 SPECIES SELECTED FOR MANAGEMENT AND CURRENT STATUS p. 9 Bear TAG Species Selection Criteria p. 9 Table 1: Outcome of Bear TAG Species Selection Criteria p. 11 Table 2: Bear TAG Animal Program Summary p. 12 Table 3: Bear TAG Animal Program Goals p. 13 Table 4: Bear TAG Species Replacement p. 14 Table 5: Bear TAG Program Management Update p. 15 SPACE ASSESSMENT p. 16 Table 6: Summary of space survey results p. 16 DESCRIPTIONS OF SPECIES HOUSED IN AZA FACILITIES p. 18 Giant Panda p. 19 Andean Bear p. 20 Sun Bear p. 21 Sloth Bear p. 22 Asiatic Black Bear p. 23 American Black Bear p. 24 Brown Bear p. 25 Polar Bear p. 26 Bear TAG Regional Collection Plan Page 2 Bear TAG Regional Collection Plan Mission Statement and Summary of Goals MISSION STATEMENT The Bear Taxon Advisory Group (Bear TAG) supports bears around the world through ex situ and in situ activities, including management strategies, education, research, upholding welfare standards, conservation programs, and advocacy for bears. SUMMARY OF GOALS a. Genetic and Demographic Management The Bear TAG will attempt to maintain genetically and demographically healthy, well- managed captive populations of bears for public education and scientific study and to generate support of in situ conservation.
    [Show full text]