Search

Globally, climate is changing rapidly, which causes shifts in many species' distributions, stressing the need to understand their response to changing environmental conditions to inform conservation and management. Northern latitudes are expected to experience strongest changes in climate, with milder winters and decreasing snow cover. The wolverine (Gulo gulo) is a circumpolar, threatened carnivore distributed in northern tundra, boreal, and subboreal habitats. Previous studies have suggested that wolverine distribution and reproduction are constrained by a strong association with persistent spring snow cover. We assess this hypothesis by relating spatial distribution of 1589 reproductive events, a fitness‐related proxy for female reproduction and survival, to snow cover over two decades. Wolverine distribution has increased and number of reproductive events increased 20 times in areas lacking spring snow cover during our study period, despite low monitoring effort where snow is sparse. Thus, the relationship between reproductive events and persistent spring snow cover weakened during this period. These findings show that wolverine reproductive success and hence distribution are less dependent on spring snow cover than expected. This has important implications for projections of future habitat availability, and thus distribution, of this threatened species. Our study also illustrates how past persecution, or other factors, that have restricted species distribution to remote areas can mask actual effects of environmental parameters, whose importance reveals when populations expand beyond previously restricted ranges. Overwhelming evidence shows that climate change is affecting many species and ecological processes, but forecasting potential consequences on a given species requires longitudinal data to revisit hypotheses and reassess the direction and magnitude of climate effects with new data. This is especially important for conservation‐oriented management of species inhabiting dynamic systems where environmental factors and human activities interact, a common scenario for many species in different ecosystems around the globe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

While wildlife and cultural preservation goals can be either complimentary or counteractive, the goals of large carnivore conservation and traditional pastoralist lifestyles are often at odds. Livestock depredation can negatively impact the economies of livestock herders, while subsequent lethal removals contribute to local carnivore population declines. Here, we collaborated with two Sámi reindeer herding communities (2010–2016) situated in Sweden's boreal forest to evaluate the efficacy and economic feasibility of three brown bear predation mitigation measures: corralling pregnant reindeer during parturition, lethal bear management removals, and public bear‐license hunting. Calving corrals increased survival for reindeer calves born to average‐sized females by 7%–15%, and by 14%–30% for calves born to small females. However, the realized cost of implementing calving corrals outweighed the financial gain for both our study areas (net losses ranged between €1111 and €6210 per calf saved from bear predation per year when using the updated 2021 calf value; 1€ [Euro] = US$1.1), as well as for almost every theoretical scenario we explored (net losses €234 and €13,995 per calf saved from bear predation). The exception was the theoretical scenario where small herding communities overlapped large bear populations, which crossed the breakeven efficacy bear/reindeer ratio of 13.5 bears/100 reindeer and had a potential net gain of €36 per saved calf. Similarly, the cost of lethal management removals of bears outweighed the potential financial gain from saved calves, with net losses between €75 and €239 per calf. License hunting, where the hunters voluntarily incur the monetary costs of removing bears, is in most cases the only economically viable mitigation measure where the cost of mitigation did not outweigh the financial gain from increased reindeer survival. While the annual public license hunt was the most cost‐effective mitigation measure, it may be less biologically effective, that is, bear hunting occurs in the fall and reindeer parturition the following spring which leaves time for the empty niche of harvested bears to be filled by survivors. Economically and biologically effective predation mitigation measures are key for promoting coexistence, and we suggest that potential mitigation measures should be studied in collaboration with local people. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Competition between apex predators can alter the strength of top‐down forcing, yet we know little about the behavioral mechanisms that drive competition in multipredator ecosystems. Interactions between predators can be synergistic (facilitative) or antagonistic (inhibitive), both of which are widespread in nature, vary in strength between species and across space and time, and affect predation patterns and predator–prey dynamics. Recent research has suggested that gray wolf (Canis lupus) kill rates decrease where they are sympatric with brown bears (Ursus arctos), however, the mechanisms behind this pattern remain unknown. We used data from two long‐term research projects in Scandinavia (Europe) and Yellowstone National Park (North America) to test the role of interference and exploitation competition from bears on wolf predatory behavior, where altered wolf handling and search time of prey in the presence of bears are indicative of interference and exploitation competition, respectively. Our results suggest the mechanisms driving competition between bears and wolves were dependent on the season and study system. During spring in Scandinavia, interference competition was the primary mechanism driving decreased kill rates for wolves sympatric with bears; handling time increased, but search time did not. In summer, however, when both bear and wolf predation focused on neonate moose, the behavioral mechanism switched to exploitation competition; search time increased, but handling time did not. Alternartively, interference competition did affect wolf predation dynamics in Yellowstone during summer, where wolves prey more evenly on neonate and adult ungulates. Here, bear presence at a carcass increased the amount of time wolves spent at carcasses of all sizes and wolf handling time for small prey, but decreased handling time for the largest prey. Wolves facilitate scavenging opportunities for bears, however, bears alter wolf predatory behavior via multiple pathways and are primarily antagonistic to wolves. Our study helps to clarify the behavioral mechanisms driving competition between apex predators, illustrating how interspecific interactions can manifest into population‐level predation patterns. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The rather limited human ability to understand animal vision and visual signalling has frequently clouded our expectations concerning the visual abilities of other animals. But there are multiple reasons to suspect that visual signalling is more widely employed by animals than previously thought. Because visibility of visual marks depends on the background in which they are seen, species spending most of their time living in dark conditions (e.g., in forests and/or having crepuscular and nocturnal habits) may rely on bright signals to enhance visual display. Here, as a result of experimental manipulations, we present, for the first time ever, evidence supporting the use of a new channel of intraspecific communication by a mammal species, i.e., brown bear Ursus arctos adult males relying on visual marks during mating. Bear reactions to our manipulation suggest that visual signalling could represent a widely overlooked mechanism in mammal communication, which may be more broadly employed than was previously thought. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Scent-mediated communication is considered the principal communication channel in many mammal species. Compared with visual and vocal communication, odors persist for a longer time, enabling individuals to interact without being in the same place at the same time. The brown bear (Ursus arctos), like other mammals, carries out chemical communication, for example, by means of scents deposited on marking (or rub) trees. In this study, we assessed rub tree selectivity of the brown bear in the predominantly deciduous forests of the Cantabrian Mountains (NW Spain). We first compared the characteristics of 101 brown bear rub trees with 263 control trees. We then analyzed the potential factors affecting the density of rub trees along 35 survey routes along footpaths. We hypothesized that: (1) bears would select particular trees, or tree species, with characteristics that make them more conspicuous; and (2) that bears would select trees located in areas with the highest presence of conspecifics, depending on the population density or the position of the trees within the species' range. We used linear models and generalized additive models to test these hypotheses. Our results showed that brown bears generally selected more conspicuous trees with a preference for birches (Betula spp.). This choice may facilitate the marking and/or detection of chemical signals and, therefore, the effectiveness of intraspecific communication. Conversely, the abundance of rub trees along footpaths did not seem to depend on the density of bear observations or their relative position within the population center or its border. Our results suggest that Cantabrian brown bears select trees based on their individual characteristics and their location, with no influence of characteristics of the bear population itself. Our findings can be used to locate target trees that could help in population monitoring. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Acta Silvae et Ligni is the property of Biotechnical Faculty, Slovenian Forestry Institute and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Group living is an important behavioral feature in some species of mammals, although somewhat uncommon in the Order Carnivora. Wolves Canis lupus are highly social and cooperative carnivores that live in family groups, i.e. packs. The number of wolves in a pack affects social, reproductive and predatory behavior, thus conditioning population dynamics. Despite its relevance to management decisions, pack size has not been thoroughly studied in populations inhabiting human dominated landscapes such as the Iberian Peninsula. We estimated variation of wolf pack size from 1990 to 2018 in northern Spain, both in winter and summer. Winter data corresponded to direct observations and snow tracking at 42 localities (n = 253 data, 160 pack-years), whereas summer data corresponded to observations at rendezvous sites at 22 localities (n = 237 data, 43 pack-years). We estimated average pack size from the largest number of wolves recorded at each locality and year. Winter pack size averaged 4.2 ± 1.7 (mean ± SD) individuals. At summer rendezvous sites adult/subadult wolves (older than one year) averaged 3.1 ± 1.3 individuals, whereas pups averaged 4.0 ± 1.9. Generalized linear mixed models (GLMM) showed that pack size declined through the winter from 4.9 (4.2–5.6, 95% CI) wolves in November to 3.8 (2.9–4.9, 95% CI) wolves in April. We found no trend in pack size, neither in winter nor in summer. We discuss our results compared with other studies and populations worldwide, and its usefulness to comprehend the dynamics of this vulnerable population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We compiled, summarized and reviewed 338 cases of people killed or injured by brown bears from 1932 to 2017 in Russia, home of about half of the world's brown bears. During the Soviet period, 1932–1990, hunters and outdoor workers were injured/killed by bears more frequently than people engaged in other activities, 28% and 19% among all incidents, respectively. However, after 1991, people who gathered wild resources, hiked or were within human settlements were most affected (22, 16 and 15%, respectively). Single bears were involved in most of the incidents before and after 1991 (76% and 74% of the cases, respectively). In 1991–2017, the post-Soviet period, when data availability was better, bear-caused injuries and fatalities (264 records) occurred more often on the Russian Pacific Coast (111 incidents) and in Siberia (109 incidents) than in European Russia (44 incidents), where human encroachment in bear habitat is higher. During the same period, the percentages of fatalities were not significantly different among the areas; 39% in European Russia, 49% in Siberia and 50% on the Pacific Coast. Casualties occurred mainly during daytime and especially in summer and autumn. In 182 incidents with known probable causes, bears most frequently attacked when provoked or disturbed (38%) and surprised (21%), but 18% of the incidents seemed to reflect bear predatory behavior. Hence, we encourage researchers and wildlife managers to develop educational programs on large carnivore biology and behavior and to better manage human activities in bear country in order to minimize human–bear conflicts in Russia and elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The ongoing recovery of terrestrial large carnivores in North America and Europe is accompanied by intense controversy. On the one hand, reestablishment of large carnivores entails a recovery of their most important ecological role, predation. On the other hand, societies are struggling to relearn how to live with apex predators that kill livestock, compete for game species, and occasionally injure or kill people. Those responsible for managing these species and mitigating conflict often lack fundamental information due to a long-standing challenge in ecology: How do we draw robust population-level inferences for elusive animals spread over immense areas? Here we showcase the application of an effective tool for spatially explicit tracking and forecasting of wildlife population dynamics at scales that are relevant to management and conservation. We analyzed the world's largest dataset on carnivores comprising more than 35,000 noninvasively obtained DNA samples from over 6,000 individual brown bears (Ursus arctos), gray wolves (Canis lupus), and wolverines (Gulo gulo). Our analyses took into account that not all individuals are detected and, even if detected, their fates are not always known. We show unequivocal quantitative evidence of large carnivore recovery in northern Europe, juxtaposed with the finding that humans are the single-most important factor driving the dynamics of these apex predators. We present maps and forecasts of the spatiotemporal dynamics of large carnivore populations, transcending national boundaries and management regimes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Habitat selection of animals depends on factors such as food availability, landscape features, and intra- and interspecific interactions. Individuals can show several behavioral responses to reduce competition for habitat, yet the mechanisms that drive them are poorly understood. This is particularly true for large carnivores, whose fine-scale monitoring is logistically complex and expensive. In Scandinavia, the home-range establishment and kill rates of gray wolves (Canis lupus) are affected by the coexistence with brown bears (Ursus arctos). Here, we applied resource selection functions and a multivariate approach to compare wolf habitat selection within home ranges of wolves that were either sympatric or allopatric with bears. Wolves selected for lower altitudes in winter, particularly in the area where bears and wolves are sympatric, where altitude is generally higher than where they are allopatric. Wolves may follow the winter migration of their staple prey, moose (Alces alces), to lower altitudes. Otherwise, we did not find any effect of bear presence on wolf habitat selection, in contrast with our previous studies. Our new results indicate that the manifestation of a specific driver of habitat selection, namely interspecific competition, can vary at different spatial-temporal scales. This is important to understand the structure of ecological communities and the varying mechanisms underlying interspecific interactions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Reliable methods to measure stress-related glucocorticoid responses in free-ranging animals are important for wildlife management and conservation. Such methods are also paramount for our ability to improve our knowledge of the ecological consequences of physiological processes. The brownbear (Ursus arctos) is a large carnivore of ecological and cultural importance and is important for management. Here, we provide a physiological validation for an enzyme immunoassay (EIA) to quantify glucocorticoid metabolites in brown bear feces. We also provide an evaluationof the effects of sample exposure to ambient temperature on measured fecal glucocorticoid metabolite (fGCM) concentrations. We evaluated three EIA systems: a cortisol assay, an 11- oxoetiocholanolone assay, and an 11b-hydroxyetiocholanolone assay. Of these, the cortisol assay provided the best discrimination between peak fGCM concentrations detected 1–4 d after injections of synthetic adrenocorticotrophic hormone and preinjection baseline concentrations in four individual brown bears. The time of exposure to ambient temperature had substantial but variable effects on measured fGCM concentrations, including variation both between samples from the same individual and among samples from different bears. We propose that the validated EIA system for measuring fGCM concentrations in the brown bear could be a useful noninvasive method to monitor stress in this species. However, we highlight that this method requires that fecal samples be frozen immediately after defecation, which could be a limitation in many field situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We compiled, summarized and reviewed 338 cases of people killed or injured by brown bears from 1932 to 2017 in Russia, home of about half of the world's brown bears. During the Soviet period, 1932--1990, hunters and outdoor workers were injured/killed by bears more frequently than people engaged in other activities, 28% and 19% among all incidents, respectively. However, after 1991, people who gathered wild resources, hiked or were within human settlements were most affected (22, 16 and 15%, respectively). Single bears were involved in most of the incidents before and after 1991 (76% and 74% of the cases, respectively). In 1991--2017, the post-Soviet period, when data availability was better, bear-caused injuries and fatalities (264 records) occurred more often on the Russian Pacific Coast (111 incidents) and in Siberia (109 incidents) than in European Russia (44 incidents), where human encroachment in bear habitat is higher. During the same period, the percentages of fatalities were not significantly different among the areas; 39% in European Russia, 49% in Siberia and 50% on the Pacific Coast. Casualties occurred mainly during daytime and especially in summer and autumn. In 182 incidents with known probable causes, bears most frequently attacked when provoked or disturbed (38%) and surprised (21%), but 18% of the incidents seemed to reflect bear predatory behavior. Hence, we encourage researchers and wildlife managers to develop educational programs on large carnivore biology and behavior and to better manage human activities in bear country in order to minimize human--bear conflicts in Russia and elsewhere. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In previous centuries, wolves were extirpated across much of their range worldwide, but they started to recover in Europe since the end of last century. A general pattern of this recovery is the expansion of the range occupied by local populations. The Iberian wolf population, shared by Portugal and Spain, reached its lowest extent and abundance around the middle of the twentieth century. Unlike other populations in Europe, its range recovery and pack counts seem to have stalled since the first Spanish country-wide census of 1986-1988. The population shows low effective population size and remains isolated from other European wolves. This is unexpected given the protection offered by European legislation, i.e., the Habitats Directive, and the apparent availability of habitat outside its present range. We compiled records of wolves killed legally in Spain, reviewed the legislative and management framework for the Iberian wolf population, and discussed potential implications of a policy of lethal management for the ecology, genetics and conservation status of wolves in the Iberian Peninsula. Wolves are strictly protected in Portugal. Meanwhile, they are subject to culling and hunting in Spain. No wolf was legally removed by culling or hunting during the study period in Portugal, whereas 623 wolves were legally killed in Spain between 2008 and 2013. Twenty-nine of those wolves were killed in areas under strict protection according to European legislation. Despite the transboundary nature of this wolf population, we are not aware of coordinated conservation plans. Management is further fragmented at the sub-national level in Spain, both due to the authority of Spanish autonomous regions over their wildlife, and because wolves were listed in multiple annexes of the Habitats Directive. Fragmentation of management was apparent in the uneven adherence to the obligations of the Habitats Directive among Spanish regions. A similar situation is found for other large predator populations in Europe. We suggest that lethal management as carried out in Spain is a hindrance to transit and settlement of wolves, both within and beyond the Iberian wolf population. Reducing the pressure of lethal management appears a feasible policy change to improve the conservation status of the population and foster transboundary connectivity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human disturbance causes behavioral responses in wildlife, including large carnivores. Previous research in Scandinavia has documented that brown bears (Ursus arctos) show a variety of behavioral reactions to different human activities. We investigated how proximity to human settlements and roads, as proxies of human influence, affected brown bears' reactions to encountering humans. We analyzed experimental approaches to GPS collared bears, 18 males and 23 single females, in Sweden (n = 148 approaches) and Finland (n = 33), conducted between 2004 and 2012. The bears in Finland inhabited areas with higher human density compared to Sweden. However, the proportion of bears staying or moving when approached and the flight initiation distances were similar in both countries. In Sweden, the flight responses were not dependent on human densities or roads inside the bears' home ranges or the distances from the bears to roads and settlements. Brown bears in Fennoscandia live in areas with relatively low human population densities, but in many areas with high forestry road densities. Our results show that bears' flight reactions were consistent between areas, which is an important message for management, reinforcing previous studies that have documented human avoidance by bears at different spatial and temporal scales. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Identifying how sympatric species belonging to the same guild coexist is a major question of community ecology and conservation. Habitat segregation between two species might help reduce the effects of interspecific competition and apex predators are of special interest in this context, because their interactions can have consequences for lower trophic levels. However, habitat segregation between sympatric large carnivores has seldom been studied. Based on monitoring of 53 brown bears (Ursus arctos) and seven sympatric adult gray wolves (Canis lupus) equipped with GPS collars in Sweden, we analyzed the degree of interspecific segregation in habitat selection within their home ranges in both late winter and spring, when their diets overlap the most. We used the K‐select method, a multivariate approach that relies on the concept of ecological niche, and randomization methods to quantify habitat segregation between bears and wolves. Habitat segregation between bears and wolves was greater than expected by chance. Wolves tended to select for moose occurrence, young forests, and rugged terrain more than bears, which likely reflects the different requirements of an omnivore (bear) and an obligate carnivore (wolf). However, both species generally avoided human‐related habitats during daytime. Disentangling the mechanisms that can drive interspecific interactions at different spatial scales is essential for understanding how sympatric large carnivores occur and coexist in human‐dominated landscapes, and how coexistence may affect lower trophic levels. The individual variation in habitat selection detected in our study may be a relevant mechanism to overcome intraguild competition and facilitate coexistence. Identifying how sympatric species belonging to the same guild coexist is a major question of community ecology and conservation. We analyzed the degree of interspecific segregation in habitat selection between wolves and brown bears. We found that habitat segregation was larger than expected by chance, which suggests habitat segregation as a possible mechanism used by both species to coexist. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large carnivores are often persecuted due to conflict with human activities, making their conservation in human-modified landscapes very challenging. Conflict-related scenarios are increasing worldwide, due to the expansion of human activities or to the recovery of carnivore populations. In general, brown bears Ursus arctos avoid humans and their settlements, but they may use some areas close to people or human infrastructures. Bear damages in human-modified landscapes may be related to the availability of food resources of human origin, such as beehives. However, the association of damage events with factors that may predispose bears to cause damages has rarely been investigated. We investigated bear damages to apiaries in the Cantabrian Mountains (Spain), an area with relatively high density of bears. We included spatial, temporal and environmental factors and damage prevention measures in our analyses, as factors that may influence the occurrence and intensity of damages. In 2006–2008, we located 61 apiaries, which included 435 beehives damaged in the study area (346 km2). The probability of an apiary being attacked was positively related to both the intensity of the damage suffered the year before and the distance to the nearest damaged apiary, and negatively related to the number of prevention measures employed as well as the intensity of the damage suffered by the nearest damage apiary. The intensity of damage to apiaries was positively related to the size of the apiary and to vegetation cover in the surroundings, and negatively related to the number of human settlements. Minimizing the occurrence of bear damages to apiaries seems feasible by applying and maintaining proper prevention measures, especially before an attack occurs and selecting appropriate locations for beehives (e.g. away from forest areas). This applies to areas currently occupied by bears, and to neighbouring areas where dispersing individuals may expand their range. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Abstract: Evolutionary traps, and their derivative, ecological traps, occur when animals make maladaptive decisions based on seemingly reliable environmental cues, and are important mechanistic explanations for declines in animal populations. Despite the interest in large carnivore conservation in human‐modified landscapes, the emergence of traps and their potential effects on the conservation of large carnivore populations has frequently been overlooked. The brown bear Ursus arctos typifies the challenges facing large carnivore conservation and recent research has reported that this species can show maladaptive behaviours in human‐modified landscapes. Here we review, describe and discuss scenarios recognised as evolutionary or ecological traps for brown bears, and propose possible trap scenarios and mechanisms that have the potential to affect the dynamics and viability of brown bear populations. Six potential trap scenarios have been detected for brown bears in human‐modified landscapes: 1) food resources close to human settlements; 2) agricultural landscapes; 3) roads; 4) artificial feeding sites; 5) hunting by humans; and 6) other human activities. Because these traps are likely to be of contrasting relevance for different demographic segments of bear populations, we highlight the importance of evaluations of the relative demographic consequences of different trap types for wildlife management. We also suggest that traps may be behind the decreases in brown bear and other large carnivore populations in human‐modified landscapes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Human persecution and habitat loss have endangered large carnivore populations worldwide, but some are recovering, exacerbating old conflicts. Carnivores can injure and kill people; the most dramatic form of wildlife-human conflict. In Scandinavia, the brown bear (Ursus arctos) population increased from ~500 bears in 1977 to ~3300 in 2008, with an increase in injuries, fatalities, and public fear of bear attacks. We reviewed media coverage and interviewed victims to explore how bear population trends, hunter education, and other factors may have influenced the number of injuries and fatalities in Scandinavia from 1977 to 2016. We found 42 incidents with 42 injuries and 2 fatalities; 42 were adult men, one was an adult woman conducting forestry work, and one was a boy skiing off-piste. Thirty-three adult men were hunting bears, moose, or small game, often with a hunting dog, and 26 had shot at the bear at 8±11 m before injury. Eleven nonhunters were conducting forestry work, inspecting a hunting area, picking berries, tending livestock, hiking, harassing a denned bear, and one person was killed outside his house at night. Eight of the 11 incidents of nonhunters involved female bears with cubs; three of these family groups were in dens and two were on carcasses. The annual number of hunters injured/killed was mostly influenced by the increase in the bear population size. The pattern was similar regarding injuries/fatalities to other outdoor users, but the relation with the bear population size was weaker than for hunters, and the null model was equally supported. Bear physiology at denning may make encounters with bears more risky in the fall, when bears show prehibernation behavior. Awareness and education efforts, especially among hunters, seem important to ensure human safety. Recreationists and forestry workers should avoid dense vegetation or make noise to warn bears of their presence. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Pigeon et al. (2016) Staying cool in a changing landscape: the influence of maximum daily ambient temperature on grizzly bear habitat selection. Oecologia 181:1101. doi: analyzed the effect of ambient temperature on the habitat selection of grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos) in Alberta, Canada. They concluded that temperature played a significant role in bear habitat selection and that it was unlikely that human activity introduced biases to the habitat selection of bears. However, Pigeon et al. did not consider variables related to human activities in their analyses. They also misinterpreted previous research that has accounted for temperature in the habitat selection of brown bears. There is much literature published on the negative effects of human disturbance on wildlife in general and on bears in particular. Downplaying the role of human disturbance could have important negative consequences if, in fact, human disturbance were a more important factor than thermoregulation. Indeed, dismissing the importance of human influence, in the face of contradictory evidence, could tempt managers to disregard an important factor that is difficult and often unpopular to deal with in their conservation plans. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Trophic interactions are a fundamental topic in ecology, but we know little about how competition between apex predators affects predation, the mechanism driving top-down forcing in ecosystems. We used long-term datasets from Scandinavia (Europe) and Yellowstone National Park (North America) to evaluate how grey wolf (Canis lupus) kill rate was affected by a sympatric apex predator, the brown bear (Ursus arctos). We used kill interval (i.e. the number of days between consecutive ungulate kills) as a proxy of kill rate. Although brown bears can monopolize wolf kills, we found no support in either study system for the common assumption that they cause wolves to kill more often. On the contrary, our results showed the opposite effect. In Scandinavia, wolf packs sympatric with brown bears killed less often than allopatric packs during both spring (after bear den emergence) and summer. Similarly, the presence of bears at wolf-killed ungulates was associated with wolves killing less often during summer in Yellowstone. The consistency in results between the two systems suggests that brown bear presence actually reduces wolf kill rate. Our results suggest that the influence of predation on lower trophic levels may depend on the composition of predator communities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Humans are important agents of wildlife mortality, and understanding such mortality is paramount for effective population management and conservation. However, the spatial mechanisms behind wildlife mortality are often assumed rather than tested, which can result in unsubstantiated caveats in ecological research (e.g. fear ecology assumptions) and wildlife conservation and/or management (e.g. ignoring ecological traps). We investigated spatial patterns in human-caused mortality based on 30 years of brown bear Ursus arctos mortality data from a Swedish population. We contrasted mortality data with random locations and global positioning system relocations of live bears, as well as between sex, age and management classes ('problem' versus 'no problem' bear, before and after changing hunting regulations), and we used resource selection functions to identify potential ecological sinks (i.e. avoided habitat with high mortality risk) and traps (i.e. selected habitat with high mortality risk). We found that human-caused mortality and mortality risk were positively associated with human presence and access. Bears removed as a management measure were killed in closer proximity to humans than hunter-killed bears, and supplementary feeding of bears did not alter the spatial structure of human-caused bear mortality. We identified areas close to human presence as potential sink habitat and agricultural fields (oat fields in particular) as potential ecological traps in our study area. We emphasize that human-caused mortality in bears and maybe in wildlife generally can show a very local spatial structure, which may have far-reaching population effects. We encourage researchers and managers to systematically collect and geo-reference wildlife mortality data, in order to verify general ecological assumptions and to inform wildlife managers about critical habitat types. The latter is especially important for vulnerable or threatened populations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Large carnivores inhabiting human-dominated landscapes often interact with people and their properties, leading to conflict scenarios that can mislead carnivore management and, ultimately, jeopardize conservation. In northwest Spain, brown bears Ursus arctos are strictly protected, whereas sympatric wolves Canis lupus are subject to lethal control. We explored ecological, economic and societal components of conflict scenarios involving large carnivores and damages to human properties. We analyzed the relation between complaints of depredations by bears and wolves on beehives and livestock, respectively, and bear and wolf abundance, livestock heads, number of culled wolves, amount of paid compensations, and media coverage. We also evaluated the efficiency of wolf culling to reduce depredations on livestock. Bear damages to beehives correlated positively to the number of female bears with cubs of the year. Complaints of wolf predation on livestock were unrelated to livestock numbers; instead, they correlated positively to the number of wild ungulates harvested during the previous season, the number of wolf packs, and to wolves culled during the previous season. Compensations for wolf complaints were fivefold higher than for bears, but media coverage of wolf damages was thirtyfold higher. Media coverage of wolf damages was unrelated to the actual costs of wolf damages, but the amount of news correlated positively to wolf culling. However, wolf culling was followed by an increase in compensated damages. Our results show that culling of the wolf population failed in its goal of reducing damages, and suggest that management decisions are at least partly mediated by press coverage. We suggest that our results provide insight to similar scenarios, where several species of large carnivores share the landscape with humans, and management may be reactive to perceived conflicts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Carnivore-human encounters that result in human injury present a conservation and management challenge and it is therefore important to understand under what conditions such incidents occur. Females with cubs are often involved when humans are injured by brown bears Ursus arctos. In Scandinavia, this is particularly true for unarmed recreational forest users. Our aim was to document behavioural differences between single bears and females with cubs in order to develop recommendations to minimize the risk of injuries to recreational forest users. We documented the reactions of GPS-collared females with cubs and single brown bears to experimental approaches by humans to 50 m from the bear on 42 and 108 occasions, respectively. The majority of females with cubs (95%) and single bears (89%) left when approached. Bears that left were passed at shorter distances and were in more open areas than those that stayed. Both groups had similar flight initiation distances, which were longer for bears that were active at the time of the disturbance. Females with cubs selected more open habitat than single bears, also for the new site they selected following disturbance. Females with cubs, particularly active females with cubs of the year, moved greater distances and spent more time active following the approach. Females with cubs and single bears were seen or heard in 26% and 14% of the approaches, respectively. None of the bears displayed any aggressive behaviour during the approaches. Females with cubs selected more open habitat, perhaps predisposing them to encountering people that are not involved in hunting activities, which might be the primary explanation why females with cubs are most frequently involved when unarmed people are injured by bears in Scandinavia. To mitigate injury risks, one must consider factors that bring bears closer to human activity in the first place. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Some large carnivore populations are increasing in Europe and North America, and minimizing interactions between people and carnivores is a major management task. Analysing the effects of human disturbance on wildlife from a predator-prey perspective is also of conservation interest, because individual behavioural responses to the perceived risk of predation may ultimately influence population distribution and demography., The Scandinavian brown bear population provides a good model to study the interactions between an expanding large carnivore population, and people who use forests extensively for professional and recreational activities. We experimentally approached 52 GPS-collared brown bears (293 approaches on foot) from 2006 to 2011, to document the reaction of bears and quantify the effect of disturbance on bear movements., None of the bears reacted aggressively to the observers. Although the location of the animals was known, bears were usually in quite concealed spots and were physically detected in only 16% of the approaches (seen in 42 approaches; heard in 6). However, the bears altered their daily movement patterns after the approaches. Bears increased movement at night-time and moved less at daytime, which was most visible in days 1 and 2 after the approaches, altering their foraging and resting routines., Synthesis and applications. We provide experimental evidence on the effect of human disturbance on a large carnivore. The lack of aggressive reactions to approaching observers reinforces the idea that European brown bears generally avoid people, although bears can respond aggressively if they feel threatened (e.g. when wounded). However, the movement patterns of the bears changed after disturbance. Separating large carnivores and people temporally and spatially is an important goal for conservation and management. Conserving the shrub cover that provides concealment to the carnivores and keeping people away from the most densely vegetated spots in the forests is a way to avoid encounters between carnivores and people, therefore promoting human safety and carnivore conservation. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Prey usually adjust anti-predator behavior to subtle variations in perceived risk. However, it is not clear whether adult large carnivores that are virtually free of natural predation adjust their behavior to subtle variations in human-derived risk, even when living in human-dominated landscapes. As a model, we studied resting-site selection by a large carnivore, the brown bear ( Ursus arctos), under different spatial and temporal levels of human activity. We quantified horizontal and canopy cover at 440 bear beds and 439 random sites at different distances from human settlements, seasons, and times of the day. We hypothesized that beds would be more concealed than random sites and that beds would be more concealed in relation to human-derived risk. Although human densities in Scandinavia are the lowest within bear ranges in Western Europe, we found an effect of human activity; bears chose beds with higher horizontal and canopy cover during the day (0700-1900 hours), especially when resting closer to human settlements, than at night (2200-0600 hours). In summer/fall (the berry season), with more intensive and dispersed human activity, including hunting, bears rested further from human settlements during the day than in spring (pre-berry season). Additionally, day beds in the summer/fall were the most concealed. Large carnivores often avoid humans at a landscape scale, but total avoidance in human-dominated areas is not possible. Apparently, bears adjust their behavior to avoid human encounters, which resembles the way prey avoid their predators. Bears responded to fine-scale variations in human-derived risk, both on a seasonal and a daily basis. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In northern Eurasia, large carnivores overlap with semi-domestic reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) and moose (Alces alces). In Scandinavia, previous studies have quantified brown bear (Ursus arctos) spring predation on neonates of reindeer (mostly in May) and moose (mostly in June). We explored if habitat selection by brown bears changed following resource pulses and whether these changes are more pronounced on those individuals characterised by higher predatory behaviour. Fifteen brown bears in northern Sweden (2010–2012) were fitted with GPS proximity collars, and 2585 female reindeers were collared with UHF transmitters. Clusters of bear positions were visited to investigate moose and reindeer predation. Bear kill rates and home ranges were calculated to examine bear movements and predatory behaviour. Bear habitat selection was modelled using resource selection functions over four periods (pre-calving, reindeer calving, moose calving, and post-calving). Coefficients of selection for areas closer to different land cover classes across periods were compared, examining the interactions between different degrees of predatory behaviour (i.e., high and low). Bear habitat selection differed throughout the periods and between low and high predatory bears. Differences among individuals' predatory behaviour are reflected in the selection of habitat types, providing empirical evidence that different levels of specialization in foraging behaviour helps to explain individual variation in bear habitat selection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The effects of human disturbance spread over virtually all ecosystems and ecological communities on Earth. In this review, we focus on the effects of human disturbance on terrestrial apex predators. We summarize their ecological role in nature and how they respond to different sources of human disturbance. Apex predators control their prey and smaller predators numerically and via behavioral changes to avoid predation risk, which in turn can affect lower trophic levels. Crucially, reducing population numbers and triggering behavioral responses are also the effects that human disturbance causes to apex predators, which may in turn influence their ecological role. Some populations continue to be at the brink of extinction, but others are partially recovering former ranges, via natural recolonization and through reintroductions. Carnivore recovery is both good news for conservation and a challenge for management, particularly when recovery occurs in human-dominated landscapes. Therefore, we conclude by discussing several management considerations that, adapted to local contexts, may favor the recovery of apex predator populations and their ecological functions in nature. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Several large carnivore populations are recovering former ranges, and it is important to understand interspecific interactions between overlapping species. In Scandinavia, recent research has reported that brown bear presence influences gray wolf habitat selection and kill rates. Here, we characterized the temporal use of a common prey resource by sympatric wolves and bears and described individual and seasonal variation in their direct and/or indirect interactions. Most bear–wolf interactions were indirect, via bear scavenging of wolf kills. Bears used >50% of wolf kills, whereas we did not record any wolf visit at bear kills. Adult and subadult bears visited wolf kills, but female bears with cubs of the year, the most vulnerable age class to conspecifics and other predators, did not. Wolf and bear kill rates peaked in early summer, when both targeted neonate moose calves, which coincided with a reduction in bear scavenging rate. Some bears were highly predatory and some did not kill any calf. Individual and age-class variation (in bear predation and scavenging patterns) and seasonality (in bear scavenging patterns and main prey availability of both wolves and bears) could mediate coexistence of these apex predators. Similar processes likely occur in other ecosystems with varying carnivore assemblages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Understanding animal movement facilitates better management and conservation. The link between movement and physiology holds clues to the basic drivers of animal behaviours. In bears, heart rate increases with the metabolic rate during the active phase. Their movement and heart rate change at seasonal and daily scales, and can also depend on environmental factors. Their behaviour is, therefore, flexible in activity patterns with high individual variations. The aim of this study was to establish the relationship between heart rate and distance travelled, and test whether this relationship was influenced by environmental (e.g., time of year and time of day) and biological (e.g., reproductive status, sex, body mass and age of the bears) factors. We analysed data of distance travelled and heart rate of 15 GPS-collared brown bears, both males and females, equipped with cardiac loggers in the south of Sweden in 2014–2017. Results: Heart rate increased with distances travelled exceeding 50 m in an hour, but this correlation depended on the day-of-year with higher heart rate in August than in May. Bears accompanied by cubs had lower heart rate than solitary bears especially in May. When movement was minimum (< 50 m in an hour), heart rate was not related to distance travelled and was very variable, regardless of the months. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that heart rate increases with long distances travelled, but varies with day-of-year and reproductive status, depending on the metabolic rate. Studying the change in heart rate in bears can help to evaluate their seasonal rhythms and how different factors affect them. This study illustrates the usefulness of combined bio-logging proxies, i.e., movement and heart rates in our case, in animal ecology. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]