SEARCH · Geology Reports

Results for “Ursus”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 469 records · Page 26Linked to original sources

USGS2009

Hierarchical models for estimating density from DNA mark-recapture studies

Genetic sampling is increasingly used as a tool by wildlife biologists and managers to estimate abundance and density of species. Typically, DNA is used to identify individuals captured in an array of traps ( e. g., baited hair snares) from which individual encounter histories are derived. Standard methods for estimating the size of a closed population can be applied to such data. However, due to the movement of individuals on and off the trapping array during sampling, the area over which individuals are exposed to trapping is unknown, and so obtaining unbiased estimates of density has proved difficult. We propose a hierarchical spatial capture-recapture model which contains explicit models for the spatial point process governing the distribution of individuals and their exposure to (via movement) and detection by traps. Detection probability is modeled as a function of each individual's distance to the trap. We applied this model to a black bear (Ursus americanus) study conducted in 2006 using a hair-snare trap array in the Adirondack region of New York, USA. We estimated the density of bears to be 0.159 bears/km2, which is lower than the estimated density (0.410 bears/km2) based on standard closed population techniques. A Bayesian analysis of the model is fully implemented in the software program WinBUGS.

Ecology↗

USGS2009

Rebuttal of "Polar bear population forecasts: a public-policy forecasting audit"

Observed declines in the Arctic sea ice have resulted in a variety of negative effects on polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ). Projections for additional future declines in sea ice resulted in a proposal to list polar bears as a threatened species under the United States Endangered Species Act. To provide information for the Department of the Interior's listing-decision process, the US Geological Survey (USGS) produced a series of nine research reports evaluating the present and future status of polar bears throughout their range. In response, Armstrong et al. [Armstrong, J. S., K. C. Green, W. Soon. 2008. Polar bear population forecasts: A public-policy forecasting audit. Interfaces 38 (5) 382–405], which we will refer to as AGS, performed an audit of two of these nine reports. AGS claimed that the general circulation models upon which the USGS reports relied were not valid forecasting tools, that USGS researchers were not objective or lacked independence from policy decisions, that they did not utilize all available information in constructing their forecasts, and that they violated numerous principles of forecasting espoused by AGS. AGS (p. 382) concluded that the two USGS reports were "unscientific and inconsequential to decision makers." We evaluate the AGS audit and show how AGS are mistaken or misleading on every claim. We provide evidence that general circulation models are useful in forecasting future climate conditions and that corporate and government leaders are relying on these models to do so. We clarify the strict independence of the USGS from the listing decision. We show that the allegations of failure to follow the principles of forecasting espoused by AGS are either incorrect or are based on misconceptions about the Arctic environment, polar bear biology, or statistical and mathematical methods. We conclude by showing that the AGS principles of forecasting are too ambiguous and subjective to be used as a reliable basis for auditing scientific investigations. In summary, we show that the AGS audit offers no valid criticism of the USGS conclusion that global warming poses a serious threat to the future welfare of polar bears and that it only serves to distract from reasoned public-policy debate.

Interfaces↗

USGS2006

Grizzly bear management in Yellowstone National Park: The heart of recovery in the Yellowstone Ecosystem

Grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) management in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) in the past quarter century has resulted in more than doubling of the population from around 200 to more than 500, expansion of range back into habitats where the bear has extirpated more than a century ago, and a move toward removal from the U.S. Endangered Species list. At the center of this success story are the management programs in Yellowstone National Park (YNP). Regulations that restrict human activity, camping, and food storage, elimination of human food and garbage as attractants, and ranger attendance of roadside bears have all resulted in the population of grizzlies in YNP approaching carrying capacity. Recent studies suggest, however, that YNP alone is too small to support the current population, making management beyond the park boundary important and necessary to the demographics of the population as a whole. Demographic analyses suggest a source-sink dynamic exists within the GYE, with YNP and lands outside the park within the Grizzly Bear Recovery Zone (RZ) representing source habitats, whereas lands beyond the RZ constitute sinks. The source-sink demography in the GYE is indicative of carnivore conservation issues worldwide where many national parks or preserves designed to protect out natural resources are inadequate in size or shape to provide all necessary life history requirements for these wide-ranging species. Additionally, wide-ranging behavior and long-distance dispersal seem inherent to large carnivores, so mortality around the edges is virtually inevitable, and conservation in the GYE is inextricably linked to management regimes not only within YNP, but within the GYE as a whole. We discuss those needs here.

Wyoming↗

USGS2001

Whitebark pine, grizzly bears, and red squirrels

Appropriately enough, much of this book is devoted to discussing management challenges and techniques. However, the impetus for action—the desire to save whitebark pine ( Pinus albicaulis ) - necessarily arises from the extent to which we cherish it for its beauty and its connections with other things that we value. Whitebark pine is at the hub of a fascinating web of relationships. It is the stuff of great stories (cf. Quammen 1994). One of the more interesting of these stories pertains to the dependence of certain grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) populations on its seeds, and the role that red squirrels ( Tamiasciurus hudsonicus ) play as an agent of transfer between tree and bear.

Book chapter↗

USGS1998

Black bear depredation on agricultural commodities in Massachusetts

We used response to a mail survey (n = 848) to evaluate the extent and severity of depredation by black bears (Ursus americanus) on agricultural commodities in Massachusetts and to assess producers' attitudes toward and tolerance of bear depredation. Damage abatement techniques were ranked for effectiveness by producers of corn, bees and honey, and livestock and dairy products. Results showed differences in perception of effects of bear depredation among commodity groups. Producers of corn and livestock and dairy products considered bear damage to be low to moderate in severity whereas beekeepers thought their losses were substantial or severe. Most estimates of economic loss were <$1,000 per year. Respondents considered bears to be an inconvenience, but thought they should remain a part of our natural heritage. There was no significant relationship between producers' experience with or economic dependence on their product and their attitude toward bears or their tolerance of bear damage. We conclude that there is need for effective education programs for agricultural producers, strengthened working relationships between producers and state fish and wildlife agencies, incorporation of producers' suggestions into management decisions, and investment in effective, economical, and long-term solutions to bear depredations for each affected commodity group.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS1998

Attraction of brown bears to red pepper spray deterrent: Caveats for use

Humans in brown bear ( Ursus arctos ) country may unexpectedly encounter hears with sometimes harmful consequences. Firearms may be an effective defense, but they destroy bears, their use is illegal in most national parks, and many people prefer not to carry them, Consequently, nonlethal bear deterrents have long been sought as a means of self-defense against bear attacks. In the 1970s a liquid spray containing oleoresin capsicum (the chief irritant in red peppers) was developed. This mixture could be defensively discharged at aggressive bears (Herrero and Higgins 1995), and today, several commercially manufactured products, generically called "red pepper spray," are sold for the purpose of deterring aggressive bear attacks. Many hikers, campers, and outdoor enthusiasts carry this spray for self-defense in bear country Additionally, some states (eg, Wyoming) and many national parks (e.g., Glacier National Park) highly recommend that back-country users carry red pepper spray for use in an aggressive beat encounter. Herrero and Higgins (1998) found that red pepper spray was effective in halting aggressive brown bear behavior in 88% (1 of 16) of incidents studied. However, red pepper spray is not claimed to be a bear repellent when applied to objects. Nonetheless, instances have been reported of people applying red pepper spray to objects and around campsites in order to repel curious bears. The impetus for this study came from an observation I made of a bear rolling vigorously on beach gravels that had been accidentally sprayed with red pepper spray. To further investigate brown bear reaction to red pepper spray residues, I conducted systematic observations of bear responses to spray discharged at selected sites. I discuss those findings and their implications in this report.

Alaska↗

USGS1999

Potential energetic effects of mountain climbers on foraging grizzly bears

Most studies of the effects of human disturbance on grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) have not quantified the energetic effects of such interactions. In this study, we characterized activity budgets of adult grizzly bears as they foraged on aggregations of adult army cutworm moths (Euxoa auxiliaris) in the alpine of Glacier National Park, Montana, during 1992, 1994, and 1995. We compared the activity budgets of climber-disturbed bears to those of undisturbed bears to estimate the energetic impact of climber disturbance. When bears detected climbers, they subsequently spent 53% less time foraging on moths, 52% more time moving within the foraging area, and 23% more time behaving aggressively, compared to when they were not disturbed. We estimated that grizzly bears could consume approximately 40,000 moths/day or 1,700 moths/hour. At 0.44 kcal/moth, disruption of moth feeding cost bears approximately 12 kcal/minute in addition to the energy expended in evasive maneuvers and defensive behaviors. To reduce both climber interruption of bear foraging and the potential for aggressive bear-human encounters, we recommend routing climbers around moth sites used by bears or limiting access to these sites during bear-use periods.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS2002

Test of a habitat suitability index for black bears in the southern Appalachians

We present a habitat suitability index (HSI) model for black bears (Ursus americanus) living in the southern Appalachians that was developed a priori from the literature, then tested using location and home range data collected in the Pisgah Bear Sanctuary, North Carolina, over a 12-year period. The HSI was developed and initially tested using habitat and bear data collected over 2 years in the sanctuary. We increased number of habitat sampling sites, included data collected in areas affected by timber harvest, used more recent Geographic Information System (GIS) technology to create a more accurate depiction of the HSI for the sanctuary, evaluated effects of input variability on HSI values, and duplicated the original tests using more data. We found that the HSI predicted habitat selection by bears on population and individual levels and the distribution of collared bears were positively correlated with HSI values. We found a stronger relationship between habitat selection by bears and a second-generation HSI. We evaluated our model with criteria suggested by Roloff and Kernohan (1999) for evaluating HSI model reliability and concluded that our model was reliable and robust. The model's strength is that it was developed as an a priori hypothesis directly modeling the relationship between critical resources and fitness of bears and tested with independent data. We present the HSI spatially as a continuous fitness surface where potential contribution of habitat to the fitness of a bear is depicted at each point in space.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗

USGS2003

Estimating black bear population density and genetic diversity at Tensas River, Louisiana using microsatellite DNA markers

The Recovery Plan for the federally threatened Louisiana black bear ( Ursus americanus luteolus ) mandates that remnant populations be estimated and monitored. In 1999 we obtained genetic material with barbed-wire hair traps to estimate bear population size and genetic diversity at the 329-km 2 Tensas River Tract, Louisiana. We constructed and monitored 122 hair traps, which produced 1,939 hair samples. Of those, we randomly selected 116 subsamples for genetic analysis and used up to 12 microsatellite DNA markers to obtain multilocus genotypes for 58 individuals. We used Program CAPTURE to compute estimates of population size using multiple mark-recapture models. The area of study was almost entirely circumscribed by agricultural land, thus the population was geographically closed. Also, study-area boundaries were biologically discreet, enabling us to accurately estimate population density. Using model Chao M h to account for possible effects of individual heterogeneity in capture probabilities, we estimated the population size to be 119 (SE=29.4) bears, or 0.36 bears/km 2 . We were forced to examine a substantial number of loci to differentiate between some individuals because of low genetic variation. Despite the probable introduction of genes from Minnesota bears in the 1960s, the isolated population at Tensas exhibited characteristics consistent with inbreeding and genetic drift. Consequently, the effective population size at Tensas may be as few as 32, which warrants continued monitoring or possibly genetic augmentation.

Louisiana↗

USGS2003

Serum markers of bone metabolism show bone loss in hibernating bears

Disuse osteopenia was studied in hibernating black bears (Ursus americanus) using serum markers of bone metabolism. Blood samples were collected from male and female, wild black bears during winter denning and active summer periods. Radioimmunoassays were done to determine serum concentrations of cortisol, the carboxy-terminal cross-linked telopeptide, and the carboxy-terminal propeptide of Type I procollagen, which are markers of hone resorption and formation, respectively. The bone resorption marker was significantly higher during winter hibernation than it was in the active summer months, but the bone formation marker was unchanged, suggesting an imbalance in bone remodeling and a net bone loss during disuse. Serum cortisol was significantly correlated with the bone resorption marker, but not with the bone formation marker. The bone formation marker was four- to fivefold higher in an adolescent and a 17-year-old bear early in the remobilization period compared with the later summer months. These findings raise the possibility that hibernating black bears may minimize bone loss during disuse by maintaining osteoblastic function and have a more efficient compensatory mechanism for recovering immobilization-induced bone loss than that of humans or other animals.

Clinical Orthopaedics and Related Research↗

USGS2005

Ecology of Florida black bears in the Okefenokee-Osceola ecosystem

The population status of the Florida black bear ( Ursus americanus floridanus ) is problematic within many portions of its range and its potential listing as a federally threatened species has been the subject of legal debate. We studied Florida black bears in 2 areas in the Okefenokee-Osceola ecosystem in southeast Georgia (i.e.,Okefenokee) and north Florida (i.e., Osceola) from 1995 to 1999 to evaluate relationships between population characteristics, habitat conditions, and human activities. Bears in Okefenokee were hunted and those in Osceola were not. We captured 205 different black bears (124M:81F) 345 times from June 1995 to September 1998. We obtained 13,573 radiolocations from 87 (16M:71F) individual bears during the study. In Okefenokee, black gum ( Nyssa sylvatica ) and saw palmetto ( Serenoa repens ) fruits were the most important foods for bears based on scat analysis. In Osceola, corn from white-tailed deer ( Odocoileus virginianus ) feeders was the most stable food source but saw palmetto was heavily used when available. Corn from deer feeders was not available in Okefenokee. Adult bears in Osceola were 29% heavier than those in Okefenokee ( t 82 = 3.55, P <0.001). The mean annual home-range size for Osceola females ( x̄ =30.3 km 2 ± 4.0 [SE], n =53) varied little seasonally or annually and was almost half that of Okefenokee females (55.9 km 2 ± 6.9, n = 69; Z = –2.47, P = 0.014). In contrast, radiocollared females in Okefenokee expanded their home ranges during years of poor black gum production. That expansion was most apparent between autumn 1998 and 1999, when mean home-range size for Okefenokee females increased from 14.5 km 2 to 78.4 km 2 , respectively, and included a larger proportion of upland areas open to sport hunting. As a result, 5 females were harvested in the Okefenokee study area during the 1999 bear hunting season compared with only 7 harvested from 1996 to 1998. Home ranges of adult female bears were located in areas with disproportionately high loblolly bay ( Gordonia lasianthus ) and gum-bay-cypress ( Taxodium spp.) vegetation associations in Okefenokee and gum-bay-cypress associations in Osceola. The pine vegetation association ranked lower than most other associations within the home ranges of bears in both study areas even though much of the summer and autumn diets of bears included food items found almost exclusively in pine. Sixteen mortalities of radiocollared bears were documented in Okefenokee; hunting accounted for 11 (68.8%) of these deaths. The annual survival rate of radiocollared males in Okefenokee was 0.71 (95% CI = 0.53–0.88) whereas survival of females in Okefenokee was higher ( Z =18.87, P <0.001) at 0.89 (95% CI = 0.83–0.95). The survival rate for females in Osceola was 0.97 (95% CI = 0.92–1.00). Overall, 67 bears (51M:16F) were killed by hunters in the Okefenokee study area from 1995 to 1999. Based on all radiocollared bears in Okefenokee, many of which resided within areas closed to hunting, we estimated an annual harvest rate of 0.22 (95% CI = 0.03–0.37) for males and 0.07 (95% CI = 0.01–0.12) for females. When we excluded those bears that were not in areas open to hunting, however, the annual harvest rate rose to 0.37 (95% CI = 0.07–0.58) for males and 0.39 (95% CI = 0.09–0.58) for females. Following a black gum shortage in autumn 1995, only 1 of 15 radiocollared females in Okefenokee produced cubs in winter 1996. That low reproductive rate was in contrast to winter 1997, which followed heavy black gum production, when 21 of 22 radiocollared females produced cubs. Reproductive output was more consistent in the Osceola study area, with 46 cubs being produced from 8, 5, and 9 litters in 1997, 1998, and 1999, respectively. To estimate population size, we maintained 88 and 94 barbed-wire hair traps during 1999 in the Okefenokee and Osceola study areas, respectively. Using DNA collected at the hair traps, mark–recapture models produced estimates of 71 bears (95% CI = 59–91) in Okefenokee and 44 bears (95% CI = 40–57) in the Osceola study area during 1999. The estimated densities in the Okefenokee and Osceola study areas were 0.12 and 0.14 bears/km 2 , respectively. Alternative density estimates based on the amount of time bears spent within study area boundaries were similar (0.11 and 0.14 bears/km 2 on Okefenokee and Osceola, respectively). We used a population model to estimate the effect of harvest in the Okefenokee bear population. Excluding harvest, bears at Osceola experienced higher average annual population growth (λ = 1.184 ± 0.002) than those at Okefenokee (1.064 ± 0.002; t 18 = 3.93, P = 0.001), most likely due to protection from hunting and higher recruitment. Including the effects of emigration and immigration, we estimated an average annual sustainable harvest at Okefenokee of approximately 9 bears (12.6%), which was slightly less than the average 1995–1999 annual harvest of 9.4. That level of hunting in Okefenokee is sustainable but likely represents the highest exploitation rate in the region. Our mark–recapture data from Osceola suggest a high dispersal rate by subadult bears, and our population modeling data support this hypothesis; we documented bears in Okefenokee that originated from Osceola but not the reverse. We speculate that bears from the interior of the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge (ONWR), and to some extent northern Florida, served as a source to the population sink caused by hunting mortality in Okefenokee and in the surrounding Georgia counties. Corn from deer feeders was the most probable reason for smaller home-range sizes and greater body masses and reproductive output at Osceola. Changes in management to eliminate or reduce baiting for deer with corn would negatively affect the Osceola bear population. On Okefenokee, sporadic black gum and palmetto production influenced harvest rates and cub production and, thus, governed bear population dynamics. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) concluded in 1998 that listing the Florida black bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 was not warranted. That decision was largely based on the stability and protection afforded to a few subpopulations within the range of the subspecies, which includes the Okefenokee-Osceola subpopulation; our results support that conclusion. However, we suggest that metapopulation processes among the various subpopulations be given greater consideration, with the ultimate goal of managing the sub-species as a unit rather than as an assemblage of independent components. Our study illustrates the importance of travel corridors for maintaining metapopulation processes.

Florida, Georgia↗

USGS2008

Space and habitat use by black bears in the Elwha valley prior to dam removal

Dam removal and subsequent restoration of salmon to the Elwha River is expected to cause a shift in nutrient dynamics within the watershed. To document how this influx of nutrients and energy may affect black bear (Ursus americanus) ecology, we used radio-telemetry to record movements of 11 male and two female black bears in the Elwha Valley from 2002-06. Our objective was to collect baseline data on bear movements prior to dam removal. We calculated annual home ranges, described seasonal timing of den entry and emergence, and described seasonal patterns of distribution and habitat use. Adaptive kernel home ranges were larger formales (mean = 151.1 km2, SE = 21.4) than females (mean = 38.8 km2, SE = 13.0). Males ranged widely and frequently left the watershed during late summer. Further, they exhibited predictable and synchronous patterns of elevation change throughout each year. Bears entered their winter dens between 8 October and 15 December and emerged from dens between 10 March and 9 May. Male bears used low-elevation conifer and hardwood forests along the Elwha floodplain during spring, mid- to high-elevation forests and meadows during early summer, high-elevation forests, meadows and shrubs during late summer, and mid-elevation forests, shrubs and meadows during fall. Data acquired during this study provide important baseline information for comparison after dam removal, when bears may alter their late summer and fall movement and denning patterns to take advantage of energy-rich spawning salmon.

Northwest Science↗

USGS1987

Size and growth patterns of the Yellowstone grizzly bear

Weights and/or measurements of 151 grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) captured 261 times were recorded from 1975 to 1985. Males were consistently heavier than females within all age classes beginning at age 2. Mean weight for 65 captive males (5+ years old) was 192 kg and 135 kg for 63 adult females (5+ years old). Mean monthly weights by sex and age class indicated adults lost weight from den emergence through July, generally regaining emergence weight by August. Weaned yearlings lost weight July-Septmber, whereas unweaned yearlings gained weight during the same period. Sexual dimorphism in body measurements within age classes was apparent in cubs and became significant in all body measurements by age 3. Girth was the measurement most closely correlated with weight for both males and females. Adults feeding at garbage dumps weighted more than bears relying on natural food sources. Bears were smaller and weighed less in this study than during the period 1959-70, when major dumps were available as a food source. Mean annual weights of nondump females were highly correlated with annual habitat productivity indices for Yellowstone Park. Correlations between mean adult female weight an cub litter size ( r ) = 0.92) and mean age at 1st cub production ( r = -0.52) were apparent. In general, females with reliable high-energy foods tended to attain larger body sizes, mature at an earlier age, and have larger cub litters than females using relatively low-energy foods.

Book↗

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↗

USGS2014

Use of isotopic sulfur to determine whitebark pine consumption by Yellowstone bears: a reassessment

Use of naturally occurring stable isotopes to estimate assimilated diet of bears is one of the single greatest breakthroughs in nutritional ecology during the past 20 years. Previous research in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE), USA, established a positive relationship between the stable isotope of sulfur (δ 34 S) and consumption of whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) seeds. That work combined a limited sample of hair, blood clots, and serum. Here we use a much larger sample to reassess those findings. We contrasted δ 34 S values in spring hair and serum with abundance of seeds of whitebark pine in samples collected from grizzly (Ursus arctos) and American black bears (U. americanus) in the GYE during 2000–2010. Although we found a positive relationship between δ 34 S values in spring hair and pine seed abundance for grizzly bears, the coefficients of determination were small ( R 2  ≤ 0.097); we failed to find a similar relationship with black bears. Values of δ 34 S in spring hair were larger in black bears and δ 34 S values in serum of grizzly bears were lowest in September and October, a time when we expect δ 34 S to peak if whitebark pine seeds were the sole source of high δ 34 S. The relationship between δ 34 S in bear tissue and the consumption of whitebark pine seeds, as originally reported, may not be as clean a method as proposed. Data we present here suggest other foods have high values of δ 34 S, and there is spatial heterogeneity affecting the δ 34 S values in whitebark pine, which must be addressed.

Yellowstone National Park↗

USGS2011

Development of a pan-Arctic monitoring plan for polar bears: Background paper

Polar bears (Ursus maritimus), by their very nature, and the extreme, remote environment in which they live, are inherently difficult to study and monitor. Monitoring polar bear populations is both arduous and costly and, to be effective, must be a long-term commitment. There are few jurisdictional governments and management boards with a mandate for polar bear research and management, and many have limited resources. Although population monitoring of polar bears has been a focus to some degree within most jurisdictions around the Arctic, of the 19 subpopulations recognised by the IUCN/Species Survival Commission Polar Bear Specialist Group (PBSG), adequate scientific trend data exist for only three of the subpopulations, fair trend data for five and poor or no trend data for the remaining 11 subpopulations (PBSG 2010a). There are especially critical knowledge gaps for the subpopulations in East Greenland, in the Russian Kara and Laptev seas, and in the Chukchi Sea, which is shared between Russia and the United States. The range covered by these subpopulations represents a third of the total area (approx. 23 million km2) of polar bears’ current range, and more than half if the Arctic Basin is included. If we use popular terms, we know close to nothing about polar bears in this portion of their range. As summer sea-ice extent, and to a lesser degree, spring-time extent, continues to retreat, outpacing model forecasts (Stroeve et al. 2007, Pedersen et al. 2009), polar bears face the challenge of adapting to rapidly changing habitats. There is a need to use current and synthesised information across the Arctic, and to develop new methods that will facilitate monitoring to generate new knowledge at a pan-Arctic scale. The circumpolar dimension can be lost when efforts are channelled into regional monitoring. Developing and implementing a plan that harmonises local, regional and global efforts will increase our power to detect and understand important trends for polar bears, with particular emphasis on how climate warming may differentially affect populations and habitats. Current knowledge is inadequate for a comprehensive understanding of the present and future impact of climate warming and its interaction with other stressors. The cumulative effects are unknown (Laidre et al. 2008). An integrated pan-Arctic research and monitoring plan will improve the ability to detect future trends, identify the most vulnerable subpopulations and guide effective conservation. There is a need to direct attention and resources where data are deficient to understand the mechanisms that drive trends, and to facilitate more effective and timely conservation response.

Report↗

USGS2003

Large carnivores, moose, and humans: A changing paradigm of predator management in the 21st century

We compare and contrast the evolution of human attitudes toward large carnivores between Europe and North America. In general, persecution of large carnivores began much earlier in Europe than North America. Likewise, conservation programs directed at restoration and recovery appeared in European history well before they did in North America. Together, the pattern suggests there has been an evolution in how humans perceive large predators. Our early ancestors were physically vulnerable to large carnivores and developed corresponding attitudes of respect, avoidance, and acceptance. As civilization evolved and man developed weapons, the balance shifted. Early civilizations, in particular those with pastoral ways, attempted to eliminate large carnivores as threats to life and property. Brown bears (Ursus arctos) and wolves (Canis lupus) were consequently extirpated from much of their range in Europe and in North America south of Canada. Efforts to protect brown bears began in the late 1880s in some European countries and population reintroductions and augmentations are ongoing. They are less controversial than in North America. On the other hand, there are no wolf introductions, as has occurred in North America, and Europeans have a more negative attitude towards wolves. Control of predators to enhance ungulate harvest varies. In Western Europe, landowners own the hunting rights to ungulates. In the formerly communistic Eastern European countries and North America, hunting rights are held in common, although this is changing in some Eastern European countries. Wolf control to increase harvests of moose (Alces alces) occurs in parts of North America and Russia; bear control for similar reasons only occurs in parts of North America. Surprisingly, bears and wolves are not controlled to increase ungulates where private landowners have the hunting rights in Europe, although wolves were originally exterminated from these areas. Both the inability of scientific research to adequately predict the effect of predator control on ungulate populations and a shift in public attitudes toward large carnivores have resulted in an accelerating number of challenges to predator management in places where it is still espoused. Utilitarian attitudes towards wildlife are declining in Western cultures and people now increasingly recognize the intrinsic value of wildlife, including large predators. In the future, agencies responsible for managing resident wildlife will face increased pressure to balance the needs of the hunting public with the desires of non-hunting publics. We suggest that in the next century we will witness a continued shift in how wildlife agencies manage both moose and large carnivores. More attention will be paid to maintaining and restoring intact ecosystems and less toward sustainable yield of meat.

Alces↗

USGS2007

Adapting to the reality of climate change at Glacier National Park, Montana, USA

The glaciers of Glacier National Park (GNP) are disappearing rapidly and likely will be gone by 2030. These alpine glaciers have been continuously present for approximately 7,000 years so their loss from GNP in another 25 years underscores the significance of current climate change. There are presently only 27 glaciers remaining of the 150 estimated to have existed when GNP was created in 1910. Mean annual temperature in GNP has increased 1.6°C during the past century, three times the global mean increase. The temperature increase has affected other parts of the mountain ecosystem, too. Snowpacks hold less water equivalent and melt 2+ weeks earlier in the spring. Forest growth rates have increased, alpine treelines have expanded upward and become denser, and subalpine meadows have been invaded by high elevation tree species. These latter responses can be mostly attributed to longer growing seasons and warmer temperatures. Ecosystem modeling of possible future changes in the GNP mountain environments suggest that increased tree growth rates and evapotranspiration will reduce soil moisture and streamflow. The drier forests, with more wood, will burn more frequently and with greater severity, leading to degradation in air quality and increased risk to people and infrastructure. Management of forest fires is an important issue in the arid western United States. In 2003, 13% of GNP’s 4,082 km 2 was burned in three large fires and numerous smaller fires. Managers can accomplish some of their goals, such as preserving threatened wildlife populations, by altering their management of fires. In 2003, intense efforts were successfully made to divert the fires away from valuable grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) habitat that contained huckleberry plants ( Vaccinium spp .) necessary to ensure bear survival through the winter.

Montana↗