BROWN BEAR IN GREECE: DISTRIBUTION,PRESENT STATUS-ECOLOGY OF A NORTHERNPINDUS SUBPOPULATION GEORGE A. MERTZANIS, Hellenic Society for the Protection of Nature 24, Nikiw Street, 10557, Athens, Greece Abstract: Brown bear distributionrange in Greece comprises 2 distinct nuclei of unequal size, covering a total of about 11,000 km2, and seems to have stabilized for the last 20 years after dramaticregression in the 19th century. Extra-limitalsporadic occurrence of bears southwardsof the western population nucleus down to the 39th parallel, as well as unexplored sectors of potentialbear occurrence in the northernparts of the country, may add new data to the species chorology in Greece. There is a risk of further internal fragmentationof the western distribution nucleus. Human-causedmortality appears to be the main factor of populations' negative trends. Brown bear food habits were determined by investigations in a 900 km2 bear area located in the northernPindus range and scat analysis (N = 343). Only plant materialwas found in 77 % of the samples, whereas 17% contained both plant and animal material, and 6% only animal material (mostly insects-ants). Omnivory and opportunisticstrategy appearedas the main characteristicsof bears' feeding behavior. Brown bear annualactivity cycle was determinedby data on signs of presence and activity (N = 664). It appears in relation to trophic optimas and mesoclimatic conditions of the habitat. There is evidence of winter inactivity. Brown bear habitatpreferences determined by Marcum& Loftsgaarden'smethod (N = 289 bear locations) show seasonal influence of types of vegetation communities on habitatuse. Bear-humaninteractions level seems critical: poaching and logging are the main causes of habitat deteriorationand populationdecrease. Int. Conf. Bear Res. and Manage. 9(1):187-197 Elements on the historical distributionof the brown Ministryof Agricultureand the Hellenic Society for the bear in Greece are mainly based on historical reports, Protection of Nature (Greek Ministry of Agriculture notes, and available texts. Report 1988). According to this information, brown bear range in Results and figures presented in this paper come Greece appears to have suffered dramatic regression essentially from the latter sources. throughthe centuries, as in other parts of Europewhere We thank the Greek Ministry of Agriculture, the the species was or is still in conflict with human Hellenic Society for the Protection of Nature, and the expansion. In the late 1960s (1969), brown bear were Royal Instituteof NaturalSciences of Belgium for their legally regarded as a protected species in Greece. It is collaborationin the data availability. We also thank the actuallyconsidered as an endangered-vulnerablespecies Veterinary School of Toulouse-France, the National (Greek Red Data Book-Universityof Athens 1992). A Instituteof Researchin Agronomy of Toulouse, France, review of the late 20th century brown bear distribution and the University of Agronomy-Laboratory of patterns and population status in Greece gives various Pedology, Athens, Greece for their collaboration and estimates for the first 2 decades (Couturier 1954, sound technical assistance. Hainard 1961, Curry-Lindahl1972). Apart from previous authors' fragmentary information, lack of systematicdata on the distribution STUDYAREA and ecology of the brown bear in Greece before the The study area for distributionestimate included all early 1980s resulted in an urgent need for systematic northernparts of the Pindus and Peristeriranges as well status and ecology studies. as the Rhodopimountain complex. Divided into 4 main More up-to-date information(Matsakis et al. 1981, apparentphysiographic/phytogeographic units, this area Mertzanis 1989) gives a brown bear distributionpattern comprises (Fig. 1): of 2 distinct population nuclei located respectively in Unit I: The Peristeri range with alpine meadows, the Pindus range (northwestern Greece) and the largebeech (Fagion sylvaticae) forests between 1,200 Rhodopes mountaincomplex (northeasternGreece), and and 2,100 m, and oak forests on lower altitudes, all considers the southwesternnucleus as the southernmost covering mostly graniticsoils (Quezel 1967, Debazac range of the species in Europe. These papers also and Mavromatis 1971). contain some preliminary information on bears' food Unit II: Large parts of northern Pindus range, habits. includingthe valleys of Aliakmon, Sarantaporos,and In 1985 I started 31/2years of researchwork, in the Aoos rivers with alpine meadows, large black pine framework of a doctoral thesis (Mertzanis 1992), in forests (Pinus nigra ssp. Pallasiana) as well as mixed which were incorporated data and results of the forests with black pine (Pinus nigra), fir (Abies preliminary stage of an EEC-funded survey project, borisii regis), beech (Fagus sylvatica), and white pine conducted in 1988 by the Royal Institute of Natural (Pinus heldreichiii) covering mostly limestone and Sciences of Belgium in collaboration with the Greek ophiolithic soils. At lower altitudes the vegetation 188 Int. Conf.Bear Res. and Manage.9(1) 1994 - I /, . J Macedoine r- I f/F IV Thessalie ? Regularpresence N o 0 13.5 Km + Sporadicoccurance I . 4- Transbordermigration phenomena .- --. Studyarea Fig. 1. Brown bear distribution range in Greece-western population nucleus. zones of Quercion-frainettoand Ostryo-Carpinionare Climate of the area is temperate with cold winters. widely present. Annual precipitationranges from 1,270 to 1,450 mm Unit III: The river Acheloos high valleys with and vegetation zones comprise: oak forests with mainly large fir (Abies borisii regis) forests covering (Quercusfrainetto, Quercuspubescens, Quercus cerris, limestone soils and oak forests on lower altitudes. Ostryacarpinifolia, Carpinusorientalis) pure and mixed Unit IV: Rhodopi mountaincomplex: a vast granitic coniferous and deciduous forests with: black pine (Pinus mountain complex covered with large forests of nigra), beech (Fagus sylvatica), fir (Abies borisii regis), spruce (Picea excelsa), forest pine (Pinus sylvestris), and white pine (Pinus heldreichii) followed at the higher beech (Fagus orlentalis, Fagus mosaecus), and oak elevations by alpine meadows. (Quercusfrainetto, Quercus macedonica). The composition (percentage of occurrence) of the The study area for the ecological analysis extends main types of forest vegetation is: over a 900 km2 zone in northwestern Pindus with Oak forests 27% elevations ranging between 550 and 2,637 m. About Pine forests 27% 40% of the area presents a denivelation of 500 m per Beech forests 10% km2, and 7% of it is above 1,900 m of altitude. Fir forests 5% BROWNBEAR IN GREECE* Mertzanis 189 Table 1. Percent composition of the 11 vegetation 1989) only during1988. They were often backedby communities in the study area and bear use. second-handinformation of the same year. Cases of bearsightings located in 2 neighboringareas or regions Observeduse Expecteduse countedonce. An of Vegetationcommunities (n = 289) (n = 840) were only approach population trendsis attemptedthrough harvest data as well as cases 1. Oak forests 0.23 (66) 0.22 (185) of illegalkilling. 2. Other deciduous forest types 0.03 (10) 0.03 (21) 3. Orchardsand cultivated land 0.12 (35) 0.04 (35) Ecology Food habits. Collections of scats in the field 4. Black pine forests 0.18 (52) 0.22 (184) (N = 343) were used to determinethe quantitative 5. Fir forests 0.01 0.01 (4) (4) importanceof food itemsused by brownbears. Partof 6. Beech Forests 0.09 (25) 0.04 (32) the sample(n = 95) was analyzedin the laboratory, 7. White pine forests 0.01 (4) 0.02 (15) whereasthe otherpart (n = 248) was macroscopically in the field. scat contentswere 8. Mixed Forests 0.06 (18) 0.09 (77) analysed Generally, moreeasily identifiable when freshin the field. In the 9. Mixed forests and ecotones 0.10 (30) 0.03 (25) secondcase identificationof plantremains was easier 10. Ecotones 0.08 (24) 0.14 (117) when comparedwith nearby specimens. In several cases materials in the field were takento the 11. Subalpine and alpine pastures 0 07 (21) 0.19 (145) analyzed laboratoryfor furtherstudy. All scatswere individually Chi-square test demonstratedthat there was a highly significant identifiedaccording to location, altitude, vegetative difference between the expected utilization of the vegetation surroundings,and age. Analysisof bear scats in the communities and the observed frequency of use in the study area laboratoryfollowed the techniquesof Tisch (1961), df = P < (Chi-sq. test, 10; 0.001). Russell (1971), Sumnerand (1973), and Consequently, Bonferronisimultaneous confidence intervalswere Craighead used to determinewhich categories of habitattypes were utilized more Faliuet al. (1980). Basicsteps involved: or less than expected within an annual cycle. - rehydrationof fecal material - separationof materialinto homogeneous groups by Whitepine forests 6% use of screens(4.0, 2.0, 1.0, 0.5 mm mesh) Mixedforests 11% - identificationof contents Alpinemeadows 14% - recordingof identifiedmaterials. Identificationof species, throughmacroscopic and METHODS microscopic examination, was usually successful, presentingsome difficulties for grass. Animalmaterials Distributionand PopulationStatus weremainly identified through micro-techniques of hair Estimateof brown bear historicaldistribution in examinationusing reference collections as well as Greece was based on data from relevantliterature. throughexamination of bone remains. The occurrence Recent data, based on signs of bear activity, bear of each