Fall 2015 Vol

Home , Eurasian brown bear, Florida black bear, Intermountain West, Kamchatka brown bear

International Bear News

Tri-Annual Newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) and the IUCN/SSC Bear Specialist Group Fall 2015 Vol. 24 no.3

Kamchatka brown bear hunting for salmon on the riverside. Read more on the conservation of the Kamchatka Brown Bear on page 22.

IBA website: www.bearbiology.org Table of Contents

INTERNATIONAL BEAR NEWS 3 International Bear News, ISSN #1064-1564

IBA PRESIDENT⁄IUCN BSG CO-CHAIRS 37 Florida Re-Opens Black Bear Hunting After 4 President’s Column Two Decades 7 Contemplating Bear Conservation in Abu 39 Updating the Density Estimates for Black Dhabi Bears in New Mexico 40 Two Nonfatal Black Bear Attacks in One CONSERVATION Month – California, USA 10 Do Sloth Bears Live in Bhutan? 14 Asiatic Black Bear Conservation Taught in CONFERENCE REPORTS Bashagard Schools, Iran 41 Presentations Related to Bear Management 16 Monitoring of Two Small Subpopulations of at the 5th International Wildlife Brown Bears in the Pyrenees, 1993 to 2014 Management Congress in Sapporo, Japan 20 Six New Publications Advance Andean Bear Conservation and Management CONFERENCE ANNOUNCEMENTS 42 24th International Conference on Bear HUMAN BEAR CONFLICTS Research & Management, June 11-16, 2016, 22 Conservation of the Kamchatka Brown Bear Anchorage, Alaska, USA 45 1st International Symposium on Sun Bear BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH Conservation & Management July 2016, 24 Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Applications for Phnom Penh, Cambodia Bear Research 26 Brown Bear Marking Behavior in FORUMS Northwestern Slovakia 45 Student Forum 28 Habitat Modeling to Detect Corridors for Sloth Bears in Gujarat, India PUBLICATIONS 30 Genetic Study Shows that Sloth Bears Utilize 46 Recent Bear Literature Forest Corridors in Fragmented Landscape in Central India IBA OFFICERS & COUNCIL 32 Identifying Bears Using Non-Invasive 52 Executive Council Members and Ex-Officio Methods - The Bears of Bute Members 33 Analysis Underway for Population Dynamics of the Brown Bear in the Italian Central Alps BSG COORDINATING COMMITTEE 53 BSG Expert Team Chairs MANAGER’S CORNER 34 Burned Bear Rescued, Rehabilitated, and Released in Washington 35 Syrian Brown Bear War Hero 37 Agency and University Collaboration for Black Bear Management in the Southwest and Intermountain West, USA and Northern Mexico

2 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Table of Contents International Bear News, ISSN #1064-1564 Tri-Annual newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) Editors: Mark Edwards (Managing Editor) Amy Macleod (Layout & Design) Jim Tomlin (Proofing) Jennapher L Teunissen van Manen (Distribution) Email: [email protected]

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

Correspondents: Alaska: Steven Kovach, Email: [email protected] 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 and Central Asia: Tatjana Rosen Michel, Email:trosen@panthera.org Zoo and Captive Bear Organizations: Jordan Schaul, Email:[email protected] Bear Specialist Group: Dave Garshelis, Email:[email protected] Manager’s Corner: Rich Beausoleil, Email: [email protected] All other submission and/or inquiries: Mark Edwards, Email: [email protected] Deadline for the Spring 2015 issue is 5 February 2016.

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 Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 3 IBA President President’s Column

Karen Noyce 15542 County Road 72 Warba, MN 55793 USA Email: [email protected] In this issue Progress in conservation looks different in different parts of the world. In this issue of IBN, I draw your attention to several items that represent tangible evidence of progress that might go unrecognized. Sun bears and Andean bears are among the least known of the world’s eight bear species. In July, 2016, one month after the Anchorage IBA conference, an historic meeting will take place (see page 45). The First Interna- tional Symposium on Sun Bear Con- servation and Management, in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, will gather experts working across Southeast Asia to coordinate planning for conservation of the world’s smallest bear. Likewise, on page 20 of this newsletter, six new publications on Andean Bears are announced. These publications represent compilations of experience and knowledge, written for the purpose of coordinating conservation planning and action across the Andean bear’s range. Both announcements demonstrate that growing efforts over the past few decades, many of them supported by IBA Research and Conservation Grants, to assess and understand these bears have succeeded in gathering critical masses of knowledge; enough to compile and translate into on-the-ground conservation. Experiences with American black bears, one of the best-understood species, in Florida (page 37) demonstrate another level of conservation success. After 40 years of concerted efforts, Florida’s once- threatened black bear population has grown by 1000% and reached a density that has prompted the reopening of bear hunting. This transition from a “protection and recovery” mindset to one of population management through controlled hunting represents a sea change that can be disconcerting to the public. It also presents a strange identity crisis for wildlife professionals as they transition from advocates of minimizing mortality to increase population size, into managers of a hunt aimed at harvesting 20% of the population each year. Tension and turmoil at these times of transition between population protection and population management play out in various ways and places around the world. They are worth paying attention to as they always signal movement along the conservation path.

Conference News: IBA Anchorage The 2016 IBA Conference in Anchorage, Alaska, is only six months away. I urge you to make your plans and reservations now, if you haven’t already done so. See page 42 of this newsletter for details on conference registration, deadlines, low- cost lodging, field trips, and more. Alaska is a fabulous place to visit; don’t miss this opportunity to see it in the company of a plethora of bear biologists!

Conference Travel Grants When I reflect on my many years as an IBA member, it is always memories of conferences that rise to the top. It is impos- sible to overstate the importance that IBA conferences have had in shaping my thoughts, priorities, and practices as a bear researcher. I know this is true of many others as well. It is at conferences that the science we read in journals becomes tangible and the authors of that science become real. As we meet colleagues in person, we learn that even the most accom- plished grapple with the same logistic snags, limiting assumptions, unanswerable questions, and frustrations with human attitudes as we do. Conferences confirm that we are in this together and that every one of us has insights to offer. We are part of a body that inches the science of bear management and conservation forward. Colleagues. We can read their papers wherever we are in the world, but nothing takes the place of face time for fostering collaboration and progress.

4 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 IBA President The sad truth, however, is that attending conferences is expensive. Conference organizers work hard to keep the price low, but the costs of holding a conference continue to rise. IBA conferences, quite frankly, are too expensive for many people to attend if they don’t have financial assistance from their employers or other sources. Arguably, it is often those that might benefit the most - e.g., students and others living and working in remote corners of developing countries - that are least likely to have financial backing to attend. IBA Conference Travel Grants help to address this need. Travel Grants will be available for the 2016 IBA Conference in Anchorage, Alaska, though we don’t yet know how much support will be available. Please go to the conference website or the IBA Facebook page for information on applying for a Conference Travel Grant. The deadline for applications is December 20 with notification of acceptance or rejection in mid-January. Based on correspondence we receive before every conference from those who are disappointed at not receiving a grant, it is clear that there are a number of misconceptions about how the program works. Below I clarify some things about the program. 1. IBA’s financial assets are limited. IBA cannot pay for travel grants. Except for a small amount ($1500 - $2500) allotted from IBA’s Bear Conservation Fund each year, travel grant money is raised each time there is a conference by the conference organizers. Thus, the amount of travel grant money available varies from conference to conference. This amount depends on many things, including the cost of conference facilities and services and the amount of governmental and NGO support available to conference organizers - all highly dependent on location. 2. There are always more applicants for travel grants than money available. 3. The size of grants is set at the discretion of the travel grants committee. Whether other financial subsidies like registration waivers will be offered is at the discretion of the conference organizers. 4. Travel grants are not meant to enable the same individuals to attend IBA conferences year after year. Nor are they meant to cover all costs of attendance. Preference goes to those who: a) demonstrate true financial need; b) will be presenting an oral presentation or poster; c) have not received a travel grant in recent years; d) have demonstrated efforts to raise some of their own funds. 5. Allocation of grants is meant to a) boost attendance from typically underrepresented regions of the world, b) enable biologists who are working in the region of the conference, who would not normally attend an IBA conference, to come and broaden their learning, and to c) help achieve a balance in regional versus international attendance and a broad representation of topics and species. IBA recognized the need to offer travel grants many years ago, when Council voted to earmark for this purpose 15 % of the gift IBA receives from the John Sheldon Bevins Memorial Foundation each year. This is not a lot, typically $1500 - $2500, but enough to subsidize travel for two to four attendees. In 2002, however, the Norwegian conference organizers worked magic raising money and offered thousands of dollars in travel, registration and food subsidies for international attendees. The result was vibrant and inspiring, with the best attendance of South Americans at an IBA conference to date and representation from across Europe and Asia. Inspired by the result, all conference organizing committees since Norway have raised money for travel grants and provided assistance for typically about 20 to 30 attendees. IBA owes a great deal of gratitude to conference hosts for continuing this tradition. It is a large and extra burden on top of the many other things involved in hosting a conference. Recognizing that IBA needs to move towards relieving conference organizers of this extra burden, we are in the process of forming a standing committee on Conference Travel Grants to better standardize the awarding of grants, define the relationship between IBA and conference hosts in administering grants, and to make conferences as accessible for IBA members as possible.

Other Council News: Council voted to accept the bid submitted by Life Dinalp Bear to host the next Eurasian IBA Conference in Ljubliana, Slovenia, in September of 2018 (following Quito, Ecuador, in 2017)! Council approved a new reporting system and calendar for committees to keep Council updated on their activities. We are now using Dropbox for archiving discussions. These actions and efforts to improve efficiency and record-keeping fall under the category of “mundane, but important”. The Strategic Planning Survey has been completed. Approximately 125 surveys were submitted through Survey Monkey during the summer. In the coming months the Strategic Planning Committee will review and analyze responses. We will report the results of the survey at the IBA conference in Anchorage next June and in the summer 2017 newsletter. Members of the Strategic Planning Committee are Andreas Zedrosser (chair), Emre Can, Gordon Stenhouse, Tabitha Graves, and Karen Noyce.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 5 IBA President I invite you to contact me at [email protected] if you are interested in volunteering for ongoing or future IBA tasks. In particular, if you have comments to share about what you like to see in a website, or if you have examples to provide of websites that you are particularly drawn to, for content, appearance, ease of use, and special functionality, I welcome your comments and communication.

IBA Volunteers Many years ago, Dr. Fred Dean and his students at the University of Alaska performed a great service by compiling a bibliography of all the scientific literature on bears that they could find. In recent years, the volume of new bear literature published each year has exploded and it has become difficult, as a scientist or manager, to keep up. Since 2006, an update on bear publications has been a regular feature in every issue of International Bear News. Compiling this information is a big job; the spring and summer 2015 issues of IBN listed 135 new papers published since fall 2014. In this issue of IBN I thank and recognize the team of three volunteers who currently perform the great service of compiling these records for our conve- nience: Agnes Pelletier, Marion Schneider, and Agnieszka Sergiel.

Agnes Pelletier Agnes began her studies of American black bears in 2008 as a Ph.D. student at Trent University, Ontario, Canada. Her research with the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources focused on determining the historical and contemporary genetic structure in Ontario’s black bear population, and mapping genetic clustering within a large contiguous population. Agnes particularly enjoyed finding interesting patterns in genetics at all spatial scales. Modeling the future state of isolated populations under different translocation scenarios fed her desire to apply genetics and behavioral ecology to management and conservation. Work in Algonquin Park for the Ministry kept her in the field increasing her understanding of bears and their behavior. Since completing her PhD, Agnes has been a post doctoral fellow at the University of Winnipeg (http://agnespelletier. weebly.com/), where she conducts research on behavioral ecology and management of white-tailed deer and mule deer. She joined IBA in 2011 and was immediately drawn to its “family” feel and its open, inclusive, and interesting members. “It is easy to want to help out,” she says. “That’s why I have been teaming up with Marion and Agnieszka on the Recent Bear Literature since 2014.” Agnes is also building and managing the literature database for the Human-Bear Conflict Expert Team of the Bear Specialist Group.

Marion Schneider Marion landed in the field of wildlife biology when she “finally saw the light” after living and working in Italy for several years. She attended night school, and then went on to study at the University of Cologne in Germany. Her first research was on social behaviour in captive Malayan sun bears at the Cologne Zoo nearly 15 years ago. She built on that work studying foraging behaviour in sun bears and has recently earned her PhD studying thermoregulation in Malayan sun bears and polar bears. All the while, she has worked as a lecturer, teaching ethology to undergraduates and zoo keepers, as a voluntary zoo educator at the Cologne Zoo, and as a secondary school science teacher. She says, “I took advantage of the opportunity to educate students about the importance of nature conservation. I am convinced that species conservation and nature education are inseparable.” Marion currently works for Free the Bears in the Bear Rescue Centre in the Cat Tien National Park in Vietnam. There she assesses stress through behavioural observation and testing cortisol levels in hair in Asiatic black bears and Malayan sun bears confiscated from bear bile extraction facilities or private households.

6 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 IBA President Marion attended her first IBA conference in Italy in 2005 and says, “I have learned so much from the remarkable network IBA has established and I very much appreciate the opportunity to volunteer and contribute to the important work of IBA”.

Agnieszka Sergiel Agnieszka, a.k.a. “Aga”, has been working with bears since 2002. Her masters degree focused on stereotypic behaviors in big zoo mammals and her PhD, at Wroclaw University, Poland, on stereotypic behavior and physiological indicators of stress in captive bears. Currently Aga is an assistant professor at the Institute of Nature Conservation, Polish Academy of Sciences, in Kraków, Poland, and is part of a team conducting the GLOBE project: “Global climate change and its impact on brown bear populations: predicting trends and identifying management priorities”. Within this project her specialty is stress ecology. Aga joined IBA in 2007 and was asked to join the BSG Euro- pean Brown Bear Expert Team in 2009. She started preparing the Recent Bear Literature section for International Bear News at the end of 2013 when invited to help Jennapher Teunissen van Manen. She enjoys preparing Recent Bear Literature and is pleased to be a part of the team.

IUCN BSG Co-Chairs Contemplating Bear Conservation in Abu Dhabi

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

Abu Dhabi, one of seven emirites of the United Arab Emirites (UAE), is a desert. It has gazelles and leopards, but no bears (probably never had any bears). Most notably, the UAE has Arabian Oryx, the first species that was once Extinct in the Wild, but recovered, through captive breeding, reintroductions and protection, to the status of Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. The Environment Agency of Abu Dhabi is also presently funding a reintroduction of the Scimitar-horned Oryx, from captive populations (in the UAE and US) to its historic range in north Africa (Chad). These are some of the fascinating conservation stories we learned when attending the 3rd Leaders Meeting of the IUCN Species Survival Commission in Abu Dhabi, 15–18 September, 2015. The site of this meeting was due to the fact that it was generously funded and hosted by the Environment Agency of Abu Dhabi. This agency also funded the previous two SSC Leaders’ meetings, in 2008 and 2012. The meeting brings together all the chairs of the ca. 130 SSC Specialist Groups and Task Forces. It was interesting to compare the variety of challenges faced by these diverse groups. For example, we’ve spent two years working on our Red Listing accounts for seven species of bears, which compared to most other species on earth, we know a great deal about. Imagine doing >500 primates. Or how about 26,000 orchids?

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 7 IUCN BSG Co-Chairs A good portion of the meeting dealt with the function and functioning of specialist groups. SSC Chair Simon Stuart fielded questions about issues faced by the various specialist groups, including behavior and responsibilities of members, and necessity for cohesion, while allowing for dissent. We learned that, with 190 members, the BSG is the 4th largest mammalian specialist group. (Primates have 585, Otters 228, Cats 201, Bats 190). Considerable time was allowed for specialist group chairs to interact, and to learn more about the full network of resources within IUCN.

We also participated in a number of workshops, dealing with issues like wildlife trade, CITES, involvement of local communities in fighting poaching, trophy/ The 3rd Leaders Meeting of the IUCN Species Survival Commission brought together sport hunting, human-wildlife conflicts, the chairs of the ca. 130 SSC Specialist Groups and Task Forces. reintroduction, partnerships with zoos, red-listing, and green-listing. A few key points from these are listed below: • The illegal wildlife trade is estimated to be worth 20 billion dollars per year. CITES attempts to deal with commercial trade that is devastating some species: 3% of CITES-listed species are already threatened with extinction and listed on Appendix I, prohibiting all commercial trade. Species on Appendix II may be commercially traded internationally if such trade is legal, sustainable, and traceable, and if it is properly reported. Of the 35,000 species that are listed under CITES, 26,000 are orchids, and many of these are farmed. The look-alike based listings in CITES (like most orchids and American black bears) makes some legal trade across international borders very cumbersome (e.g., hair samples shipped to a genetics lab). An interesting TED-type talk by the Secretary General of CITES is available at https://www. youtube.com/watch?v=Z5xeQzlIWNI. • The African and Asian Rhino Specialist Groups are grappling with similar issues as the BSG in terms of thwarting illegal trade in parts: Would farming rhinos for horns, or creating synthetic horn (already in process) increase or decrease (or have no effect on) trade in wild horn? Bear bile farming is of course already a huge industry, and a synthetic bear bile is on the near-horizon. Both the synthetic bile and synthetic rhino horn are products of new biotechnology. • A crisis of commercial poaching is happening world-wide and traditional law enforcement approaches are not effectively stemming it. In recognition, there is increasing interest and urgency to think “outside the box” when dealing with poaching. A numerically powerful, but commonly undervalued, potential ally in the fight against poaching are the local communities that occur inside and around the world’s protected areas. IUCN is conducting a global study of the possible benefits and approaches to working with local communities, and they are situating their analysis scientifically within a theory of behavior change that will facilitate hypothesis testing and experimentation on this social as- pect of conservation. (For more information: https://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/ceesp_ssc_sustainable_ use_and_livelihoods_specialist_group/communities_and_wildlife_crime/beyond_enforcement/). Local communities are important for conserving bears, but there is probably much more potential here that deserves to be explored. We previously highlighted an example of experimental anti-poaching work with local people that resulted in an apparent increase in bears (International Bear News, 2014, 23(3): 6–7). • The shooting of Cecil the lion by a trophy hunter in Zimbabwe raised a fierce debate about the ethics of sport hunting for such charismatic species. It also put organizations like IUCN, which promotes sustainable use as a conservation strategy, in the spotlight. The SSC is considering a possible “situation analysis” to examine the role of trophy/sport hunting in promoting conservation. American black bears may serve as a prime example. • A new human-wildlife website has been launched to try to coalesce knowledge and highlight solutions to this ever- increasing problem (http://www.peopleandwildlife.org.uk). Conflict was defined as having 4 components: (1) both parties are involved (animal causes damage, humans retaliate); (2) animal’s behavior is purposeful (e.g., attracted to a resource, not just wandering through); (3) behavior is recurrent (not just once); and (4) it results in some adverse impact on the animal population.

8 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 IUCN BSG Co-Chairs • New IUCN reintroduction guidelines have been published (http://www.issg. org/pdf/publications/RSG_ISSG-Rein- troduction-Guidelines-2013.pdf), and should be consulted before considering any sort of reintroduction. Several specialist groups (e.g., Primate SG) have developed taxon-specific reintroduction guidelines as well. We might consider doing so for bears, given the increasing pressures to release captive bears from over-flowing facilities (e.g., Asiatic black bears, giant pandas), and proposals to “rewild” areas now devoid of bears. • Partnerships with zoos were examined and their benefits promoted. Incred- ibly, 700 million people visit zoos and aquariums every year. Another 300 Seven BSG members attended the SSC Leaders Meeting, in various capacities. million visit botanical gardens. In sum, Front row, left to right: Luigi Boitani (chair Large Carnivore Initiative of Europe), one of seven people on Earth visits a Rob Steinmetz, Piero Genovesi (chair Invasive Species SG), Urs Breitenmoser facility that allows them to get close to (co-chair Cat SG); Back row: Ximena Velez-Liendo (IUCN Focal Point for Bolivia), animals and plants each year. This level Dave Garshelis, Bill McShea (co-chair Deer SG). of interest in the biodiversity of our planet clearly presents major opportunities to educate people and change behavior on societal scales. Zoos today do much more than entertain visitors. They actively fund conservation programs and ecological research, they conduct conservation-relevant research themselves on captive animals, and they increasingly attempt to implement behavior change programs intended to create environmentally conscious citizens that act in favor of conservation. The BSG is fortunate to have experts in the Captive Bear Expert Team working on all of these fields, and we look forward to enhanced activities in the future. • 2014 marked the 50th anniversary of the IUCN Red List. Its purpose is to provide our best description of extinction risk, based on consistent and rigorous scientific guidelines. Free training for how to conduct a Red-List assessment is now available online: www.conservationtraining.org. Although officially called the Red List of Threatened Species, it is not simply a list of threatened species. For example, of the 5,487 mammal species assessed, approximately one-quarter are globally threatened or extinct (whereas six of eight bear species are globally threatened). • It costs $5 million/year and 2,500 volunteer days/year to maintain the Red List. There are presently 77,000 listed species — 15,990 more than just three years ago (including 15 newly-listed mammals) — with a goal of assessing 160,000 by 2020. New Red List accounts will each have a DOI number, and hence be considered a true publication (with down- loadable PDF). There are an increasing number of national red list assessments, which employ the same criteria as the global red list. • The concept of a Green list — to highlight species that have successfully been conserved — was adopted at the World Conservation Congress in 2012. At that same congress, the IUCN adopted the concept of a Green List of Protected Ar- eas, which would specify objective, transparent, and globally consistent criteria for identifying protected areas that are successful in achieving their conservation objectives. A number of sites have already been so chosen. Criteria for the Green Listing of Species have yet to be determined. One idea, proposed at this meeting, is to plot species along two axes — Y: Impact of conservation actions, versus X: Extent fully conserved. A species plotted in the upper left corner of the graph would have been the target of substantial conservation action but still is far from being fully conserved. An example is the California condor, which was saved from the brink of extinction decades ago through intensive conservation management, but still occurs in small populations that are vulnerable to extinction. We think it would be an interesting exercise to examine the Green Listing status of various populations of the world’s bears, to gauge the relative success of conservation actions.

Delegates to the meeting agreed on a declaration that “safeguarding of the Earth’s biodiversity, its species and ecosystems, is a moral responsibility.” We found this meeting to be extraor- dinarily valuable in terms of thinking ahead to making the Bear Specialist Group more effective in conserving the world’s bears.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 9 Conservation Do Sloth Bears Live in Bhutan? (supported by an IBA Research and Conservation grant)

Nishith Dhariaya Co-chair Sloth Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group Yeshey Wangdi Hemchandracharya North Gujarat University Asiatic Black Bear and Sloth Bear Expert Teams, Patan (Gujarat) India Bear Specialist Group Email: [email protected] Royal Manas National Park, Department of Forest and Park Services Dave Garshelis Gelephu, Bhutan Co-chair Bear Specialist Group Minnesota Department of Natural Resources Sonam Wangchuk Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USA Asiatic Black Bear and Sloth Bear Expert Teams, Bear Email: [email protected] Specialist Group Chief, Wildlife Conservation Division, Department of Forest Thomas Sharp and Park Services, Sloth Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group CITES Management Authority Wildlife SOS / SWCA Environmental Consultants Thimphu, Bhutan Salt Lake City, UT USA Email: [email protected]

Rob Steinmetz Co-chair Bear Specialist Group World Wildlife Fund –Thailand Bangkok, Thailand Email: [email protected]

Sloth bears and Asiatic black bears (here- after black bears) are similar-looking species whose ranges overlap in some areas along India Burma and south of the Siwalik Range, the foothills of the Himalayas. These two species are still reported to co-occur within some protected areas in Uttarakhand and Assam, India. Historically, their co-occurrence was likely Royal Manas more widespread, but due to their similar National Park appearances, historical reports of their presence tend to be unreliable. A 1990s survey in Nepal showed no overlap in their ranges — sloth bears live only in the lowland Terai Manas and low elevations of the Siwaliks, whereas Manas National Park black bears are in the higher hills (Garshelis Reserve Forest et al. 1999a). In Bangladesh, a recent survey, sponsored in part by the IBA, revealed that sloth bears had been extirpated sometime Basemap Source: ESRI ArcGIS Online in the mid-1990s (Islam et al. 2013). This occurred without recognition by any govern- Royal Manas National Park, Bhutan, and adjoining Manas National Park, Assam, India. ment authorities, and with claims that sloth bears probably still persisted in some isolated pockets (Sarker et al. 2006). Purported observations of sloth bears after their extirpation in Bangladesh were actually shaggy-haired black bears. Following this discovery in Bangladesh, we wondered about reports of sloth bears in Bhutan. Bhutan is a primarily mountainous country. It contains prime habitat for black bears, which are noted to prey on livestock and destroy crops. However, the arc of the Terai also narrowly overlaps the extreme southern border of Bhutan, where it is called the Duars. Since sloth bears occur in the Duars of neighboring Assam, it would seem logical that they would also occur in Bhutan.

10 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conservation Both the 1994 and 1996 Red List of Threatened Animals indicated that sloth bear presence in Bhutan was questionable. However, the 1999 IUCN Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan for Bears mapped two populations of sloth bears in Bhutan (Garshelis et al. 1999b), based on information from the head of the Nature Conservation Section of the Forestry Services Division of Bhutan, and a Bhutanese representative of World Wildlife Fund. Wangchuk et al. (2004) mapped an even more extensive range, covering the southern third of the country. Given this uncertainty, we initiated a project in 2012 to survey potential sloth bear habitat in Bhutan and determine whether sloth bears exist there (map). We also conducted training for wildlife staff in Bhutan so they can better distinguish sloth bears from black bears, understand their ecology, and establish a monitoring system for sloth bears. We focused our survey in Royal Manas National Park (RMNP; 1,057 km2, 90°35’– 91°13’ E and 26°46’– 27°08’ N), the oldest national park in Bhutan. Elevations in RMNP range from 80 m along the Indian border to 2,900 m in the north. The park contains a rich array of flora and fauna, including tigers as a focal species. Rai (2006) claimed to have found sloth bear sign at elevations up to 1,100 m in RMNP; however, we examined photographs of this presumed sloth bear sign and concluded that it was likely confused with sign from black bears (or at least there was no way to distinguish the two species). Nevertheless, an adjacent sister park in Assam, India (Manas NP [MNP]) is known to contain both black bears and sloth bears (Choudhury 2011, Borah et al. 2012).

Training Workshops and Interviews We conducted two training workshops for staff of the Wildlife Conservation Division of Bhutan. We presented information about sloth bear and black bear ecology, distribution, and identification, and we solicited information about records of sloth bears. We learned that none of the staff had seen a live sloth bear or sloth bear sign in RMNP or other sites in Bhutan. One RMNP patroller said that he found pieces of a dead bear at a salt lick called Kalikhar (see below) in 1999, and based on the long hair, thought it could have been a sloth bear. One RMNP elephant driver said that there used to be a species of bear that lived primarily in the grasslands along the international border, but increased poaching in this area caused this species to decline; he had not seen one since about 2000–2002. He indicated that the other species (black bear) is still relatively common. We spoke to a park guard in MNP who indicated that black bears are more common in the forested areas and sloth bears more common in grasslands, where they eat termites. He said that he had been attacked in 2010 by a sloth bear while he was walking along a trail in the grasslands. He stabbed it with his knife and it ran off.

Sign Surveys In early December, 2012, we searched for sloth bear sign along 8 km of trail through the RMNP lowland forest. Specifically, we looked for excavated termite mounds, which are unmistakable as sloth bear sign (black bears are not known to excavate termite mounds). We went to areas that were previously grasslands to look for sloth bear sign, but much of it had grown up into scrub and small trees. We visited the largest grassland in RMNP, called ‘Specialthang’, but found no termite mounds or sloth bear diggings. By contrast, on a jeep ride through adjacent MNP we observed numerous termite mounds and found one mound in a grassland that had been excavated by a sloth bear.

Camera Trapping We examined photographs of bears from camera trapping efforts in RMNP during 2009–2014. Most camera trapping was directed at tigers, and as such, was focused in the lowlands, where we expected to find sloth bears. One photograph of a sloth bear was obtained at the Kalikhar salt lick (176 m elevation), 2.4 km from the Indian border, in February 2009. Although the camera was set at this site for two months that year, and for six months in 2012–2013, this single photograph is the only evidence of a sloth bear visit. No other sloth bear photos were obtained in extensive camera trapping during 2010–2011 (Tempa et al. 2011) and again in 2014 (Table 1). However, six years of camera trapping in the lowlands of RMNP yielded 42 photos of Asiatic black bears. If black bears were also rare in the camera-trapping records, we would have Department of Forest & Park Services, Bhutan & Park Department of Forest concluded that cameras targeting tigers were not effective in This camera-trap photo, from 2009 is the only recent detecting bears. But since so many photos of black bears were evidence of a sloth bear in Bhutan (Kalikhar salt lick, Royal obtained, this was clearly not the case. Manas National Park, 2.4 km from Indian border).

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 11 Conservation Table 1. Camera-trap photos of Asiatic black bears and sloth bears in the lowlands of Bhutan, 2009–2014. Royal Manas NP Phipsoo WS Time period Black bear Sloth bear Black bear Sloth bear a a Feb – Mar 2009 21 Cameras set at select sites; time period over which bear b d photos were obtained. Nov 2010 – Feb 2011 3 0 b Time period of systematic camera-trapping effort. a c Feb – Mar 2012 30 Camera set at 1 site over this time period. c d Dec 2012 – Jun 2013 50 Tempa et al. (2011) recorded 18 photos of black bears, 3 b Jan – Jul 2014 13 0 16 0 of which were considered independent events. Total 2009–2014 26 1 16 0

Current Sloth Bear Distribution in Bhutan It is evident from our investigation that sloth bears are presently rare in RMNP. There may be a transboundary population centered in India (MNP), or the whole population may exist on the Indian side, with occasional vagrants coming across the border. Sloth bears appear to be more common than black bears on the Indian side of the border, based on the camera-trap records there (J. Borah, pers. comm., 2012). The grasslands that we surveyed seemed similar in RMNP and MNP, yet we found termite mounds only in MNP. Termites appear to be a critical food resource for sloth bears in the northern part of their range, where fruits are seasonal. Unlike black bears, sloth bears do not hibernate during the non-fruiting season, so their distribution may be limited by rapidly diminish- ing abundance and diversity of termites with increasing latitude and elevation. Sloth bear surveys in Nepal, including Chitwan National Park, showed that termite mounds were more abundant within or near sal (Shorea robusta)-dominated forest than in open grasslands (Garshelis et al. 1999a). Despite termite mounds being more abundant in forest, sloth bear density was actually higher in the grassland, where they commonly excavated non- mound-building underground termite colonies. It was for this reason, combined with the knowledge that black bears do not use grasslands, that we concentrated our search for sloth bear sign in the small patches of grasslands in RMNP. Indeed, the few reports of sloth bears obtained during our interviews corroborated the affiliation of this species with grasslands. Phipsoo Wildlife Sanctuary is the only protected area in Bhutan that has both grasslands and sal forest, so the habitat

Our present understanding of the sloth bear distribution along the Bhutan–India border. The only confirmed presence point in Bhutan is one camera trap photo at Kalikhar, RMNP. 12 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conservation there may be especially suitable for sloth bears. Although Phipsoo is quite small (269 km2), it adjoins Manas reserve forest and Buxa Tiger Reserve, on the Indian side, both of which have existing sloth bear populations and or sightings. Sloth bear surveys have not been conducted thus far in Phipsoo. However, recent camera-trapping there documented an abundance of black bears and no sloth bears (Table 1).

Did Sloth Bears Ever Inhabit Bhutan? We conducted an exhaustive literature search and found no definitive records of sloth bears in Bhutan. However, whereas many British naturalists wrote about sloth bears in India (Garshelis and Steinmetz 2014), few visited the independent Kingdom of Bhutan. John Claude White, a British political officer of Sikkim, managed to travel and spend time in Bhutan. In his memoir (White 1909) he noted various wildlife, including bears: “Three species, one inhabiting high altitudes from 11,000 to 12,000 feet; the common black bear, found everywhere from 6,000 feet downwards; and a third species, also said to be common, inhabiting the lower valleys.” From this it appears that a third species of bear, which we presume was the sloth bear, was common in low elevations of Bhutan at the turn of the 20th century. If true, we do not know why they have become so rare there today, though we hypothesize that factors include poaching (which is relatively easy in the open habitats sloth bears prefer), scarcity of termites (a key food), and perhaps competition with more numerous black bears We plan to conduct further field work to examine these hypotheses more thoroughly.

Acknowledgements This project was supported mainly through a Research and Conservation Grant from the IBA. Further financial and logistic support was provided by the Wildlife Conservation Division, Department of Forest & Park Services, Bhutan. We thank the wildlife staffs who eagerly participated in the workshops, shared their knowledge of bears, and participated in the sign surveys. We also thank Mr. Nilmani Rabha for accompa- nying us in the field and the Mr. Anindhya Swargoveri, Field Director Manas Tiger Reserve, India for permission and providing necessary logistical support during Royal Manas NP Wildlife staff and authors. our survey there.

Literature Cited Borah J., D. Wangchuk, A. Swargowari, T. et al. 2012. Tigers in Indo-Bhutan Transboundary Manas Conservation Complex. Technical report. Choudhury, A. 2011. Records of sloth bear and Malayan sun bear in north east India. Final report to International Associa- tion for Bear Research and Management. Garshelis, D.L. and R. Steinmetz. 2014. Ghooming for bears. International Bear News 23(2): 5–8. Garshelis, D.L., A.R. Joshi, ands J.L.D. Smith. 1999a. Estimating density and relative abundance of sloth bears. Ursus, 11, 87–98. Garshelis, D.L., A.R. Joshi, J.L.D. Smith, and C.G. Rice. 1999b. Sloth bear conservation action plan (Melursus ursinus). Pages 225-240 in C. Servheen, S. Herrero, and B. Peyton, compilers. Bears. Status survey and conservation action plan. IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups, IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. Islam, M.A., M. Uddin , M.A. Aziz , et al. 2013. Status of bears in Bangladesh: going, going, gone? Ursus, 24, 83–90. Rai, D.S. 2006. Report on mammals and their habitat Royal Manas National Park. Report Nature Conservation Division, Depart of Forests, Ministry of Agriculture, Thimphu, Bhutan. Sarkar, M.S.U. 2006. The status and conservation of bears in Bangladesh. Pages 41–44 in Understanding Asian bears to secure their future. Japan Bear Network, Ibaraki, Japan. Tempa, T., N. Norbu, P. Dhendup, and T. Nidup. 2011. Results from a camera trapping exercise for estimating tiger population size in the lower foothills of Royal Manas National Park. Ugyen Wangchuck Institute for Conservation and Environment and Royal Manas National Park, Lamai Gompa, Bumtang. Wangchuk, T., P. Thinley, K. Tshering, C. Tshering , D. Yonten, and B. Pema. 2004. Field guide to the mammals of Bhutan. Royal Government of Bhutan, Thimpu. White, J.C. 1909. Sikhim and Bhutan. Twenty-one years on the north-east frontier 1887–1908. Longmans, Green & Co., New York.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 13 Conservation Asiatic Black Bear Conservation Taught in Bashagard Schools, Iran

Azar Sedaghati Khayat Taher Ghadirian Earth’s Whisper Institution Asiatic Black Bear Expert Team, IUCN Bear Specialist Group Asiatic black bear project Asiatic black bear project Tehran, Iran Tehran, Iran Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Yasaman Talebi Otaghvar Hassan Pishvaee Earth’s Whisper Institution Asiatic black bear project Asiatic black bear project Bandar Abbas, Iran Tehran, Iran Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Shadi Tavakolimehr Earth’s Whisper Institution Asiatic black bear project Tehran, Iran Email: [email protected]

Children and youth of Bashagard region from Hormozgan province in southern Iran have had the opportunity to become familiar with the Asiatic black bear. This region is the western-most limit of this species’ distribution, and their ecology in this arid region is unique. A project entitled “Conservation of Asiatic black bear in Hormozgan province” was initiated in 2009. Conservation objectives of this long-term (10 years) program include field research, participation of local people and education. Awareness and education of local people and communities who live in this region are considered a key strategy in the program. One of the actions was an educational program for students of five targeted villages in the Chahardah rosta region. The main objectives of this program included understanding: • The importance of nature and the environment • Ecological values of the environment • Natural features of the region • Role of Asiatic black bears in the region’s ecology • Relationships and interactions of humans and nature • Impacts of indigenous people on the status of Asiatic black bears • Importance of environmental conservation • Effects of environmental degradation and species extirpation • Possible solutions for nature conservation of the region Students were divided into three age groups: elementary, middle, and high school (6–11, 12–14, 15–17 years old, respectively). Specific educational tools were designed for each of these groups.

Primary School This age group has a simple understanding of concepts, instinctive interest in nature, curiosity and direct recognition. Accordingly, the educational programming team designed a game-based learning experience, different from classic educational methods in Iran. We were trying to create a pleasant environment for learning. The game was designed by using some of nature’s elements, and each student voluntarily played a role as one of these elements. As a result, we expected that they would begin to understand the function and necessity of each element in nature, and also begin to grasp the concept of life cycles. The next step of the game was omitting each element (i.e., each kid’s role), and Ehsan Hakimi showing the effects of this environmental degradation. Students Students tried to conceptualize an ideal habitat for Asiatic black bears by pasting small photos on a picture of the region.

14 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conservation

High school (top) and children’s (right) booklets for learning about Asiatic black bears. attempted to protect and reclaim their roles. Focus then shifted specifically to Asiatic black bear habitats and some of its primary threats. Students tried to create ideal habitat on the board by pasting small pictures on it. These boards were left on the classroom walls to remind students of the results. At the end, students were awarded with unique educational booklets with stickers of a bear family.

Middle School This age group, intermediate between two other age groups, prefers to be treated like high school students, while their cognitive abilities are clearly less. They desire social-learning and direct (non-abstract) experiences. The tools used in their workshops were the same as used for the high school, but the presentation and wording were different. The course was in the form of seminar-workshop, using PowerPoint and brochures.

High School This group age was not only older, but these students were attending boarding schools. The boarding school situation created special circumstances, as many of the students were not from the local, targeted villages — some lived far from the range of Asiatic black bears and thus had no direct experience and just heard about the species. However, this group of students was likely to disperse around the region after graduation, and thus could spread their learned knowledge of bears and conservation. The program for this group took the form of workshops about climate and natural features of Hormozgan province, its wildlife, threats, and conservation needs. Also at the end of the workshop a brochure, “Asiatic Black Bear in Hormozgan province”, was provided to all the students and their teachers. This brochure highlights points of the workshop and other useful information about Asiatic black bears.

Training of Trainers Another goal of this program was training the trainers in the target region. Trainers were local eager school teachers or volunteers. They were the best instructors who lived near the students and were familiar with the culture of the region. So far, 578 students and 32 local teachers have participated in the program. More funds are needed to continue the program. Ehsan Hakimi Acknowledgements Game-based exercise for elementary students to learn This program could not have been held without the help of: how components of ecosystems fit together. Bashagard city office of Department of Environment (Gholamreza Nekoei), Sam Rajabi, Rafee Khatibi and Ehsan Rostami. This program was funded mainly by Alertis foundation with additional support from local foundations and organisations.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 15 Conservation Monitoring of Two Small Subpopulations of Brown Bears in the Pyrenees, 1993 to 2014

Pierre–Yves Quenette Guillaume Chapron European Brown Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group Grimso, University of Agricultural Sciences ONCFS, Equipe ours, Impasse de la Chapelle Riddarhyttan, Sweden 31800 Villeneuve de Rivière, France Email : pierre–[email protected] Jean–Jacques Camarra ONCFS, Equipe ours, Nicolas Bombillon 14 rue Marca, 64000 Pau, France ONCFS, Equipe ours, Impasse de la Chapelle 31800 Villeneuve de Rivière, France

Jérôme Sentilles, ONCFS, Equipe ours, Impasse de la Chapelle 31800 Villeneuve de Rivière, France

The brown bear disappeared from the central Pyrenees in the late 1980s but remained in the western Pyrenees in both France and Spain. By 1995, only five to six individuals remained in this population. Augmentation plans were made to restore this population both on the western and central areas. But for socio–political reasons, the reintroduction of bears occurred only in the central area. Three bears (two females and one male) were reintroduced in 1996–1997. In 2006, five more bears (four females and one male) were translocated from Slovenia into the central area of the Pyrenees. This report describes the changing status of the population over 22 years of field monitoring, from 1993 to 2014, and the impact of the two reintroductions on population viability. Population monitoring was conducted in Andorra, France and Spain, and involved bear biologists from each country. Data were collected by radio tracking (eight translocated individuals fitted with VHF and GPS transmitters) and, after collars dropped off, by noninvasive monitoring (scats, hairs, tracks, livestock depredations). Since 2010, only noninvasive monitoring was used. There were two types of noninvasive monitoring: (1) opportunistic monitoring, using observations of bear signs by local people; and (2) systematic monitoring, by repeated sampling of trails, hair traps, and camera trapping. The identity of bears was determined by genotyping biological samples (hairs, scats, urine) and by photographic identification from camera traps, using morphological measures or artificial marks (radio-collar, ear tag) to identify individual bears. In aggregate, these techniques allowed us to determine the minimum numbers of bears present in the two nuclei of the population.

Number of brown bear signs and observations collected in the Pyrenees during 1993–2014. Visual Photos / Livestock / Apiary Tracks Hairs Scats Observations Videos Damages Other Radiolocations 6072 5519 1945 839 1057 3357 835 9295

Trends in Occupied Bear Range Bear presence was estimated on the basis of a grid of 10 x 10 km cells, in each of five periods: 1993–1995, 1996–2000, 2001–2005, 2006–2010, and 2011–2014. If evidence of bear presence was detected in more than half of each period, presence was considered regular, otherwise it was occasional. From 1993–1995, bears were present only in the western Pyrenees, in an area of 1,800 km². During and just after the reintroduction periods (1996–2010), the size of the occupied area substantially increased. But during 2011–2014, the occupied area decreased to a more limited zone, which nonetheless was still many times larger than the initial area in the early 1990s. Although the size of the area used by bears has regularly increased in the western Pyrenees since 1993, the numbers of bears has not. In 2014, this subpopulation was restricted in France to Pyrenees Atlantiques and Hautes Pyrénées, and in Spain to Aragon and Navarra. The central subpopulation area of occupancy increased up to 2010, after which it decreased, despite the augmentation of bears into the population. Surprisingly, the variation of the occupied area of the two subpopulations was not correlated with the number of bears.

16 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conservation

Spatial dynamics of the brown bear range in the Pyrenees, 1993–2014. Population Size and Growth The size of the population was estimated annually on the basis of the minimum number of detected individuals. In the western nucleus, the population size declined from six (1993) to two (2014). The last Pyrenean female (i.e., not from reintroduced stock) died in 2004. The remaining two bears are both males. During the study period, only one dispersal event was noted, from the central to the western subpopulation. This individual (a young male) reproduced with the last remaining female, which later died, leaving a surviving orphan. This unique event prevented the complete extirpation of the western subpopulation and shows the importance of the rescue effect of a metapopulation. In the central Pyrenees, after the 1996 release of three adults, the population size increased to five to seven bears and stayed stable until the second augmentation in 2006. The mean population growth rates, in the western and central Pyrenees, were estimated to be −5.6% and 8.0%, respectively.

Vital Rates The average age of first breeding was 3.75 years, similar to other populations in Europe (Zedrosser 2004). During the study period, 26 litters comprised of 44 cubs were detected (1.7 cubs/litter) but litter size greatly differed between the central and western nuclei (1.8 and 1.0 cub/ litter, respectively). The breeding interval, estimated from four individual females in the central nuclei, was 2.3 years. Mortality rate was estimated from 24 mortality events, either from bear carcasses found, or inferred from individuals that went undetected for more than two years. The causes of death were natural in 10 cases, anthropogenic in six, and unknown

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 17 Conservation in eight. In the central Pyrenees, the cub class was the most vulnerable (15% of the population but 31.5 % of the mortality). Unsurprisingly, overall mean survival rate of cubs (0.8) was lower than the adult rate (0.91), and compa- rable to bear populations in Italy (Groff et al. 2013). The western nucleus always had a very low recruitment rate, with cubs comprising just 6.7% of the population. After the death of the last female, three males remained until 2010 and only two males thereafter. In 2014, the central nucleus was com- posed of 48.3% adults, 31% Trends in minimum population sizes (known animals) of the central subadults, and 20.7% cubs. and western bear subpopulations in the Pyrenees range, 1993–2014.

Age structure of the bear subpopulations over time in the Pyrenees, 1993–2014. (Central Area: filled bars; Western Area: hatched).

Genetic Aspects In 2014, with only two individuals, the western nucleus was functionally extinct. We suspected, for several decades, that the low reproductive rate of this population was related to its high genetic homozygosity. The pedigree analysis of these two individuals shows they were not closely related to the individuals of the central nucleus. One is the last individual of the Pyrenean lineage. In the central nucleus, the pedigree of most of the individuals was deduced by integrating DNA profiles and additional information from the field monitoring (e.g., field observations of cubs, date and location of collected samples). Since 1997, one male (Pyros) fathered three cubs with translocated females, in 1996 and 2006. Later, his son produced one litter (two cubs) with a Slovenian native female reintroduced in 2006. Thus, during the period 1997–2014, two males and seven strongly related females reproduced, so, 72.7% of the litters are inbred, with incestuous mating between daughter and father.

18 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conservation Population Viability Different demographic models (excluding genetic considerations) were used to evaluate the risk of extinction and the management strategies that might maintain a viable brown bear population in the Pyrenees (Chapron et al. 2003, 2009). The most recent analysis (Quenette 2010) concluded that the central nucleus is not highly threatened for the next 25 years (probability of extinction = 9%), but more threatened over the next 50 years (probability of extinction = 17%). In contrast, the western nucleus, considering the very low probability of migration of a reproducing female from the central nucleus, will likely disappear entirely during the next 15–20 years. For an extinction risk lower than 5% over 50 years, the viability models (based on 2009 population size) indicate the necessity of further augmentation, with four bears in the central Pyrenees (three females, one male) and 13 bears in the western Pyrenees (10 females, three males).

Conclusions The stagnation of the population size from 1997–2005 shows that the number of bears released in the central Pyrenees in the 1990s was insufficient to restore the population over the long term. Despite the increase of the population after the release of five bears in 2006, the status of the species in the Pyrenees remains precarious because of demographic and inbreeding risks. In 2014, its conservation status was classified as “unfavorable inadequate” in the framework of European Union’s Habitats Directive of 1992. Furthermore, without reinforcement, the western nucleus will probably be extinct by the end of the next decade, this despite local peoples’ increasingly positive attitude towards the bears there. Population monitoring should be continued, in order to improve the demographic models, improve assessments of inbreeding risks, and to track the resilience of the central subpopulation to the anticipated loss of the western nucleus. Brown bear conservation depends on the acceptance of the species by the local people. A multidisciplinary approach, including social and biological sciences, should be used in the framework of the brown bear management plan in the Pyrenees.

Acknowledgements We especially thank the ADET, ALTAIR, ANC, FDC, FERUS, FIEP, IPHB, NMP65, ONCFS, ONF, PNP, RNC, SEPANSO, the SPANISH provinces (Gobierno de Navarra, Diputacion de Aragon, Generalitat de Catalunya) and the government of Andorra for their collaboration in field investigations.

Literature Cited Chapron, G., P.Y. Quenette, S. Legendre, and J. Clobert. 2003 Which future for the French Pyrenean brown bear (Ursus arctos) population? An approach using stage–structured deterministic and stochastic models. C. R. A. Sciences, 326, 174–182. Chapron, G., R. Wielgus, P.Y. Quenette, and J.J. Camarra. 2009. Diagnosing mechanisms of decline and planning for recovery of an endangered brown bear (Ursus arctos) population. PLoS ONE, 4(10), e7568 Groff, C., N. Bragalanti, R. Rizzoli, and P. Zanghellini. 2013. 2012 Bear Report, Forestry and Wildlife Department of the Autonomous Province of Trento, 72 pp. Quenette PY, Chapron G.,and O. Gimenez. 2010. Paramètres démographiques et viabilité de la population d’ours brun des Pyrénées. Rapport interne ONCFS, 3p. Zedrosser, A., G. Rauer, and L. Kruckenhauser. 2004. Early primiparity in brown bears. Acta Theriologica, 49, 427–432.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 19 Conservation Six New Publications Advance Andean Bear Conservation and Management

Isaac Goldstein Steering Committee, Bear Specialist Group Wildlife Conservation Society Andean Bear Conservation Program Coordinator Merida, Venezuela Email: [email protected]

The Wildlife Conservation Society (WCS) Andean Bear Conservation Program and the national WCS offices in Bolivia and Colombia, in collaboration with the Andean Bear Conservation Alliance (a partnership between WCS, Cleveland Metroparks Zoo, Saint Louis Zoo and IUCN Bear Specialist Group) and other partner institutions, recently published six contributions focused on the conservation and management of the Andean bear. At the regional level, the publication “Andean Bear Priority Conservation Units in Bolivia and Peru” showcases the result of a workshop on the Conservation of the Andean Bear in Bolivia and Peru, which was held as part of the II International Symposium on Andean Bear in Lima Peru in November 2008. Under the leadership of Rob Wallace, collaborators from Bolivia and Peru (Ariel Reinaga, Teddy Siles, Jan Baiker, Isaac Goldstein, Boris Ríos-Uzeda, Russ Van Horn, Renzo Vargas, Ximena Vélez-Liendo, Luis Acosta, Viviana Albarracín, Jessica Amanzo, Paula De La Torre, Enrique Domic, Marco Enciso, Cecilia Flores, Alicia Kuroiwa, Renata Leite-Pitman, Karen Noyce, Susanna Paisley, Bader Peña, Heinz Plenge, Roxana Rojas, Vera Pinto, Trini- dad Tapia, Hector Vela) systematically collated existing distributional knowledge on the Andean bear using the Range-Wide Priority Setting Exercise developed by WCS for landscape and globally threatened species. Bolivia and Peru represent 70% of the Andean bear range, containing the largest remaining wilderness areas for the species, and the results of the workshop are key for informing the species conservation efforts across the range, particularly by identifying conservation strongholds. Available in English and Spanish the document was published in late 2014. The workshop was possible thanks to the support of the organizers of the II International Symposium on the Andean Bear, WCS, Centro de Diversidad y Genetica de la Universidad Mayor de San Simon de Bolivia, La Universidad Cayetano Heredia de Peru, and Antwerp University. At a more local level, “Strategy for the Conservation of the Andean Bear at the Machupicchu Historic Sanctuary and Choquequirao Regional Conservation Area” (Estrategia para la Conservación del Oso Andino en el Santuario Histórico de Machupicchu y el Área de Conservación Regional Choquequirao) in Peru, was published as a joint effort of the Peruvian National Protected Areas Service (SERNANP), the Regional Government of Cusco, WCS and INKATERRA. The publication presents five lines of actions and interventions including a detailed roadmap for the implementation of the strategy for the period 2014–2018. The goal is to establish an institutional framework, baseline information, management tools and local capacity to implement management, conservation and education actions to secure the Andean bear population at the Machupicchu-Choquequirao landscape. In August 2014, with the support of the Andean Bear Conservation Alliance, Inkaterra, SERNAP and the Government of Cusco, the Machupicchu Historic Sanctuary and the Choquequirao Regional Conservation Area started an Andean bear occupancy study as part of the diagnostic of the state of the Andean bear at the landscape scale. Two additional works, focusing on bear–human conflict, were published: the “Guide for the Diagnosis of the Bear–People Conflict Landscape” (Guía para el Diagnostico del Paisaje de Conflicto Oso-Gente), and its associated “Manual for the Recon- naissance and Evaluation of Predation Events on Cattle by Carnivores” (Manual de Reconocimiento y Evaluación de Eventos de Predación de Ganado por Carnívoros Silvestres). Both are the result of the collaboration of WCS as part of the Inter- institutional Table for the Management of Andean Bear–Human Conflicts lead by the Colombian Environment Ministry. The guide is a tool for the evaluation of different components of conflict risk in localities with Andean bear presence, and the selection of the best possible interventions to prevent or reduce conflict. The manual is a tool to help stakeholders identify what carnivores were involved in cattle predation events. Both publications were possible thanks to the financial support of the Mario Santo Domingo Foundation and the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation. Last but not least, our two latest publications focus on the experience and best practices with camera trapping developed by WCS Andean Bear Conservation and Research Program. The “Guide for the Use of Camera Traps: Andean Bear” (Guía para el uso de trampas cámara :oso andino) is the result of the camera trapping studies in Natural Park Chingaza. This work forms part of a series of pilot studies to monitor Andean bear populations in the National Natural Parks of Colombia, and is supported by the Andean Bear Conservation Alliance. Camera traps are quickly becoming an important research and management tool, as they enable the evaluation of bear presence and identification of individuals. However, the value of the information depends on the proper use of the tool. Detectability and probability of identification of individuals depends on where and how the cameras are set, and how the information is evaluated. The guide helps the user select the

20 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conservation best sites for camera trap stations, instructs how to place the cameras at the stations in relation to signs of bear activity and how to setup the cameras, and provides advice on how to identify bear individuals from analysis of the images. The associated publication “Working Protocols for Camera-Trapping: Andean Bear (Protocolos de trabajo para el foto-trampeo: Oso Andino)”, is the step-by-step description of all the activities related to Andean bear camera trapping. Both publications were possible thanks to the financial support of the Colombian National Park Service, the Mario Santo Domingo Foundation and the Andean Bear Conservation Alliance.

The six publications are part of the ongoing commitment to support Andean bear conservation initiatives throughout the Andean bear range from the WCS Andean Bear Program, Andean Bear Conservation Alliance and its partner institutions. For PDF copies of the publications please contact Isaac Goldstein.

1. Wallace, R.B., A. Reinaga, T. Siles, J. Baiker, I. Goldstein, B. Ríos-Uzeda, R. Van Horn, R. Vargas, X. Vélez-Liendo, L. Acosta, V. Albarracín, J. Amanzo, P. De La Torre, E. Domic, M. Enciso, C. Flores, A. Kuroiwa, R. Leite-Pitman, K. Noyce, S. Paisley, B. Peña, H. Plenge, R. Rojas Vera Pinto, T. Tapia & H. Vela. 2014. Andean Bear Priority Conservation Units in Bolivia & Peru. Wildlife Conservation Society, Centro de Biodiversidad y Genética de la Universidad Mayor de San Simón de Bolivia, Universidad Cayetano Heredia de Perú & Antwerp University. La Paz, Bolivia. 80 pp.

2. SERNANP, GOBIERNO REGIONAL DEL CUSCO, WCS, INKATERRA. 2014. Estrategia para la conservación del Oso Andino en el Santuario Histórico de Machupicchu y el Área de Conservación Regional Choquequirao (Strategy for the Conservation of the Andean Bear at the Machupicchu Historic Sanctuary and Choquequirao Regional Conservation Area). Lima Perú.

3. Márquez, R; & Goldstein, I. 2014. Guía para el diagnóstico del paisaje de conflicto oso-gente (Guide for the Diagnosis of the Bear–People Conflict Landscape). Versión 1.0. Wildlife Conservation Society Colombia. Santiago de Cali. pp. 35.

4. Márquez, R; & Goldstein, I. 2014. Manual para el reconocimiento y evaluación de eventos de depredación de ganado por carnívoros silvestres (Manual for the Reconnaissance and Evaluation of Predation Events on Cattle by Carni- vores).Versión 1.0. Wildlife Conservation Society Colombia. Santiago de Cali. pp. 35.

5. Goldstein, I., Márquez, R., & Bianchi G. 2015. Guía para el uso de trampas cámara: oso andino (Guide for the Use of Camera Traps: Andean Bear). Wildlife Conservation Society Colombia. Santiago de Cali. 44 pp.

6. Márquez, R., Bianchi, G., Gómez, C., Cifuentes, A., Melchor, A., Pérez, A., Goldstein, I. 2015. Protocolos de trabajo para el foto-trampeo: oso andino (Working Protocols for Camera-Trapping: Andean Bear). Wildlife Conservation Society. Santiago de Cali. 28 pp.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 21 Human-Bear Conflicts Conservation of the Kamchatka Brown Bear (supported by an IBA Research and Conservation grant)

Liya Pokrovskaya, PhD Vladimir V. Zhakov Research Assistant Junior scientist Laboratory of Vertebrate Behavior Pacific Institute of Geography, Kamchatka Branch Department of Biology of the Russian Academy of Sciences Lomonosov Moscow State University Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy, Russia Moscow, Russia Tel: +79247943175 Tel: +7 925 175 1657 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Ivan V. Seryodkin, PhD Head of the laboratory of Ecology and Animal Conservation, Assistant professor Pacific Institute of Geography, Far-Eastern Branch of the Russian Academy of Sciences Vladivostok, Russia Tel: +7 914 660 3880 Email: [email protected]

The density of Kamchatka brown bear (Ursus arctos piscator) is the highest throughout Eurasia. Despite the increasing anthropogenic pressure, the population is stable or tends to grow slowly. The bears on Kamchatka face escalating threats, such as illegal harvest, increased human access to bear habitat, oil and gas development, habitat loss and resource degradation (Paczkowski, 2005). The Kamchatka brown bear has been studied intensively from 2002−2005 within the framework of the monitoring project of the Wildlife Conservation Society. Although movements, habitat selection patterns, genetic structure of the population, and many behavioral attributes remain totally unstudied. In past decades, the problem of human-bear conflicts has become extremely severe on Kamchatka, frequently leading to fatality for both human and bear. The primary goals of our project are to increase human safety and decrease bear mortality by preventing bears from becoming habituated to human trash, food and settlements, and to provide critical information, based on sound science, to help guide effective wildlife conservation on Kamchatka. Our project is comprised of five main parts: 1) human-bear conflicts; 2) genetics; 3) endocrinology; 4) diet diversity; and 5) behavior. We chose five study sites within Kamchatka peninsula, varying in the environmental conditions, resource abundance and anthropogenic pressure (poaching activity, habitat degradation and remoteness). The first study site (in 2003) was located in Kronotsky Biosphere State Reserve. The second site (in 2015), Lake Azabachye is the most important sockeye salmon spawning and nursery ground within the system of the Kamchatka River and the third big- gest freshwater lake on Kamchatka peninsula. The brown bear on Azabachye Lake is protected by law, but on the adjacent territories it is actively hunted and poached throughout the year. We employed the non-invasive barbed wire hair sampling technique (Woods et al., 1999) on two study sites in late summer (July−August). Wire stations and bear marks were checked once a week during the study period. In 2015, we set 16 wire stations with ground bait, fitted 12 bear marked trees with barbwire and obtained in total 757 samples. In 2003, bear hair samples (N = 1,440) were collected from 63 baited stations in Kronotsky Reserve (Seryodkin & Paczkowski, 2006). In the near future, we will start the laboratory analysis of bear hairs. Genetic analysis will be performed to identify individuals, determine gender, to conduct minimal population assessment, and to evaluate the population structure. We will study the diet of bears by measur- ing ratios of nitrogen and carbon stable isotopes. We will also collect tissues of The location of two study sites on the map of the Kamchatka peninsula.

22 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Human-Bear Conflicts

(left) Bear hair on a barbwire fitted on a mark tree. (center) A large male bear rubbing on a mark tree (Betula ermanii) with a barbwire. (right) Hair collecting station with a ground bait. salmon, herbs and berries consumed by bears, to calculate their stable isotope signatures, standard deviations, and fraction rates on Kamchatka. To examine the chronic endocrine effects of a salmon niche, we will compare cortisol, progesterone, and testosterone levels in hair of salmon-eating bears and those lacking access to salmon. We set a remote camera trap in front of two bear marked trees on Kamchatka River and Azabachye Lake (for six and 15 days, respectively). The photos (N = 103 and N = 2,114) were analyzed by the following parameters: the bear’s sex, size and individuality (if possible), duration and time of a bear visit, olfactory investigation and marking behavior and interval between bear visits. We plan to develop the methods of individual identification and relative population density assessment via monitoring of marking activity. The Agency of Forestry and Wildlife Conservation of Kamchatka provided upon request a hardcopy database containing the information on human-bear conflicts from 1971–2015. During the past 30 years, the socioeconomic situation in Russia has changed dramatically, leading to variations in the wildlife management and regulatory system. Unfortunately, there is no unique method for recording conflict, therefore the reliability of these data is not very high. It is quite difficult to draw valid conclusions and propose management recommendations benefiting the conservation of the species. These methodological limitations will be considered in data analysis. Based on the literature (Gordienko, 2012; Paczkowski, Seryodkin, & Voropanov, 2006), interviews with local people and with the heads of the Wildlife Agency, and based on the preliminary analysis of the conflict database, here we summarize the most evident causes for the rise in conflicts during the past decades: growing numbers of anthropogenic attractors; decrease in fish resources; increasing numbers of tourists and photographers in bear habitat; disregard of the conflict-preventing rules by local people; and displacement of bears from their natural habitat. We hope to continue our fieldwork next year in other regions of Kamchatka. These future expeditions will involve hair- sampling, camera trapping on mark trees, free-darting capture and satellite monitoring and collecting data on human-bear conflicts. Acknowledgements The work was supported by the IBA Research and Conservation grant, Homer’s Bear Conservation Fund, and Alertis Fund.

Literature Cited Gordienko, T. A. (2012). Kamchatka brown bear: ecology, behaviour, population management [in Russian]. Kamchatka State Technical University, Russia. Paczkowski, J. (2005). Developing a reliable monitoring system for the brown bears of Kamchatka: conclusions and recommendations. International Bear News, 14, 15–17. Paczkowski, J., Seryodkin, I. V., & Voropanov, V. Y. (2006). Conflict situations between humans and brown bears in Kamchatka. In Conservation of biodiversity in Kamchatka and adjacent seas (pp. 240–243). Petropav- lovsk-Kamchatsky, Russia: Kamchatpress. Seryodkin, I. V., & Paczkowski, J. (2006). A programm to study and conserve the brown bear of Kamchatka. In Bears of Russia and adjacent countries: population state, human-bear system, managements (pp. 116–120). Krasnogorsk, Russia: Delovoy mir. Woods, J. G., Paetkau, D., Lewis, D., McLellan, B. N., Proctor, M., & Strobeck, C. (1999). Genetic tagging of free-ranging black and brown bears. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 27(3), 616–627.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 23 Biological Research Unmanned Aerial Vehicle Applications for Bear Research (supported by an IBA Research and Conservation grant)

Mark A. Ditmer John B. Vincent Department of Fisheries, Wildlife & Conservation Biology School of Environmental and Forest Sciences 135 Skok Hall, 2003 Upper Buford Circle Box 354115 University of Minnesota University of Washington St. Paul, Minnesota, USA 55108 Seattle, Washington, USA 98195 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

The use of unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs; i.e. “drones”) is revolutionizing many fields of natural science, including ecology, wildlife biology and conservation. UAVs are capable of collecting vast amounts of data via (typically) interchange- able sensors (e.g. video, thermal imagery). The appeal of UAVs extends beyond data quality and quantity, as information is gathered at greatly reduced cost and risk of physical harm relative to traditional aerial methods. Although this technology and possible applications are nascent, current projects are using UAVs for animal population estimation (Ratcliffe et al. 2015), tracking fine spatial and temporal changes in phenology and habitats (Shahbazi et al. 2014, van Andel et al. 2015), and to deter poaching (Mulero-Pázmány 2014). In 2014 we received an IBA Research and Conservation grant to investigate two questions: (1) can we use UAVs to collect behavioral data on American black bears that is uninfluenced by the observer; and (2) what are the impacts of UAV flights above or near wildlife in terms of behavior (as measured by a GPS collar) or stress (as measured by cardiac biologgers implanted under the bears’ skin; Medtronic, Reveal XT Model 9529)? To answer these questions we used GPS-collars and biologgers already deployed on a population of bears in northwestern Minnesota along with a small quadcopter UAV (3D Robotics). We found that a relatively inexpensive UAV (ca. $900 USD) did not have the ability (due to battery limitation) to fly to the location of a collared bear (typically ca. 200 m from the launch location), and record behavior for an extended period. Additionally, for most species and habitats, the height at which a UAV must be flown to gather observations of behavior results in poor image quality (with current and affordable camera technology). In the future, as UAVs become lighter, battery power increases, and imagery improves, using UAVs to collect behavioral data may be possible in areas with limited vegeta- tive obstructions. In regards to our second question, we found that UAV flights consistently resulted in large increases in bear heart rates (beats per minute, bpm). These observations of increased heart rate included a bear denned for hibernation (Figure 1) and one instance of an increase from 41 bpm prior to the UAV flight to 162 bpm when the UAV was above a free ranging bear. Our unique ability to detect these acute stress responses was only possible because the bears we studied had implanted cardiac biologgers. Had we analyzed movement only, we would have concluded that bears only rarely respond to UAV flights (in only two of 18 flights did bears increase movement rates or displace from their location). Our findings highlight the need for caution when using UAVs and more research to develop the best scientific practices for UAV use near wildlife. We published the results of our study (Ditmer et al. 2015) in August 2015 to great interest from both the scientific community and popular press. Despite the current limitations of UAVs for wildlife research (at least for off-the shelf affordable models) and their potential to stress wildlife, they have many great research applications. Currently, we know of bear researchers using UAVs to obtain data that would not previously have been possible. One such scientist is Lorraine Scotson, a Ph.D. candidate at the University of Min- nesota. Lorraine is planning to use a UAV (Phantom 2, ca. $500 on Amazon) to measure the amount of damage caused by crop raiding sun bears and Asiatic black bears in Nam Et Phou Louey National Protected Area in northeast Lao PDR. Determining the total damaged area within a field is difficult from the ground, due in part to unreliable estimates from farmers, and difficulty of L. Scotson. on-the-ground measurements of damage that occurs in sporadic Initial attempts to photograph bear damage to sweet corn fields in Laos, PDR by Lorraine Scotson using a GoPro attached patches throughout fields in mountainous terrain. She is choos- to a helium balloon. Due to the high price and difficulties ing this technology in lieu of a camera suspended by a helium sourcing helium, the method was abandoned. Scotson now balloon, which was tested but deemed unfeasible due to the dif- plans to use a drone with a GoPro to quantify damage.

24 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Biological Research ficulty and expense of obtaining helium (photo, previous page). Scotson believes the use of UAVs to take aerial photographs of crop fields could offer a simple means of accurately quantify- ing the true amount of damage to each field. Determining the scale of the damage from bears is an important conservation management tool as sun bears and Asiatic black bears, classified as Vulner- able by the IUCN Red List, are sometimes killed in retribution for crop damage. Developing a quick, inexpensive, and Figure 1. Heart rate data, in 2-min intervals, collected using a subcutaneous cardiac biologger from a hibernat- accurate method ing adult female American black bear in northwestern Minnesota, USA. The blue boxes represent the time when for assessing the the UAV was in flight. The first flight did not result in a large cardiac response from the bear but the second damage will help resulted in an increase in beats per minute from 17 to 75. Full results can be found in Ditmer et al. 2015. determine whether managers should devote more resources to monitoring crop-raiding, assisting in conflict mitigation and raising public awareness on the protection status of bears. UAVs will become a powerful tool in most bear researchers’ toolboxes in the near future. However, given the current technological limitations, regulations (see Vincent et al. 2015 for U.S.A), and need for further research into the best scientific practices to limit or eliminate deleterious effects on nearby wildlife, use of UAVs in research is still in its infancy.

Literature Cited Ditmer, M. A., Vincent, J. B., Werden, L. K., Tanner, J. C., Laske, T. G., Iaizzo, P. A., Garshelis, D. L., and Fieberg, J. R. 2015. Bears show a physiological but limited behavioral response to unmanned aerial vehicles. Current Biology, 25, no. 17 (August 31, 2015): 2278–83. doi:10.1016/j.cub.2015.07.024. Mulero-Pázmány, M., Stolper, R., van Essen, L.D., Negro, J.J., Sassen, T. 2014. Remotely piloted aircraft systems as a rhinoc- eros anti-poaching tool in Africa. PLoS ONE, 9, e83873 Ratcliffe, N., Guihen, D., Robst, J., Crofts, S., Stanworth, A., Enderlein, P. 2015. A protocol for the aerial survey of penguin colonies using UAVs. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems http://dx.doi.org/10.1139/juvs-2015-0006 (accessed March 31, 2015) Shahbazi, M., J. Théau, and P. Ménard. 2014. Recent applications of unmanned aerial imagery in natural resource management. GIScience and Remote Sensing, 51, 339–365. van Andel, A. C., Wich, S. A., Boesch, C., Koh, L. P., Robbins, M. M., Kelly, J., and Kuehl, H. S. 2015. Locating chimpanzee nests and identifying fruiting trees with an unmanned aerial vehicle. American Journal of Primatol- ogy, n/a – n/a. doi:10.1002/ajp.22446. Vincent, J.B., Leland K.W., and Ditmer, M.A. 2015. Barriers to adding UAVs to the ecologist’s toolbox. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment ,13(2), 74–75. doi:10.1890/15.WB.002. Whitehead, K., and C. H. Hugenholtz. 2014. Remote sensing of the environment with small unmanned aircraft systems (UASs), part 1: a review of progress and challenges. Journal of Unmanned Vehicle Systems, 2, 69–85.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 25 Biological Research Brown Bear Marking Behavior in Northwestern Slovakia

Veronika Rijáková Comenius University in Bratislava Email: [email protected]

The brown bear population residing in the Slovak Carpathians is estimated to be about 700-800 individuals, which means that this is the most abundant large carnivore in Slovakia. So far very little vigorous research has been done in Slovakia and therefore relatively little is known about Slovakia’s bears, so the background for their conservation on a scientific basis is missing. Thus far the attention has been paid to the genetics and issues of movements and home ranges. The olfactory communication and marking behavior has not been systematically studied yet. In relation to this absence of knowledge in the area, I focused on brown bear marking behavior within the scope of my master’s thesis. The main objectives of the thesis were: (1) to contribute to the research of brown bears in Slovakia; and (2) to enhance general knowledge in the field of olfactory communication and marking behavior of brown bears through research on the West Rijáková Veronika Study area – environment within the National Park Malá Fatra. Carpathian population in Slovakia. For this purpose, we sought to study whether there are differences in scent marking and scent investigating patterns of particular age-sex classes of bears across seasons. The field research was carried out in the Malá Fatra National Park and in its buffer zone, located in the northwestern part of Slovakia and covering a total area of 458.9 km2. Owing to the dissected terrain, wide elevation range (358-1,709 m a.s.l.) and different extent of human activity, there is high habitat diversity. The predominating type of vegetation in the national park is the temperate mixed forest with beech (Fagus sylvatica), spruce (Picea abies) and fir (Abies alba) as the most abundant tree species. Although the national park is a protected area, some parts are influenced by human activity, in particular by tourism, forestry and hunting management. The buffer zone environment is a mosaic of forest and canopy stands, human settlements and intensively used or abandoned agricultural lands. To monitor the behavior of bears I deployed single camera traps facing bear marking trees in seven different sites across the study area. The trees were monitored during two periods – from the beginning of April 2014 to November 2014 and from mid-April 2015 to the end of June 2015. The general approach to data elaboration and assessment was based on the study of Clapham et al. (2014). The captured individuals were classified within the six following age-sex classes: “Male”, “Female(?)”, “Female with COY”, “Female with yearlings”, “Subadult” and “Unknown”. Class Female(?) included surely recognized lone adult females and also individuals according to body size and shape considered to be more likely females. The recorded behavior of bears, including some interest in the tree, was classified as follows: “ground sniffing”, “tree sniffing”, “rubbing”, “biting” and “clawing”. For some analyses, the categories ground sniffing and tree sniffing were pooled into the category “investigating”, as well as categories rubbing, biting and clawing into the category “marking”. For further analyses, we used Mann-Whitney tests and Principal component analysis (PCA). Comparisons were made of time investment into investigation and marking activities between age-sex classes, and also time investment within particular classes between mating and non-mating seasons. A total of 1,733.7 camera trap days yielded 276 independent events, of which 221 included investigating and/or marking behavior. In general, the investigation and marking patterns and investment varied by age-sex classes within and between the mating and non-mating seasons. During the mating season a significant difference both in investigating and marking behavior was found between Males and Females(?), which is consistent with the results of the study from British Columbia (Clapham et al. 2014). Whereas Males devoted more time to marking, Females(?) spent more time investigating. There was also a significant difference in investigation of Females(?) and Females with COY during the mating season. Females(?) spent more time investigating, while Females with COY devoted more time to marking. Moreover, Females with COY were together with Males, the only two classes in which clawing and biting were associated during the mating season. However, Clapham et al. (2012, 2014) found no marking activity of Females with COY during the mating season and, on

26 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Biological Research

Male investigating one of the monitored trees. Female with COY marking during the mating season.

the contrary, increased presence and marking outside season. They suggest that this can be a strategy for Females with COY to avoid infanticide, which is prevalent in the mating season and that females engage the cubs with marking trees at a relatively “safe” time of year. Females with COY marking during the mating season were recorded in two sites. The first one was frequently visited by at least three different Females with COY and at least two different adult males. A possible explanation is that these females had previously mated with both (or possibly more) of these geographically closest males as a counterstrategy to infanticide (Hardy 1979, Bellemain et al. 2006). In the second site where Females with COY were captured, there was only one record of a Male, at the end of non-mating season. Therefore, seemingly this area was of low infanticide risk. This indicates that Females with COY that are not forced to postpone engaging the cubs with marking due to the infanticide risk, provide the cubs with this experience as soon as possible. This supports the hypothesis proposed by Clapham et al. (2012) that experience and learning of marking trees may be required early on in life due to importance of olfactory capabili- ties for bears. Comparison of the behavior within the classes between the seasons revealed an alteration in marking behavior of Males. This class spent significantly more time marking in mating season. Additionally, during the non-mating season no biting or clawing was observed. This thesis presents the first systematic investigation from the field of brown bear olfactory communication and marking behavior in Slovakia.

Acknowledgements I would like to express my special thanks to Prof. Djuro Huber for his willingness and help and to the opponent of my thesis Dr. Alexandros A. Karamanlidis for thesis evaluation and valuable comments.

Literature cited Bellemain, E., Zedrosser, A., Manel, S., Waits, L., Taberlet, P., Swenson, J. E. (2006). The dilemma of female mate selection in the brown bear, a species with sexually selected infanticide. Proceedings of The Royal Society B, 273, 283-291. Clapham, M., Nevin, O. T., Ramsey, A. D., Rosell, F. 2012. A hypothetico-deductive approach to assessing the social function of chemical signalling in a non-territorial solitary carnivore. PLoS One 7(4), e35404. Clapham, M., Nevin, O. T., Ramsey, A. D., Rosell, F. 2014. Scent-marking investment and motor patterns are affected by the age and sex of wild brown bears. Animal Behaviour 94, 107-116. Hrdy, S. B. 1979. Infanticide among animals: a review, classification, and examination of the implications for the reproductive strategies of females. Ethology and Sociobiology, 1, 13-40.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 27 Biological Research Habitat Modeling to Detect Corridors for Sloth Bears in Gujarat, India

Helly Joshi Nishith Dharaiya Wildlife and Conservation Biology Research Lab, Co-chair Sloth Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group Department of Life Sciences, Department of Life Sciences, HNG University, Patan (Gujarat) India – 384265 HNG University, Patan (Gujarat) India – 384265 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

C.P. Singh Space Application Center Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) Ahmedabad (Gujarat) India Email:[email protected]

Confirming the distribution of species with a restricted range is of great importance for species conservation, especially when the species is at risk from habitat loss and fragmentation. One prime example is Gujarat, India’s western-most state, and the western-most edge of the distribution of sloth bears. In Gujarat the sloth bear population is patchily distributed along the eastern edge of the state, from the foothills of Arawali Mountain ranges in Banaskantha district in the north, to the Narmada district in the south. This distribution includes several protected and unprotected forests (Dharaiya and Goyal 2012). These forests are fragmented and in patches, which restricted movement and population exchange of sloth bears and other wildlife. Our goal was to identify corridors that might enable sloth bear movement and population exchange among habitat patches. The potential corridors were identified by LISS IV (Resourcesat-1) satellite images, through image classification for different land use/land covers (LU/LC) such as, agriculture, water bodies, transportation (highways and railways), settlements, forest covers, etc. We used three algorithms as a first step to better understand the potential sloth bear habitats in the state (Singh et al. 2015). The known locations of species presence through sign surveys (Mewada 2010) were used as occurrence records. Additional field investigations were carried out in 2015, and presence was recorded with GPS coordinates for sloth bear signs such as scat, tracks, claw marks on trees, and excavated termite mounds (Maria 2014). The 19 bioclimatic indices and elevation layer at 1-km spatial resolution from Wordclim (http://www.worldclim.org/) with WGS-84 coordinate system were used for training environmental niche models with the pooled presence records. The LU/LC data were also used for decision making in a GIS domain. These bioclimatic indices represent trends in mean annual temperature, annual precipitation, seasonality and extreme or limiting environmental factors such as temperature of the coldest and warmest months and precipitation per quarter (e.g., de Queiroz et al. 2013). We selected those variables that seemed biologically most relevant to sloth bear presence, and with our presence points created a model (using OpenModeller®) to distinguish potential suitable habitat for this species. We trained three different environmental niche models (Bioclim, Climate Space Model and Envelope Score). The models with the highest AUC (Area Under the Curve) and ROC (Receiver Operating Characteristic) were considered for the final assessment. An AUC equal to 1.0 represents an ideal diagnostic test because it achieves both 100% sensitivity and 100% specificity (e.g., Jiping et al. 2011) Sloth bear occurrence locations were considered to represent the envelope of “suitable” conditions. The model classified grid cells as being totally unsuitable (0) to highly suitable (1). The distribution of climatic conditions at presence points determined suitable scores, and the range of conditions in each grid cell compared against these suitable scores yielded a probability of occurrence. The different models depicted sloth bear range quite differently (see figure panels, next page), with different levels of connectivity. Visually it appears that Bioclim, with an AUC value of 0.95, provided a projected distribution that appears most similar to what we have observed on the ground. The Climate Space Model, which employs the Broken-Stick cut-off method to select variables, had an AUC of only 0.86 and omitted some areas of known presence. The Envelope Score Model had a high AUC value (0.95) but covered an area much larger than the known sloth bear distribution. Hence, we considered Bioclim as the most realistic model so far. We plan to conduct further ground surveys at projected presence sites shown in the Bioclim model to identify potential corridors. We will also conduct habitat surveys in these areas.

Acknowledgements We are thankful to the Indian Space Research Organization (ISRO) Government of India for the financial support and research fellowship to Ms. H. Joshi. We are also thankful to Chief Wildlife Warden of Gujarat state for permission to carry out

28 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Biological Research

Forest layer overlay and sloth bear presence locations in Gujarat state (India) compared to predictions from 3 different models. The Bioclim model results (upper right panel) best match the known distribution. field work, and the forest field staff for necessary logistics. Thanks also to Head, Department of Life Sciences, HNG University for extending lab facilities.

Literature Cited Dharaiya, N. and S. K. Goyal. 2012. Bear conservation action plan Gujarat. Pages 131–136 in S. Sathyakumar, R. Kaul, NVK Ashraf, A. Mookerjee, and V. Menon, editors. National Bear Conservation and Welfare Action Plan 2012. Ministry of Environment and Forests, Government of India. Jiping, Z., Z. Yili, L. I. U. Linshan, and N. I. E. Yong. 2011. Predicting potential distribution of Tibetan spruce (Picea smi- thiana) in Qomolangma (Mount Everest) National Nature Preserve using maximum entropy Niche-based model. Chinese Geographic Science, 21(4), 417–426. Maria, A. 2014. Effect of change in land use and land cover on elephant habitat and corridor in Lower Shivaliks area of Uttarakhand. Ph.D. Thesis, University of Twente. Mewada,T. 2010. Ecological studies on sloth bear (Melurus ursinus) with special reference to human-bear conflicts in selected sloth bear habitat of North Gujarat. Ph.D. Thesis, HNG University. de Queiroz, D. L., J. Majer, D. Burckhardt, R. Zanetti, J.I.R. Fernandez, E.C. de Queiroz, M. Garrastazu, B.V. Fernandes, and N. dos Anjos. 2013. Predicting the geographical distribution of Glycaspis brimblecombei (Hemiptera: Psylloidea) in Brazil. Australian Journal of Entomology, 52, 20 –30. doi: 10.1111/ aen.12001 Singh,C.P., J.S. Chauhan, J.S. Parihar, R.P. Singh, and R. Shukla. 2015. Using environmental niche modeling to find suitable habitats for the Hard-ground Barasingha in Madhya Pradesh, India. Journal of Threatened Taxa, 7, 7761–7769.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 29 Biological Research Genetic Study Shows that Sloth Bears Utilize Forest Corridors in Fragmented Landscape in Central India

Trishna Dutta Sloth Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group Columbia University, New York, NY 10027 and The Nature Conservancy, Arlington, VA 22203 Email: [email protected]

Sandeep Sharma Sloth Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, Washington DC 22630 Email: [email protected]

The Central Indian Landscape is highly fragmented — a mere vestige of a once-grand forest, filled with wildlife. Today, there is much effort directed toward saving tigers in this landscape, an iconic species whose protection should serve as an umbrella for other forest-dwelling species (Seidensticker 2015). In our study (Dutta et al. 2015a), we sought to understand whether sloth bears are able to move between habitat patches through narrow forest corridors. We investigated four focal populations: Kanha, Pench, Satpura, and Melghat tiger reserves across two states in central India.

Map of study landscape in central India. Park boundaries are shown in orange; blue dots are locations of sloth bear samples. Identifying individual sloth bears is difficult. They do not have unique coat patterns like tigers or leopards, which prevents identification of individuals from camera-trap photos. Instead, we used DNA from feces and hair to distinguish individuals (Sharma et al 2013a). Our team collected 190 sloth bear fecal samples, and 4 hair samples from trees where sloth bears may have climbed or rubbed. Out of these, we found 15 samples in the corridor between Kanha and Pench tiger reserves, indicating that bears do indeed use this corridor. From the pool of 194 samples, we identified 55 individual sloth bears. When compared across studies on different bear species in the world, sloth bears in this landscape had moderate levels of genetic diversity. Greater genetic diversity helps a species cope with changes in climate, disease outbreaks, and other environmental fluctuations, so more is better. The genetic analysis indicated that there were two populations in this landscape: Kanha and Pench formed one genetic population, and Satpura and Melghat formed another. About 20% of the sampled individuals showed signatures of genetic mixing (i.e. they had some portion of both these genetic populations). This shows that individuals are breeding in areas that they are moving to, effectively dispersing their genes. Further, five individuals were assigned to a population other than where their samples were found, showing that sloth bears are successfully moving from one park to another. DNA-based data can also help understand patterns and rates of movement over

30 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Biological Research Sandeep Sharma & Trishna Dutta Trishna Sandeep Sharma & Dutta Trishna Sandeep Sharma & Sloth bear observed in Satpura Tiger Reserve, India, DNA from sloth bear scats was used to discern movements while conducting fieldwork in 2010. within the fragmented landscape of central India. time. Over the past few generations, rates of migration were highest from Melghat to Satpura and lowest from Pench to Melghat. Satpura and Melghat have a corridor, while Pench and Melghat do not have a good forest connecting them. Our findings support previous research on other carnivore species: tigers (Sharma et al. 2013b, c) and leopards (Dutta et al. 2013a, b) in the same landscape. The bottom line is that corridors in this landscape are functional, and are being used by many different species. The protection of these corridors competes with energy and infrastructure development such as roads, railway lines, and coal mines (Dutta et al. 2015b). Urbanization, development and economic growth are essential, but it is important to plan these so they minimally impact the survival of wild species.

Literature Cited Dutta, T., S. Sharma, J. E. Maldonado, H. S. Panwar, T. C Wood, and J. Seidensticker. 2013a. Fine-scale population genetic structure in a wide-ranging carnivore, the leopard (Panthera pardus fusca) in central India. Diversity and Distribu- tions 19:760 –771. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12024 Dutta, T., S. Sharma, J. E. Maldonado, H. S. Panwar, T. C Wood, and J. Seidensticker. 2013b. Gene flow and demographic history of leopards (Panthera pardus) in the central Indian highlands. Evolutionary Applications 6:949–959. doi: doi: 10.1111/eva.12078/full Dutta, T., S. Sharma, J. E. Maldonado, H. S. Panwar, and J. Seidensticker. 2015a. Genetic variation, structure, and gene flow in a sloth bear (Melursus ursinus) meta-population in the Satpura-Maikal Landscape of Central India. PLoS ONE 10(5): e0123384. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0123384 Dutta, T., Sharma, S., McRae, B., Roy, P.S., and R. DeFries. 2015b. Connecting the dots: mapping habitat connectivity for tigers in central India. Regional Environmental Change. doi:10.1007/s10113-015-0877-z Seidensticker, J. 2015. Biodiversity resilience in the Central Indian Highlands is contingent on maintaining and recovering landscape connectivity: the tiger as a case study. Regional Environmental Change. doi: 10.1007/s10113-015-0846-6. Sharma, S., T. Dutta, J. E. Maldonado, H. S. Panwar, T. C Wood, and J. Seidensticker. 2013a. Selection of microsatellite loci for genetic monitoring of sloth bears. Ursus 24:164–169. Sharma, S., T. Dutta, J. E. Maldonado, H. S. Panwar, T. C Wood, and J. Seidensticker. 2013b. Spatial genetic analysis reveals high connectivity of tiger (Panthera tigris) populations in the Satpura–Maikal landscape of Central India. Ecology and Evolution 3:48–60. doi: 10.1002/ece3.432 Sharma, S., T. Dutta, J. E. Maldonado, H. S. Panwar, T. C Wood, and J. Seidensticker. 2013c. Forest corridors maintain historical gene flow in a tiger metapopulation in the highlands of central India. Proceedings of the Royal Society: B Biological Science 280:20131506. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2013.1506

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 31 Biological Research Identifying Bears Using Non-Invasive Methods - The Bears of Bute

Lana M. Ciarniello Homalco Wildlife Tours Inc. Aklak Wildlife Consulting British Columbia, Canada Email: [email protected] http://thebearsofbute.com/

Commercial bear viewing on the west coast of British Columbia (BC), Canada is becoming increasingly popular, drawing visitors from around the globe. Bear viewing provides opportunities for people to view bears feeding on fish and interacting with one another. Off the west coast of BC the Homalco Nation has territorial land in Orford Sound within Bute Inlet (http://thebearsofbute.com/). Spanning only ca. 8 km2 the territory boasts prolific runs of spawning salmon (Oncorhynchus keta, O. gorbuscha). Commercial bear viewing on the Orford

River began in 2002 and over the last few years it has become Nation L. Ciarniello and the Holmaco one of the major economic drivers for the Homalco Nation. A mother and her two, two to three year old cubs, The Homalco Nation want to know more about the grizzly sleeping in a day bed after filling up on salmon. bears using the Orford River; they want to know how the bears are using their territory, how many bears there are, and the family relationship of the bears. Any research or inventory program needs to be non-invasive; capture and handling of bears is not permitted nor are any visible or invasive techniques (e.g., colour marking or biopsy darts). Due to these restrictions we are using motion sensitive cameras paired with barbed wire stations at rub trees and along bear trails. The valley appears to have distinct seasons of use by black bears and grizzly bears, as has been found elsewhere in coastal BC. Visits to the Orford River since June 2015 have found that grizzly bears did not begin frequenting the Orford and Algard Rivers until mid-August. During spring and early summer the area was favoured by black bears, however, black bears have not been observed by cameras or by observation since July. Since mid-August, over 30 individual grizzly bears ranging from cubs of the year to large adult males have been identified along the rivers by their individual characteristics. The identification of individual grizzly bears is tricky because distinct colouration or markings are rare. Repeat observations, behaviour, and grouping of bears by cohort allow for identification of individuals and family groups. Over 350 DNA samples have been collected with more to come before the bears leave the area to den. Camera images are being used to assign DNA samples to individual bears and the number of bears will be confirmed through DNA. The project also trains Homalco Nation tour guides on research techniques and would not be possible without their valued support. Members of the Homalco First Nation will be attending the 24th International Conference on Bear Research and Management in Fairbanks, Alaska in 2016. The general theme of the conference is “Bears of the World: Learning from our Past to Inform our Future,” and there is a session on bear viewing. Please keep posted - we hope to showcase a poster on our preliminary “Bears of Bute” study results. L. Ciarniello and the Holmaco Nation L. Ciarniello and the Holmaco Nation L. Ciarniello and the Holmaco Identifiable by his very large size and dark coat colour, Tee- Identifiable by his Black Boots, Puth Cumputs, which is Coast Moot (Coast Salish for Mr. Big), is one of two very large male Salish for “Black Boots”, is a young subadult male bear that bears identified to date to use the Orford Sound. frequents the salmon runs.

32 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Biological Research Analysis Underway for Population Dynamics of the Brown Bear in the Italian Central Alps

Claudio Groff European Brown Bear Expert Team, Bear Specialist Group Provincia Autonoma di Trento – Servizio Foreste e Fauna Via Trener 3 – 38123 Trento (Italy) Tel. +39 0461 494961 Email: [email protected]

Simone Tenan Museo delle Scienze di Trento Corso del Lavoro e della Scienza n. 3 – 38122 Trento (Italy) Tel. +39 0461 270329 Tmail: [email protected]

Paolo Pedrini Museo delle Scienze di Trento Corso del Lavoro e della Scienza n. 3 – 38122 Trento (Italy) Tel. +39 0461 270310 Email: [email protected]

In 2014, a collaboration was formed between the Autonomous Province of Trento (Italy) and the Vertebrate Zoology Department of the Science Museum of Trento – MUSE in order to quantitatively investigate the dynamics of the brown bear population in the central Alps. This population has been growing steadily since the reintroduction of 10 bears in 1999–2002 (Groff and Bragalanti 2015). Our goals were to: (1) explore the different datasets available; (2) estimate population density in 2013; and (3) determine whether the existing data sets would yield reliable estimates of the dynamics of population size and related demographic rates. For density estimation we used data from systematic sampling an array of 100 hair traps, spaced at an average of 1,700 m apart, to genetically identify a sample of individual bears. The data were gathered over the course of five sessions, from 28 May to 31 July 2013. We identified 24 individuals: 14 females and 10 males. The analysis did not include cubs in order not to violate the assumption of sample independence, although recent research suggests that the violation of this assumption has little influence on the estimation of parameters (Reich et al. 2014). We used spatial capture-recapture models to estimate density (Borchers et al. 2006, Borchers and Efford 2008, Royle et al. 2014). The models we considered included sex-specific density, detectability, and space usage parameters. In addition to sex, we also tested for an effect of elevation on density. Models were fitted using a resolution of 500 m and a buffer of 20 km around the trap array. The best model included sex-specific density and no substantial effect of elevation. Average density was estimated to be 1.31 females/100 km2 (95% CI 0.61–2.81) and 0.28 males/100 km2 (0.12-0.66). The highly skewed sex ratio resulted from vast differences in estimated average home range sizes: 173.5 km2 for females, 2,072 km2 for males. Male home range size may have been affected by the presence of transients. Further analyses are needed to explore potential sources of bias. In addition, an integrated analysis of the different datasets available for the brown bear population in Trentino, from 2002–2013, is currently underway. We will use integrated population models (Schaub et al. 2007, Schaub and Abadi 2011, Tenan et al. 2012) to combine different sources of information and improve precision associated with the estimate of demographic rates. In particular, we will assess the demographic effects of natural and human-induced mortality. The research is conducted in collaboration with the Population Ecology Group of IMEDEA (CSIC-UIB, Spain).

Literature Cited Borchers, D.L., J.L. Laake, C. Southwell, and C.G.M. Paxton. 2006 Accommodating unmodeled heterogeneity in double- observer distance sampling surveys. Biometrics, 62,372–378. Borchers, D.L. and M. Efford. 2008 Spatially explicit maximum likelihood methods for capture–recapture studies. Biometrics, 64, 377–385. Groff, C., and N. Bragalanti. 2015. Status of the brown bear population in the Central Alps (Trentino, Italy), 2014. Interna-

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 33 Biological Research tional Bear News, 24(2), 26-27. Reich, B. and B. Gardner. 2014 A spatial capture-recapture model for territorial. Environmetrics, 25, 630–637. Royle, J.A., R.B. Chandler, R. Sollmann, and B. Gardner. 2014 Spatial Capture-Recapture. Academic Press, Waltham, MA. Schaub, M. and F. Abadi. 2011. Integrated population models: a novel analysis framework for deeper insights into population dynamics. Journal of Ornithology, 152, 227–237. Schaub, M., O. Gimene, A. Sierro, and R. Arlettaz. 2007 Use of integrated modeling to enhance estimates of population dynamics obtained from limited data. Conservation Biology, 21, 945–955. Tenan, S., J. Adrover, A.M. Navarro, F. Sergio, and G. Tavecchia. 2012 Demographic consequences of poison-related mortality in a threatened bird of prey. PloS ONE, E 7(11), e49187. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0049187 Manager’s Corner Burned Bear Rescued, Rehabilitated, and Released in Washington

Rich Beausoleil Bear & Cougar Specialist Karelian Bear Dog Handler (Cash & Indy) Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife 3515 State Highway 97A Wenatchee, WA 98801 Email: [email protected]

On the evening of July 31, 2014 in the middle of the largest wildfire in Washington State’s history, the Carlton-Complex fire, a malnourished and dehydrated 1.5 year old female bear weigh- ing 34 lbs crawled into a landowner’s yard in Methow, WA and ultimately into history. The bear’s feet were so badly burned that it was traveling on its knees and elbows; it also had numerous burns to its face, neck, chest, and legs. The landowner called Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) and stated that the bear had hobbled through the scorched landscape and ash several inches thick and seemed unwilling to move. The following morning Wildlife Officer Jason Day responded, hand captured the bear and placed it in a culvert trap lined with hay. Before leaving, the landowner stated that he had nicknamed the bear “Cinder”. The bear was transported to me in Wenatchee, WA and together we immobilized her, placed her in a wash basin and cleaned the Cinder the female black bear after being rescued and from wounds, assessed her injures, applied burn cream, and wrapped the Carlton Complex Fire in Washington in July 2014. her paws with bandages (right). She was then transported to a temperature controlled facility until a decision could be made. The landowner shared his story with other victims of the fire, the already present media immediately was publicizing it, and the story was spreading almost as fast as the fire. On August 2, with the bear eating well, recovery seemed possible so I reached out for assistance and advice. My first call was to Sally Maughan at Idaho Black Bear Rehabilitation (IBBR) in Garden City, Idaho as we have collaborated on dozens of bears together. She recommended Lake Tahoe Wildlife Care (LTWC) as they had experience in this arena and provided burn care for a bear nicknamed “Lil Smokey” from California. I also contacted my local veterinarian Dr. Randy Hein of Eastmont Animal Clinic, and asked if he had access to Clavamax (50mg/ml) and Metacam (1.5mg/ml). He stated he did and kindly donated a prescription. In the meantime, Sally called Tom and Cheryl Millham at LTWC and asked if they could help and they immediately said yes. On August 3, the bear was brought to Dr. Hein’s office. We immobilized her and shaved all injured/burned areas, did extensive debriding, and treated and bandaged all the wounds. I spent the rest of the day coordinating with Dr. Hein, IBBR and LTWC on our plans. Concurrently, folks affiliated with LTWC posted a bulletin on the “Pilots for Paws” website asking if any private pilots were willing to transport the bear. Bill Inman from Seattle responded and said he would be glad to help.

34 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Manager’s Corner On August 4, I met Bill at Pangborn Field in Wenatchee at 6:30 AM. We loaded the bear into his plane; he had removed his passenger seat to accommodate the transport crate (right). He transported the bear 780 miles and they arrived safely at 10:45 AM. Staff at LTWC treated Cinder daily for months, then gradually to weekly, and ultimately the bandages were removed. Cinder remained at LTWC through Nov 30, 2014. She was then transferred to IBBR on Dec 1, 2014 and remained there through June 2, 2015 (she denned up for about 6 weeks). On June 2, 2015 after 306 days in rehabilitation facilities, Cinder was transported back to Washington. She was marked and outfit- ted with a GPS radiocollar that received 4-5 locations/day so we could monitor her post-release. The collar was attached with a cotton spacer, so if the collar fails the spacer will rot and the collar will fall off in about 2 years. She was released back into the wild on A Photo of Bill Inman, the Seattle pilot who volunteered to June 3; local and nationwide fly Cinder the bear from Wenatchee, WA to Lake Tahoe, NV media extensively covered for burn treatment. Cinder is in the crate that is loaded the story. where the passenger seat was before being removed It was astonishing how to accommodate the crate. quickly this story spread and how many folks voluntarily assisted in these efforts at no expense. Countless donations of time, food, supplies, and money were received from people all over the country. This story became a source of strength and hope for the residents and victims of the fire; many who said “if Cinder can make it, I can make it too”. Camp Eyabsut, a local youth camp for burn victims, officially made Cinder their mascot and her story is also helping kids along their journey to recovery. Finally, Barbara deRubertis and Malcolm Keithly from the Wenatchee Valley partnered to write a nonfiction interactive electronic children’s book titled CINDER THE BEAR: A TRUE STORY OF RESCUE, RECOVERY, REHA- BILITATION AND RETURN (left) All, proceeds from the sale of the book will be split between the two wildlife rehab centers that cared for Cinder (available for iPad for $4.99). As agency folks we aren’t going to save every injured bear. But when The cover of the interactive online we can, these efforts affect people and can strengthen agency relation- children’s book called “Cinder the Bear: ships with communities, increase support for conservation and outdoor A True Story of Rescue, Recovery, recreation, and reach the public in ways never even considered. Rehabilitation, and Return”. Manager’s Corner Syrian Brown Bear War Hero

Rich Beausoleil Bear & Cougar Specialist Karelian Bear Dog Program (Cash & Indy) Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife 3515 State Highway 97A Wenatchee, WA 98801 Email: [email protected]

I recently came across a short pictorial of a Syrian brown bear cub from Iran named Wojtec (pronounced voytek, but also spelled woytek) that had an interesting World War II story. Since it was certainly in his wheelhouse, I emailed Dave Garshelis to ask if he was familiar with this story because I wondered if it would make a newsworthy article in the IBN. He told me that the name was not immediately recognizable and encouraged me to share it with IBA members. Much to my surprise, as I researched Wojtec online, one link led to another and I soon found a plethora of information and that Wojtek was actually a legend and hero.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 35 Manager’s Corner At this point, there was no need for me to try to piece a story together as it was well documented. So below, I have cut, pasted, and rearranged information provided by Wikipe- dia’s website https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ Wojtek_(bear) (retrieved 15 September 2015) to share with IBA members. Some pictures were also obtained from the following website http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-ma4Calv9T_s/ VOaPSf_Fc9I/AAAAAAAA0UI/vENfcThwD-M/ s1600/c1380e78edf3603a5ce3de00450937.jpg (retrieved 15 September 2015). Wikipedia reports that in 1942, a local boy found Wotjek near Hamadan, Iran after the mother had been shot. Shortly thereafter, the The official insignia/patch of the 22nd boy sold the cub to Lt. Anatol Tarnowiecki. Artillery Supply Company of the Polish II Corps depicting Wojtek the brown Wojtec, a Syrian brown bear cub, with The soldier then gifted the bear to a woman named Irena Bokiewicz, a young Polish refugee bear carrying an armful of howitzer a soldier from the Polish Army. ammunition. walking across the Elbruz Mountains as she escaped from the Soviet Union. When Wojtek became too big, she donated him to the Polish Army (left). The soldiers fed the bear condensed milk in the beginning and then fruit, marmalade, honey, and syrup. Unfortunately, (depending who you ask I guess) he was also given cigarettes and beer, which some said soon became his favorite treats. The bear traveled with this Company, moving through Iran, Iraq, Syria, Palestine and Egypt. When the Unit sailed from Egypt to fight with the British 8th Army in the Italian campaign, Wojtek needed clearance to board a British transport ship. To meet those requirements he was officially drafted into the Polish Army as a Private (later promoted to Corporal) and was listed among the soldiers of the 22nd Artillery Supply Company of the Polish II Corps. Two soldiers, Henryk Zacharewicz and Dymitr Szawlugo, were assigned as his caretakers. As an officially enlisted “soldier” of the Company, he lived with the other men in their tents or in a special wooden crate, which was transported by truck when the company was on the move. According to numerous accounts, during the Battle of Monte Cassino, Wojtek helped by transporting ammunition – never dropping a single crate. Following the end of World War II in 1945, the bear was transported to Berwickshire in Scotland, along with some of the company. Stationed at Winfield Airfield on Sunwick Farm near the village of Hutton, Scottish Borders, Wojtek soon became popular among local civilians and the press. The Polish-Scottish Association made Wojtek one of its honorary members. Following demobiliza- tion on November 15, 1947, Wojtek was given to the Edinburgh Zoo. There he spent the rest of his days, often visited by journalists and former Polish soldiers. Wojtek died in December 1963, at the age of 21. At the time of his death he weighed nearly 500 pounds (230 kg) and was over 6 feet (1.8 meters) tall In recognition of the bear’s service, and his popularity, the official insignia of the Company was changed to a depiction of Wojtek carrying an artillery shell (upper right). There are also statues of him and plaques memorializing his service in Poland, Edinburgh, the A retired Polish soldier visiting a memorial erected Imperial War Museum in London, and the Canadian War Museum for Wojtek, a Syrian brown bear that served in WWII. (right). As I finished piecing this story together, I realized that I had forgotten that Sylvia Dolson included an article written by Ryszard Antolak in her 2009 book titled Bear-ology: Fascinating Bear Facts, Tales, and Trivia (PixyJack Press, Masonville, CO, USA). Mr. Antolak brought a personal touch about Wojtec that could not be found in other accounts; he actually visited the bear prior to his death. Ryszard postulated that Wojtec’s last days were spent in great lonesomeness due mostly to the lack of social interaction with his human comrades. Wojtec’s story is unique and regardless of how readers decipher his story, it is another example of the unbreakable connection that exists between bears and people.

36 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Manager’s Corner Agency and University Collaboration for Black Bear Management in the Southwest and Intermountain West, USA and Northern Mexico

April Howard Predator, Furbearer and Large Carnivore Biologist Arizona Game and Fish Department Phoenix, AZ 85086 Email: [email protected]

In the southwest, intermountain west, and northern Mexico, black bears inhabit a naturally fragmented landscape of ‘Sky Islands’ where mountain ranges with suitable forest habitat are surrounded by desert and grassland that this species rarely uses. These Sky Islands are among the most diverse ecosystems in the world. As the meeting point between desert and forest, they offer a blend of tropical and temperate climates that can support many species, and often provide water sources in the form of streams and other riparian areas, which are not regularly found in the surrounding area. However, with Arizona’s increasing population, this region is being impacted by urbanization, agricultural conversion and transportation development that are further fragmenting the region. Because of their isolated geographic location and environmental fragmentation, these factors could further increase isolation, enhance the effect of genetic drift, and heighten inbreeding, all of which could decrease the genetic variation and viability of black bears in the Sky Islands. In collaboration with Arizona and other states in this region, New Mexico State University will use DNA collected from black bears to evaluate the genetic diversity, population genetic structure, and the genetic relationships and connectivity of black bear populations throughout the Southwest and Intermountain West, USA and northern Mexico. Arizona alone has shared about 150 tissue samples with the University. The goal is to identify natural and anthropogenic landscape features that may influence the distribution and connectivity among these populations in order to preserve critical habitat and maintain important linkage zones throughout the region. Furthermore, it may detect those populations that serve as genetic sources whose loss would represent a critical impact to the maintenance of the metapopulation and populations that represent important ‘stepping stones’ between these geographically isolated populations. This project is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2016. Manager’s Corner Florida Re-Opens Black Bear Hunting After Two Decades

David Telesco Bear Management Program Coordinator Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission Email: [email protected] Phone: 850-922-4330

Florida will hold its first bear-hunting season after a two-decade hiatus. The Florida black bear (Ursus americanus floridanus) is a conservation success story in the Sunshine State, recovering from numbers estimated to be as low as 300 in the 1970s to over 3,000 today. The Florida black bear was listed as a State Threatened Species in 1974 in all but a few parts of the state, where hunting continued until 1994. In 2010, all State Threatened Species were re-evaluated using IUCN Red List criteria, and the bear was deemed to no longer be at a high risk for extinction. The Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC) partnered with over 20 stakeholder groups as well as numerous interested members of the public to complete a ten-year plan to guide the management of the bear. In 2012, the Florida Black Bear Management Plan was approved, which set up seven Bear Management Units (BMU) across the state and was the final step in the process to officially remove the bear from the list of State Threatened Species. The Plan called for FWC to explore options on how to stabilize bear populations. FWC reviewed how other states and provinces manage their bear populations. All 11 Canadian provinces and 32 of the 41 U.S. states with resident black bear populations have bear hunting seasons. FWC decided to follow the lead of three of the four states who had recently opened bear hunting in their states during the last decade; Oklahoma, Kentucky, and Maryland. These states had the following four elements in common when they opened their first bear hunts:

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 37 Manager’s Corner 1) bear hunting season was opened for a relatively short time frame/time window/length; 2) the season was held during peak bear activity in the fall; 3) hunters were required to purchase a bear-specific permit; and 4) hunters were required to check in with the agency daily to ensure the number of bears harvested did not exceed harvest objectives. If/When harvest numbers were met, the hunt was closed.

Florida’s bear season will open Saturday, October 24 in the East Panhandle, North, Central, and South BMUs (map). Each of these BMUs has a harvest objective specifically designed to achieve 20% overall mortality in that particular subpopulation. In the Central BMU, for example, there are many vehicle strikes and agency removals of conflict bears, and so to achieve 20% total mortality, FWC is allowing 100 bears to be harvested. In the North BMU, very few bears are struck by vehicles or removed for conflict behavior, and therefore, although this subpopulation is much smaller than in the Central BMU, FWC is allowing 100 bears to be harvested. Hunters will need to check with the FWC each Florida black bear range and seven evening of the hunt to learn about any possible Bear Management Units (BMU), BMU closures. FWC will provide daily harvest where three BMUs (in gray) are closed to bear hunting and four numbers using a toll-free phone number, on their BMUs (in brown) will be open for website, and will use social media such as Facebook bear hunting in October 2015. posts and tweets. Hunters who provide phone numbers or email addresses will be contacted di- rectly to receive a daily update through emails and texts. If the harvest objective is not met in a particular BMU, the hunt will run through October 30 in that BMU. If the season closes early in one BMU, hunters can use their permits to hunt in another BMU that has not yet met its harvest objective. A bear can be taken with bows, crossbows, muzzleloaders, handguns, rifles, or shotguns. Bears cannot be taken over bait. No baiting is allowed for any game animals on public lands in Florida. On private lands, a bear can be legally taken as long as the hunter and the bear are both more than 100 yards away from an active game feeding station. No processed food products are allowed in game feeding stations in any of the four BMUs open for bear hunting. Only unprocessed foods (e.g., corn, soybeans) or foods specifically produced and marketed for feeding deer or hogs can be used at game feeding stations in the four open BMUs. Dogs may not be used to hunt bears, however a leashed dog may be used to help find a bear that has been shot. Bears of either sex may be taken, as long as they weigh a minimum of 100 pounds (live weight) and the bear is not observed with any cubs. Hunters with a bear permit may only take one bear for the season, and are required to bring the bear they harvest to an established bear check station within 12 hours of recovering it. FWC set up check stations so that there is at least one check station every 30 miles within each of the four BMUs open to bear hunting. Once the hunt is complete, FWC will use information collected from the check stations as well as results from a survey of all those who purchased bear permits to evaluate the hunt. FWC can then determine whether hunts will continue in the future, and if so, whether any changes are necessary.

38 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Manager’s Corner Updating the Density Estimates for Black Bears in New Mexico

Matthew Gould William Gould Ph.D. Student Associate Dean - Research New Mexico State University New Mexico State University Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

James Cain Elise Goldstein Assistant Unit Leader and Affiliate Associate Professor Carnivore and Small Mammal Program Supervisor New Mexico Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit New Mexico Department of Game and Fish New Mexico State University Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Frederic Winslow Gary Roemer Bear and Cougar Biologist Professor New Mexico Department of Game and Fish New Mexico State University Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Since 2004, the New Mexico Department of Game and Fish (NMDGF) has estimated the state’s black bear population by coupling density estimates with the distribution of primary habitat gener- ated by Costello et al. (2001). In light of recent advances in sampling, genetic, and statistical methodology, NMDGF initiated steps to update their density estimates for New Mexico black bear populations. In 2012, NMDGF began a collaborative project with New Mexico State University and the New Mexico Cooperative Fish and Wildlife Research Unit to estimate the density of black bears in the Sangre de Cristo, Sacramento, and Sandia Mountains (left). Previous density estimates used by NMDGF to set harvest limits were 17 bears/100 km2 for the Sangre de Cristo and Sacramento Mountains and 13.2 bears/100 km2 for the Sandia Mountains. These three mountain ranges constituted five study areas: the northern (2012; 6,400 km2) and southern Sangres (2013; 3,525 km2), the northern (2014; 925 km2) and southern Sacramentos (2014; 3,725 km2), and the Sandia Mountains (2014; 300 km2). We sampled each population using two concurrent non-invasive genetic sampling methods - hair traps and bear rubs. We sent hair samples to Wildlife Genetics International where individual identity and gender were determined for each sample suitable for analysis. We used these data to generate individual bear capture histories that we then used to estimate density in a spatially explicit capture-recapture framework. We cumulatively set 554 hair traps and 117 bear rubs collecting 4,080 hair samples. We identified 725 (367 M; 358 F) individuals and Aerial imagery of black bear habitat in New Mexico high- lighting the Sangre de Cristo Mountains, Sandia Moun- the sex ratio for each area was ca. 50%, respectively. Our preliminary- tains, and Sacramento Mountains study areas. density estimates varied within and among mountain ranges (Table 1). Our preliminary results suggest that the density is similar (south- Table 1. Spatially explicit capture- recapture based density ern Sangres and southern Sacramentos) or higher (northern estimates for five New Mexico black bear populations. Sangres, northern Sacramentos, and Sandias) than the previous density estimates used by NMDGF (17 bears/100 km2 and 13.2 bears/100 km2). The NMDGF will couple these density estimates with an updated black bear habitat map to establish harvest levels for responsible management and assured longevity of New Mexico black bears.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 39 Manager’s Corner Two Nonfatal Black Bear Attacks in One Month – California, USA

Marc Kenyon Sr. Environmental Scientist (Specialist) Human-Wildlife Conflict Program Coordinator California Department of Fish & Wildlife Wildlife Branch – Wildlife Investigations Lab Rancho Cordova, CA Email: [email protected]

At around 4:00 AM on the morning of Thursday, August 13, 2015, a 66 year-old man stepped out onto his porch in Mari- posa County, California, USA when he immediately encountered a black bear (Ursus americanus). In an attempt to scare the bear away, the victim shouted, but the bear suddenly lunged at the man. A struggle ensued, and the victim was knocked over and pinned by the bear, which was aggressively biting and scratching him. The victim attempted to strike the bear in its face, but the bear caught his arm in its mouth, inflicting a deep puncture wound to victim’s wrist and simultaneously digging its claw into the victim’s face, inflicting deep lacerations. The victim then attempted to fend off the bear with a flower pot, but was eventually able to kick the bear off after his dog began barking and distracted the bear momentarily; the temporary distraction allowed the victim to bring his knees and feet into the bear’s chest and push-kick it away long enough for him to get the dog and himself inside his residence. It is believed that the presence of several bags of garbage that were left on the porch attracted the bear to the property. Once the bear left his property, the man drove himself to a hospital where he was treated for several bite and scratch wounds all over his body, several of which were deep and required stitches to close. After treatment, the victim was released. Officials from the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) collected forensics evidence from the victim and the scene. The CDFW’s Forensics Laboratory was able to isolate and sequence DNA from the collected evidence, indicating to field staff that the bear was a female. The CDFW, in cooperation with the United States Department of Agriculture – Wildlife Services (Wildlife Services), set traps in the vicinity of the victim’s residence. Three bears were captured over the next two weeks; however their DNA did not match the profile from the samples collected from the victim’s wounds. On August 27, 2015, the CDFW responded to a report of a black bear causing property damage near the Mariposa County attack site. CDFW personnel verified the presence of a black bear and permitted the property owner to take a bear if it re- turned to the scene. On August 29, 2015, a female black bear was captured and dispatched in association with this depreda- tion event. A DNA sample was collected from the carcass, and the CDFW’s Wildlife Forensics Lab confirmed that the female black bear’s DNA positively matched the bear DNA that was collected from the victim two weeks earlier. On the morning of August 28, 2015 at around 1:00 PM, a 46 year-old man was kneeling down to set up a trail camera in rural Mono County, California, USA when he was pulled from behind and knocked down. He initially thought another person pulled him down so he called out, but when he looked up he saw a black bear facing him. The bear never made a sound. After the encounter, the bear turned and disappeared into the vegetation without further incident. The victim sustained scratch wounds to the back of his right shoulder, but he was able to walk away from the scene and seek medical attention. CDFW collected DNA samples from the victim’s clothing and backpack. These samples tested positive for bear markers, but the tests were inconclusive could not identify a specific bear or ascertain the sex of the animal. Collaboration between CDFW biologists, CDFW law enforcement personnel and Wildlife Services agents resulted in the capture of four bears near the scene of the incident on August 30, 2015. Three bears did not match the physical description of the bear given by the victim and were released. One bear did match the physical description and track measurements matched the captured bear’s footpad measurements. These characteristics led the CDFW to believe the bear was the of- fending bear, and it was humanely dispatched on scene.

40 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conference Reports Presentations Related to Bear Management at the 5th International Wildlife Management Congress in Sapporo, Japan

Shinsuke Koike Koji Yamazaki Tokyo University of Agriculture and Technology Tokyo University of Agriculture 3-5-8 Saiwai, Fuchu, Tokyo, Japan 183-8509 1-1-1 Sakuragaoka, Setagaya-ku, okyo, Japan 156-8502 [email protected] [email protected]

Yoshikazu Sato Rakuno Gakuen University Bunkyodai, Ebetsu, Hokkaido, Japan 069-8501 [email protected]

Overview The 5th International Wildlife Management Congress (IWMC) was held in Sapporo, Japan, from 26–30 July, 2015. It was the first IWMC held in Asia. More than 1,200 participants from 47 countries attended the conference. Several poster and oral presentations as well as two symposia and one social event were related to bears. The first symposium, “Brown Bear Monitoring and Management in Human Biosphere,” was organized by Tsutomu Mano and Hifumi Tsuruga; it focused on the management of the brown bear in Hokkaido Island during the last 30 years. The NPO Urahoro Brown Bear Research Group organized the social event titled “A Tour of a Riparian Forest: a Habitat for Biodiversity Con- servation and a Corridor for Wildlife Between Forests and City in the Sapporo Urban Area”. Recently, the frequency of brown bear intrusion into Sapporo City has increased. Thus, the aims of this event were to look at the riparian forest, which is a corridor from the mountains to Sapporo City, as well as to increase the Social Event: Riparian Forest Management. forest cover for preventing brown bear intrusion into human settlements. Although the event started early in the day (6:00 AM), many local people and participants from the conference, including IBA members, took part in the event (ca. 100 people).

Symposium on bear monitoring We organized another symposium entitled “Consecutive Monitoring of Japanese Black and Brown Bear Population Trends: Practicable Methods and Implementation Systems.” Despite the expanding distribution of bear populations in recent decades and increasing conflicts between bears and human activities [see NL23(3):18-19], bear population monitoring systems or methods have not yet been established in the whole area of Japan to date. In contrast, several types of extensive bear population monitoring systems exist in North American and European countries for big game or endangered species management. Thus, we think that development of a bear population monitoring system in Japan would be a major turning point for bear management. Our goal in holding this symposium was to aid in the establishment of a sustainable and regionally adapted monitoring system for the Japanese black and brown bear populations, through presentations (on overseas examples as well as domestic problems) and discussions. Four researchers held presentations at this symposium in the following order: • Dr. Jonas Kindberg from Sweden presented “The Status of Brown Bear Population Monitoring in Europe,” where he introduced the actual situation, methods, and purposes of monitoring bear population in various European countries. • Karen Noyce, IBA President, from Minnesota presented “Monitoring American Black Bear Populations and Trends: Matching Methods to Needs.” She introduced the status of the American black bear population monitoring systems in each state as well as the history of bear monitoring in Minnesota. • Dr. Tomoko Anezaki from the Gunma Museum of Natural History, central Japan, presented “Data Gathering and the Analysis of Nuisance Killed Bears for Their Better Management in Gunma Prefecture, Japan.” She introduced

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 41 Conference Reports the problems involved in sampling bear body organs from nuisance kills or hunting in Japan, particularly in Gunma Prefecture. Gunma Prefecture has a relatively high bear population and much conflict exists between the bears and locals. Some problems also exist due to lack of scientific data sharing between the government and local stakeholders. • Dr. Takahiro Kubo from National Institute for Environmental Studies, Japan, presented “Potential Issues in Brown Bear Population Monitoring in Japan: What Information is Needed to Explain the Population Trend?” He introduced the sociological approaches for wildlife management, with some comparisons between Europe and Japan. He also introduced some other information necessary for consensus building between the local community and the government in Hokkaido Island. After these presentations, general discussions were held and one of the main topics was how to use scientific monitoring data for consensus building between the local community and the government. Because there are many nuisance kills across Japan (black bear: 1,000–3,000 and brown bear: 500–700 annually), we have many opportunities for obtaining significant data for monitoring bear population. However, some participants mentioned that there is currently a lack of scientific data sharing between the government and local stakeholders. Although time was limited, the symposium was very useful toward the development of a monitoring system for the management of Japanese bear population in the future. Unlike other Asian countries, Japan’s rural human population has decreased, whereas its wildlife distribution has expanded. Therefore, we need to establish a regionally adapted bear monitoring system on the basis of the current scientific Post-conference Private Tour at Nikko data in Japan to successfully manage Japan’s bear National Park in Honshu Island. population in future. Conference Announcements

Learning From Our Past To Inform Our Future is the theme of the 2016 IBA Conference and our conference host is World Wildlife Fund. We expect 500 attendees from more than 30 countries to attend the first Alaska-based conference since 1995. There will be a variety of planned sessions focusing on bear viewing, genetics and genomics, bears as predators and harvest management, bear-human interactions, conservation and ecology of polar bears, physiology, capture and handling techniques, cultural anthropology of bears, urban bear ecology, health and disease ecology, and bears, science, and indigenous peoples. There will also be an IBA membership meeting, a meeting of the IUCN Bear Specialists Group, a workshop on Bayes- ian Decision Models for Bear Managers, and Community Approaches to Bear Management. The conference will also feature three nights of public presentations on a variety of topics including polar bears, Anchor- age bears, safety in bear country, cultural anthropology of bears, panda ecology, bears of the world, and Dan Bigley…author of Beyond the Bear.

42 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conference Announcements Important Information for Attendees: 1) Please register early….you can register now without paying registration fees and with no penalty if you do not receive travel approval. You can pay after you receive permission to attend. But your early registration is incredibly helpful for the conference planning team. To register without paying, contact Emily Fairbanks at emily_fairbanks@ traveletm.com for guidance. 2) Abstracts are due December 20. We will work hard to accommodate all submissions. 3) Please book your stay at the conference hotel (Anchorage Downtown Hilton). We need to meet our room block to ensure that as much of our proceeds as possible go to support students and bear conservation efforts. 4) For those international attendees with limited budget and students, some housing is available at the University of Alaska, Anchorage. Contact Emily Fairbanks at [email protected] 5) Monitor the website (www.IBA2016.com) for associated trips and other opportunities while in Alaska. We are planning multiple options to meet the varied budgets of attendees. 6) Visit the IBA Facebook page (https://www.facebook.com/IBABears/) to coordinate with your peers.

Field Trips for the Anchorage Conference

Julia Bevins Email: [email protected]

Many of you may have been wondering about field trips for the Anchorage IBA Conference. We have five offerings set up for Friday the 17th of June, the day after the scientific program ends. Check under the “Field Trips” tab on our website. Each trip, other than day hikes in the Chugach, is listed with its attendant link. Alaska is magnificent in June and all field trip choices will be interesting, rewarding and fun.

There are two field trips put together by Explore Tours, a one day bear viewing trip and a railroad and flightseeing trip around Denali and the Alaska Range. These are premier trips, both involving air travel, both designed for the traveler with a hefty pocketbook wanting the most awe-inspiring trip of vast scenery and wildlife. One of our conference sponsors, Major Marine Tours, has put together a day trip out of Anchorage to go out on a boat on Resurrection Bay, around the Chiswell Islands and into the Kenai Fjords to spend time alongside the towering face of tidewater glacier as it calves, and to see wildlife, including three species of whales, Dall’s porpoise, dolphins, sea lions, sea otters, harbor seals, seabird rookeries in peak swing, and more. The scope and majesty of what you will see leaves a life-long imprint. Both John Schoen, one of our conference organizers, and I think it might be the best single day trip in Alaska, in terms of value and experience. (See John’s introduction below). We have a good discount from Major Marine and a discount on round trip bus travel from downtown Anchorage, so check it out. Space is limited and there is a full-refund cancellation available up until two weeks prior to departure. Please book now so that we can keep our spots on the boat. Bring warm clothes and binoculars for this one. Kayak Adventures Worldwide is offering a half day kayak trip on Resurrection Bay, out of Seward, for $50/person. I’m going to see if I can arrange for participants choosing this option to also ride the bus with people going on the Major Marine Tour, which would add $70 to the price of the day’s excursion. Otherwise participants would have to make their own way to Seward. Stay tuned for details. Again, space is limited, so if you want this option, book now. Finally, we are offering an informal, no cost option that is also a wonderful choice, day hikes in the Chugach Mountains led by local bear biologists. Anchorage is set on a little square of land on the shores of Cook Inlet, bordered by mountains and the Chugach State Park on two sides. Mountain wilderness and alpine tundra are at our doorstep. The Chugach boasts healthy populations of moose, black and brown bear, Dall sheep, porcupine, lynx, snowshoe hare, grouse and ptarmigan. It is highly unlikely that we would see bear, but animal sign abound on Chugach trails and the scenery is as good as it gets. We don’t have a link for this field trip, but we do have an online bulletin board especially set up for people wanting this option. If the day hike is for you, please bring good hiking gear, including hat, small backpack, raincoat and reasonable shoes. Trails can be muddy in places or rocky and steep and weather can range from hot sunshine to cold soaking rain. Rain or shine, this is a great day out in beautiful Alaskan wilderness.

If you have further questions, you can email me, Julia, at [email protected].

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 43 Conference Announcements Kenai Fjords Cruise with Major Marine Tours I would like to recommend to all IBA members the 7.5 hour cruise through the Kenai Fjords National Park with Major Marine Tours based in Seward, Alaska. As a long-time Alaska resident who has had the opportunity to travel throughout the state, I consider this cruise one of the best for seeing marine wildlife and spectacular coastal scenery. This tour takes six hours and will travel through rugged glacial fjords and up to tidewater glaciers. Your chances of seeing whales, sea lions, sea otters and other marine mammals and seabirds including both species of puffins, as well as bald eagles and other birds is very high. There is also a possibility of seeing mountain goats and even a chance that a black bear may be observed. This is a tremendous tour and I simply don’t think you can beat the value of this delightful experience.

John Schoen Retired ecologist and IBA member

Workshop: Bayesian network models

Announcing a Workshop on Bayesian Network Models for the 24th International Conference on Bear Research and Management in Anchorage, Alaska. Bayesian network models provide a unified analytical framework in which information on ecological, environmental, and anthropogenic processes can be incorporated while simultaneously and explicitly accounting for relevant sources of uncertainty. Workshop objectives will focus on reviewing concepts of Bayesian statistical theory, understanding how Bayesian network models are structured and used, and learning procedures for constructing Bayesian network models. Workshop format will include a mixture of formal lecture designed to introduce fundamental concepts related to Bayesian network models and hands-on working examples to provide participants with real-world experience implementing these models. The workshop will be held from 9am–3pm on Sunday, 12 June. Information regarding registration and workshop prerequisites can be found on the conference website (http://www.IBA2016.com). Note there will be no registration fee and class size will be limited to 20 participants. Therefore, early registration is encouraged.

Instructor: Bruce Marcot, Ph.D. Research Wildlife Biologist USDA Forest Service, Pacific Northwest Research Station Ecological Process and Function Research Program 620 SW Main St., Suite 400 Portland, OR 97208 (503) 347-2277 [email protected]

Organizers: Jennifer Fortin-Noreus, Ph.D. Jared Laufenberg, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Researcher Postdoctoral Research Fellow Grizzly Bear Recovery Project Department of Fish, Wildlife, and Conservation Biology College of Forestry & Conservation Warner College of Natural Resources University of Montana Colorado State University Missoula, MT 59812 Fort Collins, CO 80523 (406) 243-4994 (970) 491-5020 [email protected] [email protected]

Andrew Tri, Ph.D. Research Wildlife Biologist Minnesota Department of Natural Resources 1201 East Highway 2 Grand Rapids, MN 55744 (218) 327-4133 [email protected]

44 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Conference Announcements 1st International Symposium on Sun Bear Conservation & Management July 2016, Phnom Penh, Cambodia

Join us in Phnom Penh, Cambodia for the first international symposium dedicated to the conservation and management of the world’s smallest ursid - the Sun bear. The symposium will bring together field researchers, conservation managers, environmental educators and conservation breeding specialists to share experiences and create a coordinated plan for the conservation of one of Southeast Asia’s least known large mammals.

Contact [email protected] to register your interest in joining this important symposium and we look forward to welcoming you to Cambodia in July 2016!

Call for Workshop Ideas for 2016 International Symposium on Sun Bear Conservation & Management The Sun Bear Symposium Program Committee is soliciting ideas for afternoon workshops to be held during the conference. If you have a topic you would like to see included please email Brian at [email protected]

Student Forum Truman’s List Serve • For students only • 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 Instructions • Visit: http://ww.bearbiology.com/iba/stu.html • Follow the links to request an invitation • Do NOT reply to list serve messages using your “reply” button. You must return to Truman to respond within the list serve or else other members will not receive your response. • 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.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 45 Publications Recent Bear Literature

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

For easy access to articles, we are now including the DOI citation and corresponding author email address, if available. To open articles from their DOI, enter the DOI citation in the text box provided at the following website: http://dx.doi.org

Aarnes, S. G., Hagen, S. B., Andreassen, R., Schregel, J., Knappskog, P. M., Hailer, F., . . . Eiken, H. G. (2015). Y-chromosomal testing of brown bears (Ursus arctos): Validation of a multiplex PCR-approach for nine STRs suitable for fecal and hair samples. Forensic Science Interna- tional: Genetics, 19, 197-204. doi:10.1016/j.fsigen.2015.07.018. email: [email protected]. Aars, J., Andersen, M., Brenière, A., & Blanc, S. (2015). White-beaked dolphins trapped in the ice and eaten by polar bears. 2015. doi:10.3402/polar.v34.26612. email: [email protected]. Abbas, F.-i., Bhatti, Z. I., Haider, J., & Mian, A. (2015). Bears in Pakistan: distribution, population biology and human conflicts. Journal of Bioresource Management, 2(2), 1. email: [email protected]. Abella, J., Pérez-Ramos, A., Valenciano, A., Alba, D. M., Ercoli, M. D., Hontecillas, D., . . . Morales, J. (2015). Tracing the origin of the panda’s thumb. The Science of Nature, 102(5-6), 1-13. doi:10.1007/s00114-015-1286-3. email: [email protected]. Alldredge, M. W., Walsh, D. P., Sweanor, L. L., Davies, R. B., & Trujillo, A. (2015). Evaluation of translocation of black bears involved in human–bear conflicts in south-central Colorado. Wildlife Society Bulletin, 39(2), 334-340. doi:10.1002/wsb.526. email: mat.alldredge@ state.co.us. Ashrafzadeh, M. R., Kaboli, M., & Naghavi, M. R. (2015). Mitochondrial DNA analysis of Iranian brown bears (Ursus arctos) reveals new phylogeographic lineage. Mammalian Biology-Zeitschrift für Säugetierkunde. doi:10.1016/j.mambio.2015.09.001. email: mkaboli@ ut.ac.ir. Auger-Méthé, M., Lewis, M. A., & Derocher, A. E. (2015). Home ranges in moving habitats: polar bears and sea ice. Ecography (online early). doi:10.1111/ecog.01260. email: [email protected]. Barker, O., Derocher, A., & Edwards, M. (2015). Use of Arctic ground squirrels (Urocitellus parryii) by brown bears (Ursus arctos). Polar Biol- ogy, 38(3), 369-379. doi:10.1007/s00300-014-1593-8. email: [email protected]. Bechshøft, T., Derocher, A., Richardson, E., Mislan, P., Lunn, N., Sonne, C., . . . Louis, V. S. (2015). Mercury and cortisol in Western Hudson Bay polar bear hair. Ecotoxicology, 1-7. doi:10.1007/s10646-015-1506-9. email: [email protected]. Beecham, J. J., De Gabriel Hernando, M., Karamanlidis, A. A., Beausoleil, R. A., Burguess, K., Jeong, D. H., . . . Skripova, K. (2015). Manage- ment implications for releasing orphaned, captive‐reared bears back to the wild. The Journal of Wildlife Management. doi:10.1002/ jwmg.941. email: [email protected]. Bennett, K. R., Desmarchelier, M. R., & Bailey, T. R. (2015). Surgical correction of bilateral patellar luxation in an American black bear cub (Ursus americanus). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 46(2), 359-362. doi:10.1638/2013-0288R1.1. email: marion.desmarchelier@ umontreal.ca. Bidon, T., Schreck, N., Hailer, F., Nilsson, M. A., & Janke, A. (2015). Genome-wide search identifies 1.9 Mb from the polar bear Y chromo- some for evolutionary analyses. Genome Biology and Evolution, 7(7), 2010-2022. doi:10.1093/gbe/evv103. email: ajanke@senckenberg. de. Bowen, L., Keith Miles, A., Stott, J., Waters, S., & Atwood, T. (2015). Enhanced biological processes associated with alopecia in polar bears (Ursus maritimus). Science of The Total Environment, 529, 114-120. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.05.039. email: [email protected]. Bowen, L., Miles, A. K., Waters, S., Meyerson, R., Rode, K., & Atwood, T. (2015). Gene transcription in polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from disparate populations. Polar Biology, 38(9), 1413-1427. doi:10.1007/s00300-015-1705-0. email: [email protected]. Braid, A. C. R., & Nielsen, S. E. (2015). Prioritizing sites for protection and restoration for grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in southwestern Alberta, Canada. PloS one, 10(7), e0132501. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132501. email: [email protected]. Brodie, J. F., Giordano, A. J., Dickson, B., Hebblewhite, M., Bernard, H., Mohd‐Azlan, J., . . . Ambu, L. (2015). Evaluating multispecies landscape connectivity in a threatened tropical mammal community. Conservation Biology, 29(1), 122-132. doi:10.1111/cobi.12337. email: [email protected]. Butt, N., Seabrook, L., Maron, M., Law, B. S., Dawson, T. P., Syktus, J., & McAlpine, C. A. (2015). Cascading effects of climate extremes on vertebrate fauna through changes to low-latitude tree flowering and fruiting phenology. Global Change Biology, 21(9), 3267-3277. doi:10.1111/gcb.12869. Email: [email protected]. Cahill, J. A., Stirling, I., Kistler, L., Salamzade, R., Ersmark, E., Fulton, T. L., . . . Shapiro, B. (2015). Genomic evidence of geographically widespread ef fect of gene flow from polar bears into brown bears. Molecular Ecology, 24(6), 1205-1217. doi:10.1111/mec.13038. email: [email protected].

46 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Publications Caspermeyer, J. (2015). Genomics of American black bears reveal surprising ancient migration patterns to aid conservation efforts. Molecular Biology and Evolution, 32(9), 2498-2499. doi:10.1093/molbev/msv132. email: [email protected]. Catalano, S., Lejeune, M., Tizzani, P., Verocai, G. G., Schwantje, H., Nelson, C., & Duignan, P. J. (2015). Helminths of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) and American black bears (Ursus americanus) in Alberta and British Columbia, Canada. Canadian Journal of Zoology, 93(10), 765-772. doi:10.1139/cjz-2015-0063. email: [email protected]. Catalano, S., Lejeune, M., van Paridon, B., Pagan, C. A., Wasmuth, J. D., Tizzani, P., . . . Nadler, S. A. (2015). Morphological variability and molecular identification of Uncinaria spp. (Nematoda: Ancylostomatidae) from grizzly and black bears: new species or phenotypic plasticity? Journal of Parasitology, 101(2), 182-192. doi:doi:10.1645/14-621.1. email: [email protected]. Charlton, B. D., Keating, J. L., Rengui, L., Huang, Y., & Swaisgood, R. R. (2015). The acoustic structure of male giant panda bleats varies according to intersexual context. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 138(3), 1305-1312. doi:10.1121/1.4928606. email: benjamin. [email protected]. Christian, A. L., Knott, K. K., Vance, C. K., Falcone, J. F., Bauer, L. L., Fahey, G. C., . . . Kouba, A. J. (2015). Nutrient and mineral composition during shoot growth in seven species of Phyllostachys and Pseudosasa bamboo consumed by giant panda. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition 99(6):1172-1183. doi:10.1111/jpn.12287. email: [email protected]. Çilingir, F. G., Akın Pekşen, Ç., Ambarlı, H., Beerli, P., & Bilgin, C. (2015). Exceptional maternal lineage diversity in brown bears (Ursus arctos) from Turkey. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society. doi:10.1111/zoj.12322. email: [email protected]. Clark, J. D., Laufenberg, J. S., Davidson, M., & Murrow, J. L. (2015). Connectivity among subpopulations of Louisiana black bears as estimated by a step selection function. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 79(8):1347-1360. doi:10.1002/jwmg.955. email: jclark1@utk. edu. Cless, I. T., Voss-Hoynes, H. A., Ritzmann, R. E., & Lukas, K. E. (2015). Defining pacing quantitatively: a comparison of gait characteristics between pacing and non-repetitive locomotion in zoo-housed polar bears. Applied Animal Behaviour Science. doi: 10.1016/j.ap- planim.2015.04.002. email: [email protected]. Colbert, R. W., Holley, C., Stone, L., Crampton, M., Adabag, S., Garcia, S., . . . McFalls, E. (2015). The recovery of hibernating hearts lies on a spectrum: from bears in nature to patients with coronary artery disease. Journal of Cardiovascular Translational Research, 8(4), 244- 252. doi:10.1007/s12265-015-9625-5. email: [email protected]. Cristescu, B., Stenhouse, G. B., & Boyce, M. S. (2015). Grizzly bear diet shifting on reclaimed mines. Global Ecology and Conservation, 4, 207-220. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2015.06.007. email: [email protected]. Cristescu, B., Stenhouse, G. B., & Boyce, M. S. (2015). Predicting multiple behaviors from GPS radiocollar cluster data. Behavioral Ecology, 26(2), 452-464. doi:10.1093/beheco/aru214. email: [email protected]. Curry, E., Safayi, S., Meyerson, R., & Roth, T. (2015). Reproductive trends of captive polar bears in North American zoos: a historical analysis. Journal of Zoo and Aquarium Research, 3(3), 99-106. email: [email protected]. Di Francesco, C. E., Gentile, L., Di Pirro, V., Ladiana, L., Tagliabue, S., & Marsilio, F. (2015). Serologic evidence for selected infectious diseases in Marsican brown bears (Ursus arctos marsicanus) in Italy (2004–09). Journal of wildlife diseases, 51(1), 209-213. doi:10.7589/2014-01- 021. email: [email protected]. Ditmer, M. A., Burk, T. E., & Garshelis, D. L. (2015). Do innate food preferences and learning affect crop raiding by American black bears? Ursus, 26(1), 40-52. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-14-00028.1. email: [email protected]. Dombrowski, E., McGregor, G. F., Bauer, B. S., Parker, D., & Grahn, B. H. (2015). Blindness in a wild American black bear cub (Ursus americanus). Veterinar y Ophthalmology, (online early). doi:10.1111/vop.12303. email: [email protected]. Dorresteijn, I., Schultner, J., Nimmo, D. G., Fischer, J., Hanspach, J., Kuemmerle, T., . . . Ritchie, E. G. (2015). Incorporating anthropogenic effects into trophic ecology: predator–prey interactions in a human-dominated landscape. Paper presented at the Proc. R. Soc. B. doi:10.1098/rspb.2015.1602. email: [email protected]. Escobar, L. E., Awan, M. N., & Qiao, H. (2015). Anthropogenic disturbance and habitat loss for the red-listed Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus): Using ecological niche modeling and nighttime light satellite imagery. Biological Conservation, 191, 400-407. doi:10.1016/j. biocon.2015.06.040. email: [email protected]. Farag, M. R., Abou-Hadeed, A. H., Ghoniem, M. H., Alagawany, M., Laudadio, V., & Tufarelli, V. (2015). Chemical composition and mineral contents differentiation in hairs of some wild animal species. Pakistan Journal of Zoology, 47(4). Figueroa, J. (2015). New records of parasites in free-ranging Andean bears from Peru. Ursus, 26(1), 21-27. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-14-00034.1. email: [email protected]. Gormezano, L. J., & Rockwell, R. F. (2015). The energetic value of land-based foods in western Hudson Bay and their potential to alleviate energy deficits of starving adult male polar bears. PloS one, 10(6), e0128520. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128520. email: moc.liamg@ onazemrog. Gu, Y., Wang, Y., Ma, X., Wang, C., Yue, G., Zhang, Y., . . . Wu, R. (2015). Greater taxol yield of Fungus Pestalotiopsis hainanensis from dermatitic scurf of the Giant Panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology, 175(1), 155-165. doi:10.1007/ s12010-014-1254-y. email: [email protected], [email protected]. Gustafsson, T., & Eriksson, A. (2015). Fatal Eurasian brown bear attacks—two Swedish fatalities in modern times. Journal of Forensic Sci- ences (online early). doi:10.1111/1556 - 4029.12870. email: [email protected]. Gustavson, L., Ciesielski, T. M., Bytingsvik, J., Styrishave, B., Hansen, M., Lie, E., . . . Jenssen, B. M. (2015). Hydroxylated polychlorinated biphenyls decrease circulating steroids in female polar bears (Ursus maritimus). Environmental Research, 138, 191-201. doi:10.1016/j. envres.2015.02.011. email: [email protected]. Hamer, D., & Pengelly, I. (2015). Whitebark Pine (Pinus albicaulis) seeds as food for bears (Ursus spp.) in Banff National Park, Alberta. The Canadian Field-Naturalist, 129(1), 8-14.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 47 Publications Hamr, J., Popp, J. N., Brown, D. L., & Mallory, F. F. (2015). Problem behaviour of black bears (Ursus americanus) in central Ontario: the effects of hunting and natural food availability. Animal Biology, 65(2), 151-161. doi:10.1163/15707563-00002467. Harrington, L. A. (2015). International commercial trade in live carnivores and primates 2006–2012: response to Bush et al. 2014. Conserva- tion Biology, 29(1), 293-296. doi:10.1111/cobi.12448. email: [email protected]. Hassanin, A. (2015). The role of Pleistocene glaciations in shaping the evolution of polar and brown bears. Evidence from a critical review of mitochondrial and nuclear genome analyses. Comptes Rendus Biologies, 338(7), 494-501. doi:10.1016/j.crvi.2015.04.008. email: [email protected]. Jin, Y., Chen, S., Chao, Y., Pu, T., Xu, H., Liu, X., . . . Lin, D. (2015). Dental abnormalities of eight wild Qinling giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca qinlingensis), Shaanxi Province, China. Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 51(4), 849-859. doi:10.7589/2014-12-289. email: [email protected], [email protected]. Jin, Y., Qiao, Y., Liu, X., Pu, T., Xu, H., & Lin, D. (2015). Immobilization of wild giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) with dexmedetomi- dine–tiletamine–zolazepam. Veterinar y Anaesthesia and Analgesia, (online early). doi:10.1111/vaa.12301. email: [email protected]. Johnson, H. E., Breck, S. W., Baruch-Mordo, S., Lewis, D. L., Lackey, C. W., Wilson, K. R., . . . Beckmann, J. P. (2015). Shifting perceptions of risk and reward: dynamic selection for human development by black bears in the western United States. Biological Conservation, 187, 164-172. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.04.014. email: [email protected]. Kang, D., Wang, X., Yang, H., Duan, L., & Li, J. (2015). Habitat use by giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in relation to roads in the Wanglang Nature Reserve, People’s Republic of China (vol 92, pg 715, 2014). Canadian Journal of Zoology, 93(2), 155-155. Karamanlidis, A. A., Beecham, J. J., Chatziioannou, C., de Gabriel Hernando, M., Grivas, K., Krambokoukis, L., & Papakostas, G. (2015). Intraspecific predation on a subadult brown bear in Greece. Ursus, 26(1), 7-10. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-15-00003.1. email: akaramanlidis@ gmail.com. Karamanlidis, A. A., de Gabriel Hernando, M., Krambokoukis, L., & Gimenez, O. (2015). Evidence of a large carnivore population recovery: counting bears in Greece. Journal for Nature Conservation, 27, 10-17. doi:10.1016/j.jnc.2015.06.002. email: [email protected]. Kelly, K. R., Harrison, M. L., Size, D. D., & MacDonald, S. E. (2015). Individual effects of seasonal changes, Visitor Density, and Concurrent Bear Behavior on Stereotypical Behaviors in Captive Polar Bears (Ursus maritimus). Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science, 18(1), 17-31. doi:10.1080/10888705.2014.924832. email: [email protected]. Krey, A., Ostertag, S. K., & Chan, H. M. (2015). Assessment of neurotoxic effects of mercury in beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas), ringed seals (Pusa hispida), and polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from the Canadian Arctic. Science of The Total Environment, 509–510, 237-247. doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2014.05.134. email: [email protected]. LaRue, M. A., Stapleton, S., Porter, C., Atkinson, S., Atwood, T., Dyck, M., & Lecomte, N. (2015). Testing methods for using high-resolution satellite imagery to monitor polar bear abundance and distribution. Wildlife Society Bulletin (online early). doi:10.1002/wsb.596. email: [email protected]. Lei, M., Yuan, S., Yang, Z., Hong, M., Yang, X., Gu, X., . . . Zhang, Z. (2015). Comparison of microhabitats and foraging strategies between the captive-born Zhangxiang and wild giant pandas: implications for future reintroduction. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22(19), 15089-15096. doi:10.1007/s11356-015-4720-3. email: [email protected]. Lesmerises, R., Rebouillat, L., Dussault, C., & St-Laurent, M.-H. (2015). Linking GPS telemetry surveys and scat analyses helps explain variability in black bear foraging strategies. PloS one, 10(7), e0129857. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0129857. email: martin-hugues_st-laurent@ uqar.ca. Lewis, D. L., Baruch-Mordo, S., Wilson, K. R., Breck, S. W., Mao, J. S., & Broderick, J. (2015). Foraging ecology of black bears in urban environ- ments: guidance for human-bear conflict mitigation. Ecosphere, 6(8), art141. doi:10.1890/ES15-00137.1. email: [email protected]. Li, R., Xu, M., Wong, M. H. G., Qiu, S., Li, X., Ehrenfeld, D., & Li, D. (2015). Climate change threatens giant panda protection in the 21st century. Biological Conservation, 182, 93-101. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2014.11.037. email: [email protected]. Liley, S. G., & Walker, R. N. (2015). Extreme movement by an American black bear in New Mexico and Colorado. Ursus, 26(1), 1-6. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-15-00006.1. email: [email protected]. Lindsell, J. A., Lee, D. C., Powell, V. J., & Gemita, E. (2015). Availability of large seed-dispersers for restoration of degraded tropical forest. Tropical Conservation Science, 8(1), 17-27. email: [email protected]. Liu, X., Wang, T., Wang, T., Skidmore, A., & Songer, M. (2015). How do two giant panda populations adapt to their habitats in the Qinling and Qionglai Mountains, China. Environmental Science and Pollution Research, 22(2), 1175-1185. doi:10.1007/s11356-014-3412-8. email: [email protected]. Liu, Z., Wang, C., Hu, J., Zhang, F., Linhardt, R., & Lin, X. (2015). Apparent digestibility of diet dominantly comprised of Phyllostachys vivax Bamboo Shoots for captive giant pandas JAPS, Journal of Animal and Plant Sciences, 25(3), 612-617. email: [email protected], lxc@zafu. edu.cn. López-Alfaro, C., Coogan, S. C. P., Robbins, C. T., Fortin, J. K., & Nielsen, S. E. (2015). Assessing nutritional parameters of brown bear diets among ecosystems gives insight into differences among populations. PloS one, 10(6), e0128088. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0128088. email: [email protected]. López-Urueña, E., Alvarez, M., Gomes-Alves, S., Anel-López, L., Martínez-Rodríguez, C., Manrique, P., . . . de Paz, P. (2015). Optimization of conditions for long-term prefreezing storage of brown bear sperm before cryopreservation. Theriogenology, 84(7), 1161-1171. doi:10.1016/j.theriogenology.2015.06.017. email: [email protected]. Malenfant, R. M., Coltman, D. W., & Davis, C. S. (2015). Design of a 9K illumina BeadChip for polar bears (Ursus maritimus) from RAD and transcriptome sequencing. Molecular Ecology Resources, 15(3), 587- 600. doi:10.1111/1755- 0998.12327. email: rene.malenfant@ualberta. ca.

48 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Publications McCall, A., Derocher, A., & Lunn, N. (2015). Home range distribution of polar bears in western Hudson Bay. Polar Biology, 38(3), 343-355. doi:10.1007/s00300-014-1590-y. email: [email protected]. McGee-Lawrence, M., Buckendahl, P., Carpenter, C., Henriksen, K., Vaughan, M., & Donahue, S. (2015). Suppressed bone remodeling in black bears conserves energy and bone mass during hibernation. The Journal of Experimental Biology, 218(13), 2067-2074. doi:10.1242/ jeb.120725. email: [email protected]. Melton, T. W., Sartori, M., & Sykes, B. C. (2015). Response to Edward and Barnett. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B: Biological Sciences, 282(1800). doi:10.1098/rspb.2014.2434. Mewada, T. P. (2015). Index of relative Importance of the dietary proportions of sloth bear (Melursus ursinus) in semi-arid region. Notulae Scientia Biologicae, 7(3), 281-288. doi:10.15835/nsb.7.3.9577. email: [email protected]. Miller, S., Wilder, J., & Wilson, R. R. (2015). Polar bear–grizzly bear interactions during the autumn open-water period in Alaska. Journal of Mammalogy. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyv140. email: [email protected]. Mitchell, J. W., Thomovsky, S. A., Chen, A. V., Layton, A. W., Haldorsonary, G., Tucker, R. L., & Roberts, G. (2015). Medulloblastoma in a grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 46(3), 624-628. doi:doi:10.1638/2014-0118.1. email: sthomovs@ purdue.edu. Moore, J. A., Xu, R., Frank, K., Draheim, H., & Scribner, K. T. (2015). Social network analysis of mating patterns in American black bears (Ursus americanus). Molecular ecology, 24(15), 4010 - 4022. doi:10.1111/mec.13290. email: [email protected]. Morgan Henderson, M. J., Hebblewhite, M., Mitchell, M. S., Stetz, J. B., Kendall, K. C., & Carlson, R. T. (2015). Modeling multi-scale resource selection for bear rubs in northwestern Montana. Ursus, 26(1), 28-39. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-14-00026.1. email: Matthew.Henderson@ hakai.org. Naing, H., Fuller, T. K., Sievert, P. R., Randhir, T. O., Po, S. H. T., Maung, M., . . . Myint, T. (2015). Assessing large mammal and bird richness from camera-trap records in the Hukaung Valley of Northern Myanmar. Raffles Bulletin of Zoology, 63, 376-388. email: [email protected]. edu. Nie, Y., Speakman, J. R., Wu, Q., Zhang, C., Hu, Y., Xia, M., . . . Wei, F. (2015). Exceptionally low daily energy expenditure in the bamboo-eating giant panda. Science, 349(6244), 171-174. doi:10.1126/science.aab2413. email: [email protected]. Nie, Y., Zhang, Z., Raubenheimer, D., Elser, J. J., Wei, W., & Wei, F. (2015). Obligate herbivory in an ancestrally carnivorous lineage: the giant panda and bamboo from the perspective of nutritional geometr y. Functional Ecology, 29(1), 26 -34. doi:10.1111/1365-2435.12302. email: [email protected]. Oakley, K. L., Atwood, T. C., Mugel, D. N., Rode, K. D., & Whalen, M. E. (2015). Changing arctic ecosystems: updated forecast: reducing

carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions required to improve polar bear outlook (2015-3042). Retrieved from Reston, VA: http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/ publication/fs20153042. Obbard, M., Stapleton, S., Middel, K., Thibault, I., Brodeur, V., & Jutras, C. (2015). Estimating the abundance of the Southern Hudson Bay polar bear subpopulation with aerial surveys. Polar Biology, 38(10), 1713-1725. doi:10.1007/s00300-015-1737-5. email: martyn.obbard@ ontario.ca. Otaki, Y., Kido, N., Omiya, T., Ono, K., Ueda, M., Azumano, A., & Tanaka, S. (2015). A new voluntary blood collection method for the Andean bear (Tremarctos ornatus) and Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus). Zoo Biology. doi:10.1002/zoo.21237. email: kido@hama-midorino- kyokai.or.jp. Ozeki, L. M., Caulkett, N., Stenhouse, G., Arnemo, J. M., & Fahlman, Å. (2015). Effect of active cooling and α-2 Adrenoceptor antagonism on core temperature in anesthetized brown bears (Ursus arctos). Journal of Zoo and Wildlife Medicine, 46(2), 279-285. doi:10.1638/2014- 0052R.1. email: [email protected]. Paillard, L., Jones, K., Evans, A., Berret, J., Jacquet, M., Lienhard, R., . . . Voordouw, M. (2015). Serological signature of tick-borne pathogens in Scandinavian brown bears over two decades. Parasites & Vectors, 8(1), 1-12. doi:10.1186/s13071-015-0967-2. email: maarten.voordouw@ unine.ch. Patil, S. B., Mody, N. B., Kale, S. M., & Ingole, S. D. (2015). A review of 48 patients after bear attacks in Central India: Demographics, management and outcomes. Indian Journal of Plastic Surgery: Official Publication of the Association of Plastic Surgeons of India, 48(1), 60. doi:10.4103/0970-0358.155267. email: ni.oohay@13mbjnukin. Pavlova, V., Grimm, V., Dietz, R., Sonne, C., Vorkamp, K., Rigét, F., . . . Nabe-Nielsen, J. (2015). Modeling population-level consequences of polychlorinated biphenyl exposure in east Greenland polar bears. Archives of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, 1-12. doi:10.1007/s00244-015-0203-2. email: [email protected]. Prescott, H. M., Manning, C., Gardner, A., Ritchie, W. A., Pizzi, R., Girling, S., . . . Jahoda, C. A. (2015). Giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) buccal mucosa tissue as a source of multipotent progenitor cells. PloS one, 10(9), e0138840. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0138840. email: [email protected]. Proctor, M. F., Nielsen, S. E., Kasworm, W. F., Servheen, C., Radandt, T. G., Machutchon, A. G., & Boyce, M. S. (2015). Grizzly bear connectivity mapping in the Canada–United States trans‐border region. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 79(4), 544-558. doi:10.1002/jwmg.862. email: [email protected]. Prüss, H., Leubner, J., Wenke, N. K., Czirják, G. Á., Szentiks, C. A., & Greenwood, A. D. (2015). Anti-NMDA receptor encephalitis in the polar bear (Ursus maritimus) Knut. Scientific Reports, 5, 12805. doi:10.1038/srep12805. Puckett, E. E., Etter, P. D., Johnson, E. A., & Eggert, L. S. (2015). Phylogeographic analyses of American black bears (Ursus americanus) suggest four glacial refugia and complex patterns of post-glacial admixture. Molecular Biology and Evolution, msv114. doi:10.1093/molbev/ msv114. email: [email protected]. Qunxiu, L., Shu, Z., Weiguang, H., Juxing, X., & Park, S. Z. (2015). The effects of environmental enrichment on the behavior of captive red panda in Shanghai Zoo. Chinese Journal of Wildlife, 1, 002.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 49 Publications Rayl, N. D., Fuller, T. K., Organ, J. F., McDonald, J. E., Otto, R. D., Bastille-Rousseau, G., . . . Mahoney, S. P. (2015). Spatiotemporal variation in the distribution of potential predators of a resource pulse: black bears and caribou calves in Newfoundland. The Journal of wildlife management, 79(7), 1041-1050. doi:10.1002/jwmg.936. email: [email protected]. Russo, G. A., & Williams, S. A. (2015). Giant pandas (Carnivora: Ailuropoda melanoleuca) and living hominoids converge on lumbar verte- bral adaptations to orthograde trunk posture. Journal of Human Evolution. doi:10.1016/j.jhevol.2015.06.015. email: Gabrielle.Russo@ stonybrook.edu, [email protected]. Sahanatien, V., Peacock, E., & Derocher, A. E. (2015). Population substructure and space use of Foxe Basin polar bears. Ecology and Evolu- tion, 5(14), 2851-2864. doi:10.1002/ece3.1571. email: [email protected]. Saito, M. U., & Koike, F. (2015). Trait-dependent changes in assemblages of mid-sized and large mammals along an Asian urban gradient. Acta Oecologica, 67, 34-39. doi:10.1016/j.actao.2015.06.002. email: [email protected]. Santiago-Moreno, J., Esteso, M. C., Pradiee, J., Castaño, C., Toledano-Díaz, A., O’Brien, E., . . . Zhihe, Z. (2015). Giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) sperm morphometr y and function af ter repeated freezing and thawing. Andrologia (online early). doi:10.1111/and.12468. email: [email protected]. Selvaraj, I., Arun, A. S., & Dahe, Y. K. N. (2015). Vulval abscess and its successful treatment in a captive Sloth bear (Melursus ursinus). IJAR, 1(7), 447-449. Sharma, L. K., Charoo, S. A., & Sathyakumar, S. (2015). Conflict bear translocation: investigating population genetics and fate of bear translocation in Dachigam National Park, Jammu and Kashmir, India. PloS one, 10(8), e0132005. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0132005. email: [email protected]. Shaw, M., Kolba, N., & Huffman, J. E. (2015). Babesia spp. in Ursus americanus (Black Bear) in New Jersey. Northeastern Naturalist, 22(3), 451-458. doi:10.1656/045.022.0303. email: [email protected]. Shimoinaba, S., & Oi, T. (2015). Relationship between tooth wear and age in the Japanese black bear in Hiroshima Prefecture, Japan. Mam- mal Study, 40(1), 53-60. doi:10.3106/041.040.0101. email: [email protected]. Shine, C. L., Penberthy, S., Robbins, C. T., Nelson, O. L., & McGowan, C. P. (2015). Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribilis) locomotion: gaits and ground reaction forces. The Journal of Experimental Biology, jeb. 121806. doi:10.1242/jeb.121806. email: [email protected]. Simek, S., Belant, J., Fan, Z., Young, B., Leopold, B., Fleming, J., & Waller, B. (2015). Source populations and roads affect American black bear recolonization. European Journal of Wildlife Research, 61(4), 583-590. doi:10.1007/s10344-015-0933-5. email: southpawadk@hotmail. com. Sinding, M.-H. S., Arneborg, J., Nyegaard, G., & Gilbert, M. T. P. (2015). Ancient DNA unravels the truth behind the controversial GUS Green- landic Norse fur samples: the bison was a horse, and the muskox and bears were goats. Journal of Archaeological Science, 53, 297-303. doi:10.1016/j.jas.2014.10.028. email: [email protected]. Sorensen, A. A., Stenhouse, G. B., Bourbonnais, M. L., & Nelson, T. A. (2015). Effects of habitat quality and anthropogenic disturbance on grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) home range fidelity. Canadian Journal of Zoology. doi:10.1139/cjz-2015-0095. Spector, D. A., Deng, J., Coleman, R., & Wade, J. B. (2015). The urothelium of a hibernator: the American black bear. Physiological Reports, 3(6). doi:10.14814/phy2.12429. email: [email protected]. Stapleton, S., Peacock, E., & Garshelis, D. (2015). Aerial surveys suggest long-term stability in the seasonally ice-free Foxe Basin (Nunavut) polar bear population. Marine Mammal Science (online early). doi:10.1111/mms.12251. email: [email protected]. Stetz, J. B., Seitz, T., & Sawaya, M. A. (2015). Effects of exposure on genotyping success rates of hair samples from brown and American black bears. Journal of Fish and Wildlife Management, 6(1), 191-198. doi:10.3996/122013-JFWM-085. email: [email protected]. Takahashi, K., Takahashi, K., & Washitani, I. (2015). Do small canopy gaps created by Japanese black bears facilitate fruiting of fleshy-fruited plants? PloS one, 10(7), e0130956. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0130956. email: [email protected]. Tang, J., Kong, F., Zeng, B., Xu, H., Yang, J., & Li, Y. (2015). The primary structure of COMT gene is not involved in the diet shift of the giant or the red pandas. Gene, 562(2), 244-246. doi:10.1016/j.gene.2015.02.046. email: [email protected]. Tian, G.-R., Zhao, G.-H., Du, S.-Z., Hu, X.-F., Wang, H.-B., Zhang, L.-X., & Yu, S.-K. (2015). First report of Enterocytozoon bieneusi from giant pandas (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) and red pandas (Ailurus fulgens) in China. Infection, Genetics and Evolution, 34, 32-35. doi:10.1016/j. meegid.2015.06.015. email: [email protected], [email protected]. Tokita, N., Nakiri, S., Dewi, B. S., & Tokita, T. (2015). Nutritional characteristics of Konara (Quercus serrata) acorns and their parasitic weevil larva (Curculio dentipes) and its palatability to Japanese black bears (Ursus thibetanus) as a food source in autumn. Asian Journal of Plant Science and Research, 5(7), 1-5. Trouwborst, A. (2015). Global large carnivore conservation and international law. Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(7), 1567-1588. doi:10.1007/s10531-015-0894-8. email: [email protected]. Tsaparis, D., Karaiskou, N., Mertzanis, Y., & Triantafyllidis, A. (2015). Non-invasive genetic study and population monitoring of the brown bear (Ursus arctos)(Mammalia: Ursidae) in Kastoria region–Greece. Journal of Natural History, 49(5-8), 393-410. doi:10.1080/00222933.20 13.877992. Vetter, W., Gall, V., & Skírnisson, K. (2015). Polyhalogenated compounds (PCBs, chlordanes, HCB and BFRs) in four polar bears (Ursus maritimus) that swam malnourished from East Greenland to Iceland. Science of The Total Environment, 533, 290-296. doi:10.1016/j. scitotenv.2015.07.011. email: [email protected]. Voyles, Z., Treves, A., & MacFarland, D. (2015). Spatiotemporal effects of nuisance black bear management actions in Wisconsin. Ursus, 26(1), 11-20. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-14-00038.1. email: [email protected]. Wang, D. (2015). Low daily energy expenditure enables giant pandas to survive on bamboo. Science China Life Sciences, 1-2. doi:10.1007/ s11427-015-4917-1. email: [email protected].

50 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 Publications Wang, J.-J., Liu, Y.-L., Sun, Y.-C., Ge, W., Wang, Y.-Y., Dyce, P. W., . . . Shen, W. (2015). Basic fibroblast growth factor stimulates the prolifera- tion of bone marrow mesenchymal stem cells in giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). PloS one, 10(9), e0137712. doi:10.1371/journal. pone.0137712. email: [email protected], [email protected]. Wang, Q.-L., Li, Z.-B., Kong, H.-Y., & He, J.-H. (2015). Fractal analysis of polar bear hairs. Thermal Science, 19(suppl. 1), 143-144. doi:10.2298/ TSCI15S1S43W. email: [email protected]. Wang, T., Chen, Z., Xie, Y., Hou, R., Wu, Q., Gu, X., . . . Yang, G. (2015). Prevalence and molecular characterization of Cryptosporidium in giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) in Sichuan province, China. Parasites & Vectors, 8(1), 1-5. doi:10.1186/s13071-015-0953-8. email: [email protected]. Wei, F., Swaisgood, R., Hu, Y., Nie, Y., Yan, L., Zhang, Z., . . . Zhu, L. (2015). Progress in the ecology and conservation of giant pandas. Conser- vation Biology 29(6):1497-1507. doi:10.1111/cobi.12582. email: weif [email protected]. Wei, F., Wang, X., & Wu, Q. (2015). The giant panda gut microbiome. Trends in Microbiology, 23(8), 450-452. doi:10.1016/j.tim.2015.06.004. email: [email protected] [email protected], [email protected]. Whiteman, J., Harlow, H., Durner, G., Anderson-Sprecher, R., Albeke, S., Regehr, E., . . . Ben-David, M. (2015). Summer declines in activity and body temperature offer polar bears limited energy savings. Science, 349(6245), 295-298. doi:10.1126/science.aaa8623. email: jwhitema@ uwyo.edu. Whittington, J., & Sawaya, M. A. (2015a). A Comparison of grizzly bear demographic parameters estimated from non-spatial and spatial open population capture-recapture models. PloS one, 10(7), e0134446. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0134446. email: jesse.whittington@ pc.gc.ca. Whittington, J., & Sawaya, M. A. (2015b). Correction: a comparison of grizzly bear demographic parameters estimated from non-spatial and spatial open population capture-recapture models. PloS one, 10(9), e0137940. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0137940. email: jesse. [email protected]. Wilton, C. M., Belant, J. L., Van Stappen, J. F., & Paetkau, D. (2015). American black bear population abundance and genetic structure on an island archipelago. Ursus, 26(1), 53-66. doi:10.2192/URSUS-D-15-00008.1. email: [email protected], [email protected]. Wu, J., Kohno, N., Mano, S., Fukumoto, Y., Tanabe, H., Hasegawa, M., & Yonezawa, T. (2015). Phylogeographic and Demographic Analysis of the Asian Black Bear (Ursus thibetanus) Based on Mitochondrial DNA. PloS one, 10(9), e0136398. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0136398. email: [email protected], [email protected]. Xenikoudakis, G., Ersmark, E., Tison, J. L., Waits, L., Kindberg, J., Swenson, J. E., & Dalén, L. (2015). Consequences of a demographic bottle- neck on genetic structure and variation in the Scandinavian brown bear. Molecular Ecology, 24(13), 3441-3454. doi:10.1111/mec.13239. email: [email protected]. Xie, Y., Zhou, X., Chen, L., Zhang, Z., Wang, C., Gu, X., . . . Yang, G. (2015). Cloning and characterization of a novel sigma-like glutathione S-transferase from the giant panda parasitic nematode, Baylisascaris schroederi. Parasites & Vectors, 8(1), 1-13. Yan, Y., Niu, L., Deng, J., Wang, Q., Yu, J., Zhang, Y., . . . Tan, X. (2015). Adjuvant effects of recombinant giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca) IL-18 on the canine distemper disease vaccine in mice. The Journal of Veterinary Medical Science, 77(2), 187-192. doi:10.1292/jvms.14-0226. email: nc.ude.ucs@fyymxt. Yu, F.-J., Zeng, C.-J., Zhang, Y., Wang, C.-D., Xiong, T.-Y., Fang, S.-G., & Zhang, H.-M. (2015). Establishment and cryopreservation of a giant panda skeletal muscle-derived cell line. Biopreservation and Biobanking, 13(3), 195-199. doi:10.1089/bio.2014.0073. email: zengchj@ sicau.edu.cn, [email protected]. Zhang, J., Hull, V., Huang, J., Zhou, S., Xu, W., Yang, H., . . . Huang, Y. (2015). Activity patterns of the giant panda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). Journal of Mammalogy, gyv118. doi:10.1093/jmammal/gyv118. email: [email protected]. Zhang, L., Wu, Q., Hu, Y., Wu, H., & Wei, F. (2015). Major histocompatibility complex alleles associated with parasite susceptibility in wild giant pandas. Heredity, 114(1), 85-93. doi:10.1038/hdy.2014.73. email: [email protected]. Zhu, W.-H., Pan, Y.-Y., Li, Z.-B., & Wang, Q.-L. (2015). One-dimensional heat conduction equation of the polar bear hair. Thermal Science, 19(suppl. 1), 179-181. doi:10.2298/TSCI15S1S79Z. email: [email protected]. Zolnik, C. P., Makkay, A. M., Falco, R. C., & Daniels, T. J. (2015). American black bears as hosts of blacklegged ticks (Acari: Ixodidae) in the northeastern United States. Journal of Medical Entomology. doi:10.1093/jme/tjv092. email: [email protected].

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 51 IBA Officers & Council Executive Council Members Nishith Dharaiya Julia Bevins Karen Noyce Council Member Chair - Bear Conservation Fund President Department of Life Sciences 3303 Checkmate Dr. 15542 County Road 72 HNG University Anchorage AK 99508 USA Warba, MN 55793 USA Patan, Gujarat, India Phone: 1-907-223-3483 Phone: 1-218-259-6686 Phone: +91 999 898 1560 Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Diana Doan-Crider Frank van Manen Marty Obbard Webmaster & Student Affairs Past-President Council Member Coordinator Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources Animo Partnership in Natural Resources, U.S. Geological Survey DNA Building, Trent University LLC Northern Rocky Mountain Science Center 2140 East Bank Drive Adjunct Professor, Dept. of Ecosystem 2327 University Way, Suite 2 Peterborough, ON K9J 7B8 Canada Science & Management, Texas A&M Bozeman, MT 59715 USA Phone: 1-705-755-1549 University Phone: 1-406-994-5043 Email: [email protected] PO Box 1626 Email: [email protected] Medina, TX 78055 Gordon Stenhouse Office: 830-589-3309, Cell: 830-431-2770 Mike Proctor Council Member Email: [email protected] Vice President for Americas Research Scientist and Grizzly Bear Birchdale Ecological Program Lead Dave Garshelis PO Box 920 Foothills Research Institute IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair Kaslo, BC, V0G 1M0 Canada 1176 Switzer Drive, Box 6330 Minnesota Department of Natural Phone: 1-250-353-7339 Hinton, AB, T7V 1L6 Canada Resources Email: [email protected] Phone: 1-780-865-8388 1201 East Highway 2 Email: [email protected] Grand Rapids, MN 55744 USA Andreas Zedrosser Phone: 1-218-327-4146 Vice President for Eurasia Alex Kopatz Email: [email protected] Norwegian University of Life Sciences Council Member Pb. 5003, N - 1432, Ås, Norway Bioforsk - Norwegian Institute for Mark Edwards Phone: +47-6496-5393 Agricultural and Environmental Research IBN Newsletter Editor Fax: +47-6496-5801 9925 Svanvik, Norway Royal Alberta Museum Email: [email protected] Phone: +47 92 01 33 71 12845 - 102 Ave. Email: [email protected] Edmonton, AB Jennapher Teunissen van Manen T5N 0M6 Canada Secretary Shaenandhoa Garcia-Rangel Phone: 1-780-453-9125 Bozeman, MT USA Council Member Email: [email protected] Phone: 1-406-600-3397 Departamento de Estudios Ambientales Email: jennapher.teunissenvanmanen@ Universidad Simón Bolívar, Pabellón 2, Rob Steinmetz outlook.com oficina 2-010, Valle de Sartenejas, Baruta IUCN Bear Specialist Group Co-chair Caracas, Edo. Miranda, Venezuela 1080 WWF-Thailand Tabitha Graves Phone: 00582129063044 2549/45 Paholyothin Rd. Email: [email protected] Treasurer Ladyao, Jatujak, Bangkok, 10900 Thailand 1127 4th Avenue West Phone: +662-942-7691 Columbia Falls, MT 59912 USA Ex-Officio Members Email: [email protected] Phone: 1-406-396-4162 Jerry Belant Email: [email protected] Ursus Editor Dag Vongraven Carnivore Ecology Laboratory IUCN Polar Bear Specialist Group Emre Can Forest and Wildlife Research Center Norwegian Polar Institute Council Member Mississippi State University FRAM Center Wildlife Conservation Research Unit Box 9690, Mississippi State, MS 39762 USA N-9296 Tromso, Norway University of Oxford Phone: 1-662-325-2996 Phone: +47 77750638 Recanati-Kaplan Centre, Tubney House Email: [email protected] Email: [email protected] Abingdon Road, Tubney, Abingdon OX13 5QL, UK Phone: +44 (0) 1865 611 100 Email: [email protected]

52 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 BSG Expert Team Chairs BSG Co-chairs Dave Garshelis [email protected] Rob Steinmetz [email protected]

Red List Authority Focal Point Giant Panda Expert Team Co-chairs Bruce McLellan Ron Swaisgood [email protected] [email protected] Dajun Wang European Brown Bear Expert Team Co-chairs [email protected] Djuro Huber [email protected] Andean Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Jon Swenson Shaenandhoa Garcia-Rangel [email protected] [email protected] Ximena Velez-Liendo North Asian Brown Bear Expert Team Co-chairs [email protected] Larry Van Daele [email protected] Trade in Bear Parts Expert Team Chair Tsutomu Mano Chris Shepherd [email protected] [email protected]

South Asian Brown Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Captive Bears Expert Team Co-chairs Achyut Aryal Matt Hunt [email protected] [email protected] Ali Nawaz Lydia Kolter [email protected] [email protected]

Asiatic Black Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Human-Bear Conflicts Expert Team Co-chairs John Beecham Dave Garshelis [email protected] [email protected] Lana Ciarniello S. Sathyakumar [email protected] [email protected]

Sun Bear Expert Team Co-chairs Mexican Black Bear Expert Team Chair Diana Doan-Crider Gabriella Fredriksson [email protected] [email protected] Lorraine Scotson Technical and Scientific Advisors [email protected] Bruce McLellan Sloth Bear Expert Team Co-chairs [email protected] Michael Proctor Harendra Bargali [email protected] [email protected] John Seidensticker Nishith Dharaiya [email protected] [email protected]

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 53 This page is intentionally left blank.

54 International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 This page is intentionally left blank.

International Bear News Fall 2015, vol. 24 no. 3 55 International Bear News Distribution 19625 Charline Manor Road Olney MD 20832 USA

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

About the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) The International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) is a non-profit tax-exempt organization open to professional biologists, wildlife managers, and others dedicated to the conservation of all bear species. The organization has over 550 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 Spring 2015 issue is 5 February 2016 printed with soy-based ink on 100% recycled, post-consumer waste paper