Geology Reports⌕ Search

Geology topics

Kerry A. Gunther

Publications and source records attributed to Kerry A. Gunther.

26 records · Page 2Linked to original sources
USGS2013

Response of Yellowstone grizzly bears to changes in food resources: A synthesis. Final report to the Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee and Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee

The Yellowstone grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) was listed as a threatened species in 1975 (Federal Register 40 FR:31734-31736). Since listing, recovery efforts have focused on increasing population size, improving habitat security, managing bear mortalities, and reducing bear-human conflicts. The Interagency Grizzly Bear Committee (IGBC; partnership of federal and state agencies responsible for grizzly bear recovery in the lower 48 states) and its Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommitte (YES; federal, state, county, and tribal partners charged with recovery of grizzly bears in the Greater Yelowston Ecosystem [GYE]) tasked the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team to provide information and further research relevant to three concerns arising from the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals November 2011 decision: 1) the ability of grizzly bears as omnivores to find alternative foods to whitebark pine seeds; 2) literature to support their conclusions; and 3) the non-intuitive biological reality that impacts can occur to individuals without causing the overall population to decline. Specifically, the IGBC and YES requested a comprehensive synthesis of the current state of knowledge regarding whitebark pinbe decline and individual and population-level responses of grizzly bears to changing food resources in the GYE. This research was particularly relevant to grizzly bear conservation given changes in the population trajectory observed during the last decade.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2010

Genetic analysis of individual origins supports isolation of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) supports the southernmost of the 2 largest remaining grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) populations in the contiguous United States. Since the mid-1980s, this population has increased in numbers and expanded in range. However, concerns for its long-term genetic health remain because of its presumed continued isolation. To test the power of genetic methods for detecting immigrants, we generated 16-locus microsatellite genotypes for 424 individual grizzly bears sampled in the GYE during 1983–2007. Genotyping success was high (90%) and varied by sample type, with poorest success (40%) for hair collected from mortalities found ≥1 day after death. Years of storage did not affect genotyping success. Observed heterozygosity was 0.60, with a mean of 5.2 alleles/marker. We used factorial correspondence analysis (Program GENETIX) and Bayesian clustering (Program STRUCTURE) to compare 424 GYE genotypes with 601 existing genotypes from grizzly bears sampled in the Northern Continental Divide Ecosystem (NCDE) ( F ST = 0.096 between GYE and NCDE). These methods correctly classified all sampled individuals to their population of origin, providing no evidence of natural movement between the GYE and NCDE. Analysis of 500 simulated first-generation crosses suggested that over 95% of such bears would also be detectable using our 16-locus data set. Our approach provides a practical method for detecting immigration in the GYE grizzly population. We discuss estimates for the proportion of the GYE population sampled and prospects for natural immigration into the GYE.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2010

A proposed lexicon of terms and concepts for human-bear management in North America

We believe that communication within and among agency personnel in the United States and Canada about the successes and failures of their human–bear (Ursidae) management programs will increase the effectiveness of these programs and of bear research. To communicate more effectively, we suggest agencies clearly define terms and concepts used in human–bear management and use them in a consistent manner. We constructed a human–bear management lexicon of terms and concepts using a modified Delphi method to provide a resource that facilitates more effective communication among human–bear management agencies. Specifically, we defined 40 terms and concepts in human–bear management and suggest definitions based on discussions with 13 other professionals from the United States and Canada. Although new terms and concepts will emerge in the future and definitions will evolve as we learn more about bear behavior and ecology, our purpose is to suggest working definitions for terms and concepts to help guide human–bear management and research activities in North America. Applications or revisions of these definitions may be useful outside of North America.

Ursus↗
USGS2006

Grizzly bear nutrition and ecology studies in Yellowstone National Park

T HE CHANCE TO SEE a wild grizzly bear is often the first or second reason people give for visiting Yellow - stone National Park. Public interest in bears is closely coupled with a desire to perpetuate this wild symbol of the American West. Grizzly bears have long been described as a wilderness species requiring large tracts of undisturbed habitat. However, in today’s world, most grizzly bears live in close proximity to humans (Schwartz et al. 2003). Even in Yellowstone National Park, the impacts of humans can affect the long-term survival of bears (Gunther et al. 2002). As a consequence, the park has long supported grizzly bear research in an effort to understand these impacts. Most people are familiar with what happened when the park and the State of Montana closed open-pit garbage dumps in the late 1960s and early 1970s, when at least 229 bears died as a direct result of conflict with humans. However, many may not be as familiar with the ongoing changes in the park’s plant and animal communities that have the potential to further alter the park’s ability to support grizzly bears.

Wyoming↗
USGS2002

Distribution of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, 1990-2000

The Yellowstone grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) has been expanding its range during the past 2 decades and now occupies historic habitats that had been vacant. A current understanding of the distribution of grizzly bears within the ecosystem is useful in the recovery process and to help guide the state and federal land management agencies and state wildlife agencies of Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana as they prepare management plans. We used kernel estimators to develop distribution maps of occupied habitats based on initial sightings of unduplicated females (n = 300) with cubs-of-the-year, information from radiomarked bears (n = 105), and locations of conflicts, confrontations, and mortalities (n = 1,235). Although each data set was constrained by potential sampling bias, together they provided insight into areas within the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) currently occupied by grizzly bears. The current distribution (1990-2000) extends beyond the recovery zone identified in the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Recovery Plan. Range expansion is particularly evident in the southern portion of the ecosystem in Wyoming. A comparison of our results from the 1990s to previously published distribution maps show an approximate increase in occupied habitat of 48% and 34% from the 1970s and 1980s, respectively. We discuss data biases and problems implicit to the analysis.

Wyoming↗
USGS2002

Grizzly bear denning chronology and movements in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Den entrance and emergence dates of grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem are important to management agencies that wish to minimize impacts of human activities on bears. Current estimates for grizzly bear denning events use data that were collected from 1975–80. We update these estimates by including data obtained from 1981–99. We used aerial telemetry data to estimate week of den entry and emergence by determining the midpoint between the last known active date and the first known date denned, as well as the last known date denned and the first known active date. We also investigated post emergence movement patterns relative to den locations. Mean earliest and latest week of den entry and emergence were also determined. Den entry for females began during the fourth week in September, with 90% denned by the fourth week of November. Earliest den entry for males occurred during the second week of October, with 90% denned by the second week of December. Mean week of den entry for known pregnant females was earlier than males. Earliest week of den entry for known pregnant females was earlier than other females and males. Earliest den emergence for males occurred during the first week of February, with 90% of males out of dens by the fourth week of April. Earliest den emergence for females occurred during the third week of March; by the first week of May, 90% of females had emerged. Male bears emerged from dens earlier than females. Denning period differed among classes and averaged 171 days for females that emerged from dens with cubs, 151 days for other females, and 131 days for males. Known pregnant females tended to den at higher elevations and, following emergence, remained at higher elevation until late May. Females with cubs remained relatively close (<3 km) to den sites until the last 2 weeks in May. Timing of denning events was similar to previous estimates for this and other grizzly bear populations in the southern Rocky Mountains.

Wyoming↗
USGS2001

Effects of exotic species on Yellowstone's grizzly bears

Humans have affected grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) by direct mortality, competition for space and resources, and introduction of exotic species. Exotic organisms that have affected grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Area include common dandelion ( Taraxacum officinale ), nonnative clovers ( Trifolium spp.), domesticated livestock, bovine brucellosis ( Brucella abortus ), lake trout ( Salvelinus namaycush ), and white pine blister rust ( Cronartium ribicola ). Some bears consume substantial amounts of dandelion and clover. However, these exotic foods provide little digested energy compared to higher-quality bear foods. Domestic livestock are of greater energetic value, but use of this food by bears often leads to conflicts with humans and subsequent increases in bear mortality. Lake trout, blister rust, and brucellosis diminish grizzly bears foods. Lake trout prey on native cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarkii ) in Yellowstone Lake; white pine blister rust has the potential to destroy native whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) stands; and management response to bovine brucellosis, a disease found in the Yellowstone bison (Bison bison) and elk ( Cervus elaphus ), could reduce populations of these 2 species. Exotic species will likely cause more harm than good for Yellowstone grizzly bears. Managers have few options to mitigate or contain the impacts of exotics on Yellowstone's grizzly bears. Moreover, their potential negative impacts have only begun to unfold. Exotic species may lead to the loss of substantial highquality grizzly bear foods, including much of the bison, trout, and pine seeds that Yellowstone grizzly bears currently depend upon.

Wyoming↗