international bear news · final report: eastern slopes grizzly bear project ... international bear...

Quarterly Newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA)and the IUCN/SSC Bear Specialist Group

International Bear NewsNovember 2005 vol. 14, no. 4

IBA website: www.bearbiology.org/www.bearbiology.com

Newly radio-collared Bornean sun bear 102 after release (page 24).

© S

iew

Te

Wo

ng

2 International Bear News November 2005 vol. 14, no. 4

Table of Contents

International Bear News, ISSN #1064-1564, quarterly newsletter of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA).Editor: Teresa DeLorenzo, Design: Cynthia Cheney, 10907 NW Copeland St., Portland, Oregon 97229-6145, USA.

Phone (503) 643-4008, Fax (503) 643-4072, Email [email protected], Website www.bearbiology.com/www.bearbiology.org.

MembershipUse the form on the page 53 to order or renew memberships, make donations, and update member information.

Thank you to everyone who contributed to this issue. Artwork is copyrighted — do not reproduce without permission.Thank you to CityGraphics and Imaging, Portland, Oregon, USA for generously discounting the cost of printing.

Deadline for the February 2006 issue is January 15, 2006.

Editorial Policy International Bear News welcomes articles about biology, conservation and management of the world’s eight bear species. Submis-sions of about 750 words are preferred, and photos, drawings and charts are appreciated. Submissions to [email protected] arepreferred, otherwise mail or fax to the address above. IBA reserves the right to accept, reject and edit submissions.

Council News 3 From the President5 New Policy Guidance for IBA6 Proposed IBA Bylaws Changes7 Bear Conservation Fund: IBA Funding and Development Committee8 Three IBA Grant Programs: Travel, Experience, Research

16th IBA Conference 9 Summary, Awards, Conservation of Bears in Asia and Latin America,Population Management, Bear Conservation in Europe, Population Ecology, Techniques

Opinion 16 Reader Response: Yellowstone Grizzly Delisting ProposalShould IBA Endorse Delisting the Yellowstone Grizzly?

18 Yellowstone Grizzly Delisting Issue Not Appropriate for IBARefrain from Yellowstone Position

19 Argument Against Yellowstone Grizzly Delisting20 Yellowstone Grizzly References

Bear Specialist Group 21 European Brown Bear Expert Team22 Bear Specialist Group Coordinating Committee

Eurasia Swiss Brown Bear23 Asian Bear Symposium and Workshop in Japan24 Bornean Sun Bear and Bearded Pig Research and Conservation Project25 Biogeographic Ecology of the Malayan Sun Bear

Americas 27 Dialogue Helps Andean Bear Conservation28 Andean Bear-livestock Conflict: Applying the Landscape Species Conservation Model31 Evidence of Andean Bear in Northwest Argentina32 Grizzlies in British Columbia

Final Report: Eastern Slopes Grizzly Bear Project33 Northcentral USA/Southcentral Canada

Bear Sightings in South Texas?34 During 2005 More People Killed by Bears in North America Than in Any Previous Year35 East Texas Report36 Louisiana Bear Repatriation Project Documents Cub Adoption37 Washington Manuals for Managing Bear Conflicts and Wildlife Attacks

Captive Bears 38 Semen Collection in Captive Andean Bears39 Mucous Stools in Andean Bears

Student Forum 40 Truman Takes Italy by Storm(s)!; IBA Student? The List Serve is for You!Information Please 41 Bear Trust Looking for Good Bear StoriesBears in Culture 42 Exit, pursued by a bearPublications 44 Book Review: Into Brown Bear Country

45 Bear Habitat Management Guide Online

Living in Bear Country Video/DVDEvents 46 First European Congress of Conservation Biology; 42nd N. American Moose Conf.;

American Zoo & Aquarium Association Regionals47 Ninth Western Black Bear Workshop48 Japan 17th IBA Conference51 Mexico 18th IBA Conference

IBA 52 IBA Officers & Council53 IBA Membership Application55 IBA Publications Order FormBack About IBA and Mission Statement Back issu

es available at www.bearbiology.com.

3International Bear News November 2005 vol. 14, no. 4

Council NewsFrom the President

Harry ReynoldsPO Box 80843Fairbanks, AK 99708, USAPhone (907) 479-5169Email [email protected]@reynoldsalaska.com

Italy 16th IBA ConferenceIBA’s 16th international confer-

ence was held September 27-October1 in Riva del Garda, Italy (pages 9-15). The beauty of the area is unques-tioned. The city wraps the northshore of Lake Garda which is ringedby ancient castles and moderndevelopments—all within sight ofbears that now roam the surroundinghabitat. Important for conferencesite selection is that bear conserva-tion will benefit from internationalattention to promising programsand/or providing a venue to worktowards solutions to regional prob-lems. This conference certainlyachieved these goals.

Primary support for the confer-ence was provided by ProvinciaAutonoma di Trento, Forest andWildlife Service, and the NationalWildlife Institute of Italy. Thecommittee chair and co-chairs whosuperbly organized this conferenceincluded Maurizio Zanin, ClaudioGroff and Piero Genovesi, along withthe Riva del Garda Fierecongressiconference center, many volunteersand agencies. The helpfulness,hospitality and friendliness of allpeople involved as well as everyonethat we met in the region helped tomake the meeting an outstandingsuccess. It was truly an internationalconference—individuals from 39countries shared perspectives andinsights on issues crucial to bearconservation. This is the first confer-ence with entire sessions dedicatedto Andean bears and south Asianbears. Student participation and thequality of their presentations were

superb. This is the first conference inwhich a student presented an invitedpaper —Ximena Velez-Liendo—andchaired a session—Andreas Zedrosser.

The program to bring bears backto Trentino is an outstanding effortthat will lead to success, givencontinued support. Bears andhumans can live together, to thebenefit of both. The effort hereprovides an excellent example of thesteps that must be taken to effec-tively enhance a depleted bearpopulation. That bears are stillpresent here is the result of theforesight of a few and the support ofthe people of Trentino, in concertwith the regional and nationalgovernment. So few bears remainedthat the outlook for their furtherpersistence was poor until 10 bearswere brought from Slovenia toreinforce the population. This wasnot a simple matter of moving bearsfrom one region to another, butrequired an extensive public processand biological assessment.

The first goal for bear conservationshould always be to maintainexisting populations and the habitatthat supports them. Re-establishing adepleted population is problematic.The bear population in Trentino isnow doing much better, but for theirfuture to be assured in the region,strong commitment, coordinatedeffort, and continued support by theregional and national governments iscrucial. Follow-through is essential.

There are many small bear popula-tions or subpopulations declining inthe world. Italy has shown leadershipin providing an excellent example ofhow one well-designed program canstart on the road to success. It can beapplied in other countries withsimilar problems.

Donation to IBAIn support of bear conservation

and the interchange made possibleby the 16th IBA conference,Giovanni Laezza, director of the Rivadel Garda Fierecongressi, where ourmeeting was held, donated 2,000euros to further IBA programs. Thisgift is earmarked for the Experienceand Exchange Program (page 8),which will help biologists gaintechnical training or experience withresearch or management problems.

Bear Specialist GroupThe 16th IBA conference also

provided the opportunity for manyof the Expert Teams of the WorldConservation Union (IUCN)/SpeciesSurvival Commission’s Bear SpecialistGroup (BSG) to meet and worktoward solutions to common prob-lems (pages 21-22). This is the firstconference that included a number ofworkshops dedicated to BSG. Expectan even greater BSG presence at the2006 17th IBA conference in Japan.

IBA Council Election:Genovesi, Huber, Vaughan

As provided in the bylaws, theVice President for Eurasia and twoCouncil Officers are elected inconjunction with the IBA EurasiaConference. Piero Genovesi waselected as Vice President for Eurasia.Djuro Huber and Mike Vaughan werere-elected to Council. To maintainregional representation in SouthAmerica, Isaac Goldstein was re-appointed to Council.

President’s Award:Djuro Huber & Jon Swenson

During IBA conferences, aPresident’s Award is given foroutstanding service to bear conserva-tion and to IBA. Usually only oneaward is given, but because of theirequal contributions to bear biology


Council NewsFrom the President, cont’d.

and conservation in Europe, this yearis was my great pleasure to recognizeboth Djuro Huber and Jon Swensonfor their lifetime dedication to bears(photo page 21). Their accomplish-ments, high research standards,enthusiasm and energy devoted tobears have spread to their manystudents. They have been instrumen-tal in the positive changes in atti-tudes towards bears both within andamong the people and governmentsof Europe. In addition, they haveselflessly contributed to making IBAa more international organization.

IBA WebmasterTully Hammill Retires

After serving as IBA’s originalwebmaster for so long that he can’trecall the year it was established,Tully Hammill has retired from bothhis position with the University ofWashington and his volunteerposition with IBA. Tully has been thefirst point of contact with IBA formany people and made us accessibleto the web. He deserves our heartfeltthanks.

IBA GrantsProgram Committee

Shyamala Ratnayeke was ap-pointed to the Grants ProgramCommittee to fill the positionvacated by Jon Swenson. Shyamalahas worked extensively on slothbears in her native Sri Lanka and ison the faculty of the University ofTennessee, Knoxville (page 8).

IBA IncorporationThe Council voted to incorporate

IBA as a non-profit organization. Inaddition to our tax-exempt, non-profit status for tax purposes, it givesus an additional layer of legal protec-tion and enhances the effectiveness ofthe Bear Conservation Fund (page 7).

Bylaws and Policy ChangesCouncil voted unanimously to an

interim bylaws changes regardingresolutions. We felt that committingIBA to a resolution is serious enoughthat it should require a two-thirdsmajority of mail ballots, just as isrequired for bylaws changes (page 6).

Increasingly IBA is asked torespond to a wide array of issuesaffecting bears. Council recentlyadopted a policy to guide ourdecision making (page 5).

Northern ForumBear Conservation

During early August, I was invitedto give a presentation on the func-tion and programs of IBA to theNorthern Forum Bear ConservationWorking Group meeting in Sapporo,Japan (page 23). This group includesbiologists, managers and conserva-tionists of northern countries,primarily along the Pacific Rimcountries, but also western Russiaand northern Scandinavia. It hasdirect links to regional governmentsand functions in part to assure thatsustainable development maintainsecological integrity. This was a goodopportunity to discuss IBA andNorthern Forum collaboration tobenefit bear conservation, andprovided an opportunity to see theJapanese management approachesand research programs.

17th IBA Conference JapanThe 17th IBA conference will be

held in Japan, October 2-6, 2006(pages 48-50). My recent visit toHokkaido confirms that the confer-ence will be worthwhile. The peopleare exceptionally friendly, it is veryeasy to travel, and the countryside isbeautiful. This is the first IBAconference to be held in Asia, andalthough there will be an emphasis

on Asian bear issues, most of theproblems faced by bears are universalso everyone will benefit.

Retirement and MongoliaMy retirement from a 32-year

career in bear management andresearch with the Alaska Departmentof Fish and Game began on Septem-ber 1. I look forward to spendingmore time on IBA and bear conserva-tion issues.

As I write this, I am in Mongoliawith the Gobi bear research team.The team includes members of theUnited Nations DevelopmentProgram, the Mongolian Academy ofSciences, the Great Gobi StrictlyProtected Area staff, Beringia South,and IBA. It has received help fromthese organizations and Peter Zahlerof WCS, Cuddeback Non-Typical,Inc. remote cameras, an anonymousdonor and the International BearTrust. The project is an outgrowth ofa workshop convened by the Mongo-lian Ministry for Nature and Envi-ronment during November 2004.The support for the project cameafter IBA provided a small grant toassess minimum numbers of theremaining 20-50 bears in the Mongo-lian Gobi Desert using remotecameras. Leveraged by the IBA grant,other sources developed. Providingsuch a catalyst for research directedto enhance our knowledge ofendangered populations or subpopu-lations continues to be a realstrength of IBA.

The team placed one GPS satel-lite collar on a bear June 27, 2005;and hopes to place two more in thenext three weeks to assess move-ment patterns between oasescomplexes in the Gobi, and to get abetter idea of habitat use andfactors important in limiting thepopulation.


Council News

Joseph D. Clark, IBA SecretaryUSGS-SAFL274 Ellington Plant Sciences BuildingUniversity of TennesseeKnoxville, TN 37996, USAPhone 865-974-4790Email [email protected]

IBA has been asked with increas-ing frequency to act on a wide arrayof environmental issues affectingbears. It has not always been easy todetermine whether IBA, as a profes-sional organization, should respond.Council recently adopted thefollowing policy guidance document.As always, your comments arewelcome.

As a professional organization, theInternational Association for BearResearch and Management (IBA)holds a recognized position in theworld conservation arena. While allIBA members are concerned aboutconservation of the world’s bears, asprofessionals, we cannot afford toraise questions about our scientificobjectivity. Policy statements that arenot firmly founded on the bestavailable science have the potentialto undermine that credibility and,ultimately, the strength and unique-ness of IBA. Nevertheless, membersof IBA can offer unique scientificperspectives and can synthesizeinformation to help reach solutionsto difficult issues to aid in decisionmaking. The role of IBA in communi-cating this information is perhaps itsmost important and unique func-tion. The goal of IBA should be tomaintain credibility and scientificintegrity beyond question whilebringing relevant and timely infor-mation to bear on the policy process.

Therefore, IBA Council involve-ment in policy issues should belimited to those that meet thefollowing criteria:

New Policy Guidance for IBA

1. Compatible withIBA Mission Statement.

Policy issues should be evaluatedto determine whether the issue itselfand the style of approach are consis-tent with the IBA Mission Statement.

2. Need for ScienceMany policy issues involve

differences in agenda, philosophy ordesired outcome on the part ofparticipants and may have little todo with science. When requested totake action on an issue, IBA Councilshould carefully evaluate whetherscience is a relevant and necessarypart of resolving the issue.

3. Conservation SignificanceIssues for IBA involvement should

pertain to bear populations orsubpopulations of significance.There may, of course, be exceptions;this criterion is intended simply toassist in evaluating potential issuesfor involvement by IBA.

4. Catalytic Effect/Value AddedIBA Council should determine

whether involvement of the organi-zation will make a difference in theability to resolve the issue, particu-larly in catalyzing other interests.

5. Clear ObjectivesThe issue must have a clearly

defined objective or outcome.

6. Consensus of CouncilTaking a position requires consen-

sus of Council.

In summary, IBA’s goal should be tocreate systems and capacity to commu-nicate information about scientificknowledge and experience to thepolicy process. IBA and its membersare most effective as translatorsbetween research/scientific informa-tion and the decision making process.

Procedure for Handling Requestsfor IBA Involvement in Policy

1. Any member of Council,including all executive officers, ifapproached with a request for IBAinvolvement in a policy issue orendorsement or action of any kind,shall relay that request directly to theentire Council in a timely manner.

2. After receiving a request,Council must first decide whether ornot to become involved in the issue,as outlined above. In some cases thiswill be possible with little discussion.In more complicated cases, a deci-sion may require more informationthan initially provided. In such cases,Council will appoint one or moremembers to gather and summarizethe information necessary forCouncil to decide.

3. If Council votes down a request,either the IBA president or a desig-nated Council representative willprovide a formal written response tothe requestor, including an explana-tion of why the IBA opted not totake on the issue.

4. If Council votes to proceed withan issue, either the IBA president or adesignated Council representativewill keep the party making therequest informed about Councildecisions on the issue.

5. After voting to proceed with anissue, Council will then decide whatform of involvement to pursue andwill identify members willing to dothe necessary work. IBA responsemay take any of the following forms:• Letter from the IBA.• Publication on the IBA website.• Formal position statement or

white paper.• Commissioned, published paper.• Creation of strategic initiative.• Submission of a resolution to the

membership for a vote.6. The resulting actions or inactions

will be reported to the membership.


Council NewsProposed IBA Bylaws Changes

Joseph D. Clark, IBA SecretaryUSGS-SAFL274 Ellington Plant Sciences BuildingUniversity of TennesseeKnoxville, TN 37996, USAPhone 865-974-4790Email [email protected]

At the 16th IBA conference in Italy,September-October 2005, the IBACouncil proposed the followingchanges to the bylaws. A ballot willbe mailed to IBA members to vote onthe proposed changes. Proposed newlanguage is in bold type. Existinglanguage proposed for deletion isunderlined.

Article VII. Bylaws andResolutions

Section 1. BylawsThe workings and organization of

the Association shall include onlythose listed in these Bylaws. Copiesof the Bylaws shall be available toany member upon request to theSecretary.

Proposed New Section 2.Amendments to the Bylaws and

Resolutions.Resolutions or bylaws amend-

ments may be submitted by anyIBA member during the IBAbusiness meetings or to the presi-dent at any time. Proposed resolu-tions or bylaws changes will bepublished in the Newsletter fordiscussion and to ask members tosubmit viewpoints. A ballot alongwith representative viewpoints willbe published in the followingnewsletter and the resolution orbylaw change must receive a two-thirds majority vote for passage.

Existing Section 2.Amendments to the Bylaws and

ResolutionsAmendments to the Bylaws may

be submitted by any voting memberof the Association. All amendmentsmust be ratified by the membershipbefore becoming part of the Bylaws,except for interim Bylaws as de-scribed below. All proposed amend-ments shall be either submitted tothe President and published in thenext Newsletter or brought to thefloor of the IBA business meeting atthe primary conference. Ratificationof amendments shall require a two-thirds majority of voting members atthe primary triennial conferencebusiness meeting. Amendmentsconsidered outside of the businessmeeting shall be ratified by a two-thirds majority of mail ballotspublished in the next Newsletter andreceived by the Secretary within 30days following their appearance inthe Newsletter.

To accommodate resolution ofimportant issues in a timelymanner that are not specificallyaddressed in the Bylaws, theCouncil may, by a two-thirds vote,establish interim Bylaw amend-ments, that will remain in effectuntil ratified or rejected by mail-inballot. Such interim amendmentsmust be published in the nextNewsletter and be ratified by atwo-thirds majority of returnedmail ballots. These mail ballotsshall be included with the Newslet-ter following the initial publica-tion to allow for open discussionby members. In order to becounted, ballots must be receivedby the Secretary within 30 daysfollowing their appearance in theNewsletter.

Existing Section 3.ResolutionsResolutions may be submitted by

any voting member for ratificationby a majority of the general member-ship present during IBA businessmeetings. Proposed resolutions mayalso be submitted to the President,published in the next Newsletter fordiscussion/amendments, presentedfor mail-in voting in the followingnewsletter (second presentation) andpassed by a majority of mail-inballots received by the Secretarywithin 30 days following its secondpresentation in the Newsletter.Approved resolutions will be pub-lished in the next Newsletter follow-ing their approval.

© J

oan

Ski

dm

ore


Council News

Karen NoyceVice President for AmericasMinnesota Departmentof Natural Resources1201 East Highay 2Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USAPhone (218) 327-4432Fax (218) 327-4181Email [email protected]

IBA initiated the Bear Conserva-tion Fund in 2004 in an effort togreatly expand IBA’s capacity to fundresearch and conservation projects,develop a new experience andexchange program (page 8), andmaintain publications and otherprograms. The Funding and Develop-ment Committee oversees this effort,seeking individuals and organiza-tions who like IBA’s science-basedapproach to bear conservation andwish to support it.

To date in 2005, donations to theBear Conservation Fund totaledabout $28,000, more than doublingthe funds available for Research andConservation Grants this year. Untilrecently, grants have been supportedsolely by the John Sheldon BevinsMemorial Foundation,which contributed$17,500 towardsgrants in 2005. Inaddition, a single

gift of $250,000 from a donor in2004 will soon provide annualendowment income for our grantsprogram.

Having made these first stepstowards our goal, the Funding andDevelopment Committee is gearingup to start a new round of contactswith individuals, corporations, andnon-profit organizations that mightlike to support our programs. Wethank Bernie Peyton and BruceMcLellan, two of the architects ofthis effort, for all their work as theystep down from the committee topursue other interests and responsi-bilities. In their place, StephanieSimek, John Hechtel, and SethWilson join Harry Reynolds andmyself, with Chris Morgan and JohnSchoen offering to help advise us ondirection and strategy. I encourage

Bear Conservation Fund:IBA Funding and Development Committee

any one who has an interest injoining us to contact me rightaway. We could especially usemembers from outside NorthAmerica who can provide perspec-tive and/or experience withcharitable giving in Europe, Asia,or South America.

I am also asking all IBA mem-bers to keep our goal in mind. Ifyou know or hear of anyone youbelieve could potentially providesignificant support to our pro-grams, please let us know so wecan approach them. In this kindof an effort, word of mouth andconnecting to the right people arekeys to success. Thank you foryour ideas!

16th IBA conference participants hike into brown bear mountain habitat (pages 9-15).

© D

juro

Hu

ber


Council News

Frederick C. Dean810 Ballaine RoadFairbanks, AK 99709-6606, USAPhone (907) 479-6607Email [email protected]

Thanks to a great deal of hardwork by IBA members, officers, andsupporters the grants programs areexpanding. There are now threedistinct kinds of grants available:Conference Travel Grants; Experi-ence and Exchange Grants; andResearch and Conservation Grants.

Conference Travel GrantsThese grants are designed to help

reduce the expenses associated withattending IBA conferences. For anapplication and instructions fortravel grants to the next IBA confer-ence see the IBA website: http://www.bearbiology.org. From thehome page link to conferences, thenlink to the 17th IBA conference inJapan (pages 48-50). IBA contributesseed money for travel grants to thelocal conference committee whichthen raises additional funds.

Experience andExchange Grants

The Experience and ExchangeGrants Program (EEG) is new thisyear. The EEG is opening excitingpossibilities for increasing theexperience and training of peopleworking in bear research and conser-vation. There are also great opportu-nities for well-established workers togain a better understanding ofproblems in unfamiliar parts of theworld. Hopefully, most exchangeswill be reciprocal.

The EEG Committee is chaired byOle Jacob Sørensen (Norway), andincludes: Glen Contreras (USA), IsaacGoldstein (Venezuela), PetraKaczensky (Germany), and KarenNoyce (USA). EEGs are intended to

Three IBA Grant Programs: Travel, Experience, Research

help stimulate exchanges betweenpeople working on bears in differentparts of the world. These may serveto increase the experience of someworkers, to spread ideas, etc. Boththe hosts and the visitors are ex-pected to contribute to and benefitfrom exchanges. This program isstarting on a small scale. The firstgrant(s) probably will be awarded in2006. The EEG deadline is Decem-ber 1, 2005. Details about theprogram, example forms, and theapplication process are available atthe IBA website: http://www.bearbiology.org. Follow the linkto the section on grants information.

Research and ConservationThe Research and Conservation

Grants Program (RCG) is ongoing.The information on the IBA website(http://www.bearbiology.org) hasbeen expanded significantly. Thegreatest change is in the RCGcommittee. Jon Swenson (Norway)has accepted other duties and hasresigned from this committee. Jonhas worked hard for the grantsprogram and to its great benefit. Wewill miss him and urge all in IBA toapplaud his effort. ShyamalaRatnayeke, a native of Sri Lanka nowon the faculty of the University ofTennessee at Knoxville, will takeJon’s seat on the committee.

The RCG deadline remainsDecember 31, 2005. Instructionsand forms are available at http://www.bearbiology.org.

Grants InformationIf you need grant information

and cannot connect to the IBAwebsite, contact the appropriatecommittee chair:

17th IBA Conference Travel GrantsKoji YamazakiZoological LaboratoryIbaraki Nature Museum700 Osaki, Bando-cityIbaraki 306-0622, JapanPhone +81 297 38 2000Fax +81 297 38 1999Email [email protected]

Experience and Exchange GrantsOle Jacob SørensenNord-trondelag University CollegeFaculty of Social Sciencesand Natural SciencesBox 2501N-7729 Steinkjer, NorwayPhone +4774112052Email [email protected]

Research and Conservation GrantsFrederick C. Dean810 Ballaine RoadFairbanks, AK 99709-6606, USAPhone (907) 479-6607Email [email protected]

Important NoteThe success of the grants pro-

grams depends on:• Generous financial support fromall IBA members, whether fromdonations or helping the EconomicDevelopment Committee reachpotential donors (page 7).• Consistent hard work by grantsprogram committee members.• High quality work by eachgrantee including informativereports and photos which illustrateIBA-supported efforts in bearbiology and conservation.• Hard work on the part of thenewsletter editor and the webmaster.

© J

oan

Ski

dm

ore


16th IBA Conference

Piero GenovesiINFS-National Wildlife InstituteEmail [email protected]&Claudio GroffProvincia Autonoma di TrentoForest and Wildlife ServiceEmail [email protected]

The 16th IBA conference, held inRiva del Garda, Italy, September 27-

October 1, 2005 was very successful.Oral and poster presentations withhigh scientific standards, a beautifullocation (the conference hall is onthe shore of Lake Garda with a viewof the Alps), nearby attractions inVerona and Venice, and famousregional wines all contributed to amemorable meeting. With 394specialists attending from 39 coun-tries, this was one of the largest IBAconferences ever organized.

Over the five days with a tightagenda and many people involved,everything worked perfectly andsmoothly. This was largely theresult of the efforts of the Forestand Wildlife Service of theProvincia of Trento and the Orikatastaff. We would like to particularlythank Carlo Frapporti—whoprepared the beautiful woodenbears that welcomed participants—and Davide Dalpiaz—who providedflawless technical assistance to theconference.

Almost 200 papers were submittedfor the conference. Review commit-tee members Piero Genovesi, JonSwenson, Djuro Huber, Jorg Rauerand Luigi Boitani worked very hardselecting the oral presentations. Theagenda was packed with 57 oralpresentations, two workshops, and126 posters. Conference organizersand the six session chairs kept themeeting on time throughout theentire five days.

Many attendees came fromEastern Europe, Latin America andAsia (27 supported through travelgrants). We are particularly proud ofthe interest that the conferenceraised among students—over 60students from 20 countries attended.As IBA president Harry Reynoldsnoted (page 3), this was the first timethat a student, Andreas Zedrosser,chaired a session, and that anotherstudent, Ximena Velez-Liendo,presented an invited paper. This wasalso the first IBA conference with asession entirely devoted to conserva-tion of bears in Latin America andAsia, where some of the moreinteresting contributions of theconference were presented.

With simultaneous translationinto Italian, the local staff of theprovincial forest service was able tofollow the scientific program. Thiswas very important, because theconference was also aimed at increas-ing the involvement of the technicalstaff involved in field work inTrentino.

Another critical aim of theconference was raising the profile ofbear conservation among Italianagencies and decision makers.Damage caused by the translocatedbears in Trentino is increasing, andconflicts with local residents pose acomplex challenge to the authoritiesresponsible for the reintroduction. Apositive sign for bear conservationin northern Italy was provided bythe president of the Trentino localgovernment in his opening remarksto the conference, in which hereaffirmed the government’scommitment to work in the comingyears to ensure the success of thereintroduction.

In addition, the opening remarksof the representative of the Ministryof Environment and the president ofthe National Wildlife Institute bothhighlighted the urgent need for acoordinated policy for the conserva-tion of the brown bear in Abruzzo.We hope that the conference willraise this very delicate issue in thepolitical agenda of the country.

Conference attendees also had anopportunity to enjoy Italy—its wine,food and landscapes. We had a verynice ice breaker on the lake shore, abeautiful banquet in the ancientcastle of Toblino, and a full dayexcursion into the very heart of thebear area, the amazing Adamello-Brenta Park. Park rangers showed usthe release area for translocatedbears, and a mountain hut used byshepherds in summer near sites ofbear predation.

Again with thanks to Carlo,photos of the conference, field tripsand excursion to Abruzzo are nowposted on the conference webpage:www.provincia.tn.it/foreste/16IBAconference.

16th IBA Conference is Over...

© C

ath

erin

e N

ork

in


16th IBA Conference

Sterling MillerNational Wildlife FederationEmail [email protected]&Mike VaughanVirginia Tech&Stefano FocardiInstituto Nazionaleper la Fauna Selvatica

The awards committee, appointedby conference co-chairs PieroGenovesi and Claudio Groff, washanded a tough task because therewere so many excellent papers andposters presented at the conference.

All of the presentations receivingawards, and many others that didn’t,featured excellent presentations andgraphics as well as stimulatingscience. We look forward to seeingthese award-wining papers and manyof the other excellent presentationsbetween the covers of Ursus soon.

The winners are:

Best Oral PresentationNon-invasive genetic sampling and

population estimation of brown bears inEurope. Lisette P. Waits, E. Bellemain,M. DeBarba, E. Randi, and P. Taberlet.(invited paper)

Honorable Mentions:Non-invasive DNA sampling yields a

diverse suite of ecological investigationsof grizzly bears in British Columbia,Canada, 1995-2005. Mike Proctor, B.McLellan, D. Paetkau, C. Apps, G.Mowat, and J. Boulanger.

Harvesting Bears: Do we understandwhat we are doing? Jon E. Swenson.(invited paper)

Best Student PresentationAssessing bias of global positioning

system radio-collars to study black beardistribution patterns in a temperateforest environment, Olympic NationalPark, Washington. Kate Sager, K.Jenkins, P Happe, J. Beecham, and G.Wright.

Honorable Mention:Effects of access and hunting on the

demographics of black bears. SophieM. Czetwertynski, M.S. Boyce, andF.S. Schmiegelow.

Best PosterFine versus coarse landscape level

comparisons of principal roadkill areasfor the Florida black bear (Ursusamericanus floridanus). Stephanie S.Simek, M. Endries, and S. Jonker.

Honorable Mentions:Kernel-based home range method

for data with irregular samplinginterval. J. Katajisto, A. Moilanen,and J.E. Swenson.

Density estimation: Model forcombining DNA sampling, cameratraps, and telemetry data with themiddle Georgia black bear population.J.L. Skvarla, and M.J. Conroy.

A study by carbon and nitrogenstable isotopes on the turnover time ofhair and blood in Asiatic black bear. R.Mizukami, T. Okano, S. Nakamura,C. Yayota, R. Narita, T. Komatsu, M.Yoh, H. Hayashi, and T. Tsubota.

The distribution of the sloth bear(Melursus ursinus inornatus) in SriLanka. R.A. Pieris, V.S.J. Pragash, S.Ratnayeke, and F.T. Van Manen.

Joseph Clark, Session ChairEmail [email protected]

The translocations session beganwith a paper presented by GeorgRauer comparing spatial behavior oftranslocated and non-translocatedbears in Europe. In general, translo-cated bears exhibited greater mobil-ity and larger home ranges aftertranslocation. The release site did notnecessarily become a central part ofthe home range. That was followedby a paper presented by FilipoZibordi detailing a brown bearreintroduction program in theCentral Alps in Italy. An evaluationof habitat use by the reintroducedbears led to a 12.3% increase insuitable habitat compared with whathad been previously estimated. PieroGenovesi presented a paper onguidelines for bear reintroductions inEurope. The source of founders;methods of capture, handling,transport and release; conflictmanagement; and post-releasemonitoring were discussed. Finally,P.Y. Quenette presented an overviewof a bear reintroduction program inFrance. A common theme of all thetalks was the importance of publicinvolvement. It seems evident thatthe sociological obstacles to bearreintroduction are likely to be morechallenging than the biological ones.

Awards Translocations


16th IBA Conference

Andreas Zedrosser, Session ChairEmail [email protected]

This was the first session at an IBAconference entirely devoted to bearspecies in Asia and South America.These geographical regions are ofspecial importance in the future ofbear research, conservation andmanagement, because they representseveral little-studied bear species, someof which are critically endangered.

S. Ratnayeke gave an invitedpresentation on the conservation ofsloth bears in Sri Lanka. A radiote-lemetry study showed that bothmales and females had very smallhome ranges, which was most likelyrelated to high habitat productivity.One hundred-twenty sloth bearattacks on humans were analysedand indicated that all attacks oc-curred in forest habitats remote fromvillages. Because of frequent bearattacks, local attitudes towards slothbears were negative. Reducing therisk of sloth bear attacks on humanswill be crucial for the conservation ofthe species.

N.P.S. Chauhan presented resultson human-sun bear conflicts inIndia. Ninety-five attacks on humanswere analysed and showed that mostof the attacks occurred in forests andinvolved people grazing cattle,farming or protecting crops, ormoving in forests or the vicinity ofvillages. Recommendations on howto reduce human-sun bear conflictsincluded restriction of humanactivities in forests, especially duringthe night, protection and improve-ment of potential bear habitat, andpublic education.

M.A. Nawaz presented an overviewon the status and conservation ofbrown bears in Pakistan. The specieshas been steadily declining and hasgone extinct in several places overthe last hundred years. Today 17

small populations are scattered overseveral mountain ranges. Brown bearpopulations in Pakistan have lostconnectivity with populations inAfghanistan and Tajikistan, but arewell connected with populations innorthern India and probably south-ern China. The major threat toconservation of brown bears inPakistan is habitat fragmentation dueto timber harvest, agricultural, andinfrastructure development of thegrowing human population.

S. Sathyakumar presented resultson the status and distribution of theAsiatic black bear in India and itschanges over the last 10 years. Thestatus and distribution of the specieswas evaluated through question-naires, field surveys and expertknowledge in 1994-95 and re-evaluated in 2005. The resultsindicated a slight improvement inthe status of Asiatic black bears.Based on this information and GIS-modeling, the potential Asiatic blackbear habitat range was estimated at~270.000 km2 in India. Poaching forthe illegal trade in bear parts andhabitat degradation are the twomajor threats to the Asiatic blackbear in India.

X. Velez-Liendo, an invitedspeaker, discussed the past, presentand future of the conservation of theAndean bear, a species listed asvulnerable according to IUCNcriteria. Habitat destruction andpoaching are the principal threats forthe species’ long-term survival. In1980, the Spectacled Bear SpecialistGroup was established to promotedata collection on the speciesdistribution, habitat use and diet; in1999 the Spectacled Bear ConservationAction Plan was edited setting clearpriorities for future actions. Howeverdue to lack of funding, research andconservation actions are delayed andthe threats to the species have

increased due to social impoverish-ment. In 2003 an ecoregionalstrategy for Andean bear conserva-tion was developed for the northernAndes, however such a strategy isstill missing for the southern Andes.

A. Castellanos presented firstresults of a radio-telemetry study onAndean bears in Ecuador. Averagehome size was ~108 km2 for malesand ~29 km2 for females. Muchintraspecific tolerance was indicateddue to the extensive home rangeoverlap. Activity data suggested thatthe bears were more active duringthe day.

P. Viteri discussed populationestimation and genetic diversity ofthe Andean bear in Ecuador. Theresults indicated that genetic indicesare higher than in previous reports.This study also constitutes the firstestimation of numbers of Andeanbears in the wild.

S. Paisley studied Andean bearmovements in Bolivia. The radio-tracked animals mostly used high-altitude grasslands in the rainyseason, and cloud forest and theecotone between those two habitattypes during the dry season. Thisdifference was most likely related toseasonally varying food resources.

I. Goldstein discussed the ecologi-cal, social and economic aspects ofAndean bear-cattle conflicts in asmall rural community in Ecuador(page 28). Solutions by the commu-nity focused only on economiccompensation, but no cattle or bearmanagement programs to preventdamages were addressed. Newmanagement practices like movingcattle into different areas, an envi-ronmental education program andfinancial compensation mechanismswere amongst other suggestions toreduce the conflict between localsand bears.

Conservation of Bears in Asia and Latin America


16th IBA Conference

Andrew Derocher, Session ChairEmail [email protected]

The population management sessionwas the largest of those held in Rivadel Garda with 12 talks centered ongrizzly/brown and American blackbears. The session opened with aninvited presentation by Jon Swensonwho provided a stimulating look atthe effects of harvest on bears withthe underlying theme that not allbears are created equal. SaraMacDougall shifted the session tolook at human-bear interactions inKluane National Park and how theobservations of users can be inte-grated into decision making pro-cesses to reduce interactions. Thefollowing presentation by SophieCzetwertynski received an honorablemention award for a student presen-tation (page 10). Sophie provided anoverview of her research on theeffects of access and hunting on thedemographics of black bears inAlberta using hunted and unhuntedareas to examine population struc-ture, demographics and condition.Shifting continents, Djuro Huberprovided an overview of the growingbrown bear population and itsmanagement in Croatia and outlinedthe challenges of keeping the bearsas a game species in Croatia whileCITES and other EU regulations viewit as an endangered species. Down arather different path, Karen Grahamexamined “What are grizzly bearsreally doing around roads?” andprovided a rigorous framework forassessing the factors that affect roadcrossing by grizzlies which oftenincreases the risk of mortalitythrough vehicle strikes or poaching.

Following a leisurely lunch alongthe shores of Garda Lake (the mostMediterranean of the alpine Italianlakes) the session reconvened with apresentation by Jonna Katajisto

Population Management

which examined the effects ofdisturbance in the social organiza-tion of brown bears through theremoval of adult males and foundthat most cub mortality was associ-ated with the mating season. Follow-ing on the same theme, Karen Noyceexamined the relationship betweenbear hunters, black bear abundanceand autumn food abundancethrough a fascinating series ofregression models that suddenlychanged in 1995 and brought homethe message that harvest manage-ment is always a “work in progress.”A small shift in the program saw KimTitus provide an overview of brown/grizzly bear management in Alaskathat spanned almost 30 years andexamined populations that vary 60-fold in density and resulted in>32,000 bears being harvested. Thechallenges of conflicting manage-ment goals were brought forward inone area of the interior where bearsare killing up to 52% of the neonatemoose and the current goal is toreduce the bear population toincrease harvest opportunities forungulates. Following the sametheme, Harry Reynolds finished thesession for the day and movedfurther in discussing the specificgoals of the population reductionand outlined the special measuresbeing undertaken to reduce thepopulation of 135 resident bears by60%. It was clear that the goals ofthe program were not going to beeasy to achieve and the outcome byno means certain.

Bright and early on Saturday, thehearty few that had managed to pushaway from their breakfast table andthe delicious Italian coffee made it to

the presentation of Mark Edwardswho examined subpopulationstructure of grizzly bears usingmovement data in an area of oil andgas development in the CanadianArctic. The goal of the study wasaimed at estimating the proportionallevel of development influencewithin a contiguous population.Along the same theme, TabithaGraves examined a method toidentify functional corridors forbrown bears on the Kenai Peninsulaof Alaska. Using cluster analysis,movements from GPS collars wereassigned as primary habitat (sinuousmovements) or corridors (directionalmovements). The goal was to allowmanagers to identify importantlinkage zones on the landscape. Thefinal presentation in this session wasby Barbara Schwab who examinedGPS data in Alberta to examineconnectivity across a heterogeneousand highly modified landscape. Theapproach reduces landscape com-plexity to network components ofpatches, connections (least-costmovement paths), and then multipleconnections.

The presentations were a cleardemonstration that the science andmanagement of the two speciesexamined in this session have movedquantum leaps forward. The level ofsophistication in study design,analysis, and interpretation havemoved the field of ursid ecology andapplied management forward to thecutting edge of large mammalresearch.


16th IBA Conference

Djuro Huber, Session ChairEmail [email protected]

On the first day of the conferencein Riva del Garda, right after thewelcome and opening remarks, thesession on bear conservation inEurope started.

The conference room was fullwith 392 registered participants from39 countries, still fresh and eager tofollow the presentations. Thetechnical side was also superb, bothfrom the side of organizers and thepresenters, thus making real showsof each contribution. Even theeternal challenge of staying withinthe time limits worked very nicelywith the distinguished group ofauthors.

Invited speaker Luigi Boitanieloquently described the realchallenge of saving a remnant,isolated, and small population ofbrown bears in the Abruzzo area inthe Italian Apennines. Variousagencies and interest groups aretrying to do their best to help thebears, but much of their efforts werewasted in the lack of the coordina-tion. Even scientific research failedto provide the key managementdirections. This conference could bethe turning point as most relevantpolitical, professional and scientificpersons were present and they allpromised to collaborate.

Out of the group of six co-authorsJuan Herrero from Spain presentedon the trends and distribution ofanother small and isolated Europeanbrown bear population in theCantabrian Mountains in Spain,which is subdivided into two nuclei.This was the first of three presenta-tions on these bears. The good newsis that reproduction was confirmedin both nuclei with 1.8 and 1.5 cubsper litter, respectively, indicatingslight recovery. However, the bad

Bear Conservation in Europe

news is that the area of occupancydecreased in the past 15 years by 11%and 37%, respectively, and the size ofthe gap between the nuclei increased.

After we heard about two of thesmallest European bear populations,George Predoiu, with two co-authors,spoke about the largest one that livesin Romania. Although the popula-tion seems stable and vital, the threatis the potential danger of habitatfragmentation, which may arisefrom the post-communist reformsthat include new legislation, theprivatization of forests, and neweconomic development in bearhabitat. On the positive side, theauthors studied the populationconnectivity and prepared anintegrated GIS map that will beused for strategic planning of longterm biodiversity conservation inRomania.

Javier Naves and four co-authorsbrought us back to two isolatedCantabrian bear subpopulations andthe problem of their separation,which is perceived as one of the keyobstacles for their recovery. The gapbetween western and eastern bears isabout 30 km wide and contains ahighway, railroad and reservoirs. Anew high-speed railway is underconstruction. The authors simulatedthe effect of the operational phase ofthe new railway and found 19% lessprobability of connection. Even thesimulated increases of forest cover ofup to 91 km2 did not show satisfac-tory mitigation.

The fifth presentation of thesession by John Linnell from Norwaywas a creative analysis of PVA(population viability analysis)concepts based on an increasingresearch database in relation to

management policies that differamong countries depending oneconomic and social acceptance.Some of the thoughts expressed wererepeatedly cited by other presentersduring the remaining course of theconference.

Robin Rigg with his co-workerspresented a comprehensive review offactors that are influencing theperception of large carnivores inSlovakia. They compared the threespecies and found that lynx is themost, and wolf the least accepted.Bears were rated the most dangerous,and the shepherds were the mostnegative occupational group.

In the third presentation onCantabrian bears Alberto Fernandez-Gil and four co-authors described thestudy of bear food habits and itschange over the last 30 years. In theomnivorous diet on graminoids andherbs, they found increasing grazingpressure (competitors) and the globalclimate change as the main reasonsfor diet shift, and an additionalpossible threat for populationrecovery.

The last presentation in thesession was by Jonas Kindberg (withsix co-authors) and he showed ushow the fine use of bear telemetrydata can reveal the details of bearhabitat use in Scandinavia. Amongother results they found that femalebears prefer rugged terrain and tendto stay over 10 km away from thesource of human disturbance.Conservation efforts are to take intoaccount such findings when plan-ning any further development.


16th IBA Conference

Lisette Waits, Session ChairEmail [email protected]

The population ecology session ofthe conference included a variety oftalks on brown bear and Americanblack bear ecology from Europe andNorth America.

Michael Proctor launched thesession with an evaluation of sub-population boundaries of grizzlybears in Southwest Canada and theNorthwest United States using acombination of genetic analysis andGIS. Using microsatellite analysis of15 loci from 1,266 bears, Bayesianclustering methods, and geneticassignment tests, he revealed 11 sub-population units across a 150,000km2 area and discussed the need forefforts to maintain connectivity.

Moving to Europe, the nextpresentation by Andreas Zedrosserevaluated annual reproductivesuccess and possible determinantsamong male brown bears in twostudy areas in Scandinavia using acombination of field and geneticdata. In general, older, larger andmore genetically diverse males hadgreater annual reproductive success,but the relative importance of eachfactor varied by study area.

The next two talks focused onbear-salmon interactions in NorthAmerica. First, Jennie Christensendescribed how she has documentedelevated organochlorine pesticidesand polybrominated diphenyl ethersin hair and fat tissue of bears feedingon Pacific salmon. This researchhighlighted the global nature ofenvironmental contamination anda possible risk for bears. Second,Scott Gende reviewed current

Population Ecology

knowledge on bear-salmon interac-tions by addressing predation rateson salmon, benefits to bears, andbenefits to the riparian forests.

The Scandinavian bear projectcontributed two talks. First, JonSwenson described a study thatevaluated the level of interspecificcompetition for berries betweenbrown bears and other mammal andbird species in the coniferous borealforest of Sweden. They concludedthat significant interspecific competi-tion did not occur and many berrieswere available. Second, Ole-GunnarStoen used a combination of geneticdata and field data to evaluate kin-related spatial structure amongScandinavian brown bears. Hedetected kin-related spatial structurein females and documented thatoverlap in home ranges of femaleswas positively correlated withrelatedness. Kin-related structure wasnot observed for male-male compari-sons or male-female comparisons.

Moving back to North America,Lily Peacock evaluated the hypoth-esis that bears exhibit sexual segrega-tion on salmon streams usingunbaited barbed wire hair traps tocollect 1,554 genetic samples fromblack bears at seven salmon streamsover a two year study. After analyz-ing samples to individual and sex,she used a logistic model-basedapproach to determine that habitattype and trail were significantvariables explaining female presence

and segregation. This study high-lighted the use of non-invasivegenetic sampling to address behav-ioral questions.

The next speaker, CatherineTredick, also used non-invasivegenetic sampling to study populationabundance and genetic relatedness ofblack bears in coastal Virginia andNorth Carolina. Nearly 5,500 hairsamples were collected at barbed wirehair traps over four summers andvery high bear densities were ob-served. Analysis of genetic structureacross the study area revealed threegenetic groups (subpopulations) ofbears.

In the final talk of the session,Andres Ordiz described his effort toimprove the criteria used whencounting females with cubs forpopulation monitoring by takingdistance in time and space intoconsideration. He observed thatfemales in the boreal forests ofScandinavia moved farther thannative females in south centralEurope.

In conclusion, this was an interest-ing and diverse session that demon-strated the value of integratingresearch methods such as GIS andspatial analysis, genetic approaches,stable isotope analysis, and tradi-tional field work.


Shyamala Ratnayeke, Session ChairEmail [email protected]

Studying large carnivores likebears has always posed specialchallenges to biologists, requiringspecial techniques to deal with wide-ranging, secretive animals that occurat low densities and often occupyhabitats inaccessible or inhospitableto humans. Field methodologies tostudy bears more effectively and lessintrusively have continued todevelop and expand.

Robert Marquez started the sessionby discussing the successful use ofnon-intrusive methods—monitoringbear sign on game trails, remotecameras and hair traps—to surveyareas for Andean bear presence ormonitoring a bear population overtime. Naturally occurring game trailsaround the Sur Pax mountain ofEcuador provided a wealth ofinformation on Andean bear habitatuse, feeding ecology, and populationgenetics.

Techniques

The safe and effective handling oflarge charismatic carnivores is acentral issue for studying animalsthat are by nature difficult toobserve, and consequently requirecapture and handling to addressparticular questions related to theirbehavior and population ecology.Nigel Caulkett discussed the effectsof capture and handling on thehealth and movement of grizzlybears captured with leg-hold snaresin Alberta, Canada. He pointed outthe potential for serious short-termeffects, such as significant muscledamage, and long-term effects ofpoor body condition in bears thathad been captured multiple timesover several years. Although opin-ions differ widely as to what isjustifiable in the treatment ofanimals in research, studies such asthese will certainly motivate thedevelopment of safer, more humaneapproaches for studying bears.

Katherine Kendall discussed theplanning and execution of anambitious project to assess grizzlybear population size in northwestern

16th IBA Conference

Montana, USA. The approach usesmicrosatellite analysis of hairsamples to identify individual bearsin a mark-recapture study spanning avery large study area (31,410 km2) innorthwestern Montana.

Finally, Kim Sager gave an excel-lent award-winning presentation(page 10) on the use of GPS collars tostudy American black bears inOlympic National Park, Washington,USA. Her study was designed to testvariability in performance of GPSradio collars placed in differentenvironments; Kim found that datarecovered from test collars was biasedtoward open habitats with littlecanopy cover or topographic obstruc-tion and developed weighting factorsto reduce biases in home-range andresource-use estimates.

Clearly, the hurdles of gatheringdata on ursids will remain with us,despite the promising leaps in fieldand laboratory methodologiesdeveloped over the past decades.The information presented duringthis session indicates that we shouldcarefully examine and test thosetechniques. Although new technolo-gies have helped us address previ-ously intractable questions, we stillonly gather a snapshot or glimpse ofthe lives of these mysterious, elusive,and fascinating creatures.

© C

ath

erin

e N

ork

in


Opinion

Karen NoyceIBA Vice President for AmericasMinnesota Departmentof Natural Resources1201 East Highway 2Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USAPhone (218) 327-4432Fax (218) 327-4181Email [email protected]

It’s good to see that IBA membersread their newsletters! The opinionpiece urging IBA to support removalof Yellowstone grizzlies from the U.S.Threatened Species List (Miller et al.,IBN, August 2005) drew a number ofletters expressing different points ofview. Following are several opinionpieces that differ in perspective fromthat of Miller et al., as well as a list ofscientific papers and managementdocuments which detail this issue.

The federal proposal to removeYellowstone grizzlies from theThreatened Species List has not yetbeen formally announced. Originallyexpected in August, it is now unclearwhen the announcement will bemade. This provides ample opportu-nity for discussion in the comingweeks regarding the request for IBAinvolvement. On page 5 in thisnewsletter you will find a newlyarticulated set of guidelines andprocedures for IBA Council whenconsidering whether to take posi-tions on issues of bear conservation.We encourage you to look these over,read through the opinions offeredbelow, and submit your own com-ments and viewpoints to Council.We hope that you find this ex-change of ideas in the newsletterinstructive and we encouragemembers to become informed onthis issue and provide their profes-sional opinions to the policymakers once the de-listing proposalis formally announced.

Reader Response:Yellowstone GrizzlyDelisting Proposal

Stephen F. StringhamBear Communicationand Coexistence Research [email protected]&Charles R NealU.S. Dept. of Interior (retired)Email [email protected]&Mike SmithSierra ClubWildlife and EndangeredSpecies CommitteeEmail [email protected]&David J. ZaberUniversity of Wisconsin ArboretumEmail [email protected]

We believe that the IBA shouldaddress status of the Yellowstonegrizzly only in terms of science, notpolitical or socio-economic issues.Furthermore, any precedent set byIBA’s involvement in theYellowstone issue should employ the“precautionary principle” andshould serve IBA in helping reducerisk to bear populations elsewhere inthe world.

Recovery CriteriaBureaucratic

Assuming that Miller et al. arecorrect in arguing that all recoverytargets have been met, that might besufficient bureaucratic and politicaljustification for delisting (see August2005 newsletter). But is it sufficientlegal or scientific justification?Legal

A federal judge ruled in 1995 thatthe bureaucratic targets do notcorrespond to the EndangeredSpecies Act (ESA) recovery criteria[e.g., minimizing risk of endanger-ment], nor do they explicitly addressfive sets of factors listed in the ESAas the basis for calculating risk. For

Should IBA Endorse Delistingthe Yellowstone Grizzly?

example, even if grizzlies havesaturated most habitat generallyacceptable to the public, minimizingrisk of endangerment (inviability)also requires that: (a) enough habitatbe protected in perpetuity to sustainviability, and that (b) other laws andregulations be in place to keephuman impacts so low that viabilitywon’t be jeopardized over theforeseeable future, even afterdelisting. Those criteria have not yetbeen met.Scientific

As conservation scientists, ourprimary concern should be whetherdelisting would markedly increaserisk of severe shrinkage and loss ofviability over the foreseeable future.If so, recovery has not been achievedaccording to interpretation of the ESAby the National Research Council ofthe National Academy of Sciences(1995).

Simulation modeling by Harris etal. (2005) suggests that the popula-tion could continue to grow or tostabilize over the foreseeable future, ifvital rates over the past decadepersist. But they do not addressconsequences if vital rates drop to thelevels of the previous two decades orfurther, as impacts accumulate fromhabitat degradation (e.g. logging androading) that continues even whilethe grizzly is listed. Moreover, allprimary sources of dietary lipid andprotein—whitebark pine nuts, armycutworm moths, cutthroat trout, andungulate carrion—can be expected todecline substantially, perhaps cata-strophically. Harris et al. also ignorepotential acceleration of habitatdegradation and human-causedmortality after delisting.

Viability analyses by Boyce et al.(2001) have similar limitations. Theseestimate over 99% probability ofsubpopulation persistence (≥1surviving bear) after 100 years. A test


Opinion

of model reliability is how well itretrospectively “predicts” what isalready known to have occurred.From available information, itappears that some or all of Boyce’smodels would also predict >98%persistence for most subpopulationsthat existed in the early 1800s; infact, nearly all are extinct. Modelsthat cannot account for past extinc-tions cannot be trusted to precludefuture ones.

In any event, from both legal andbiological perspectives, the criticalissue is not extinction risk, butendangerment risk—likelihood of nolonger having a viable subpopula-tion. If the subpopulation is barelyviable now, how long until it be-comes inviable due to habitatdegradation, increasing impacts onbears, and genetic impoverishment?

Genetic diversity in the GreaterYellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) isdeclining rapidly. Analyses indicatethat long-term viability requires geneflow among one-to-several-thousandbears. Delisting plans includeoccasional importation of bears fromother populations to minimizeinbreeding depression. We questionthe effectiveness of this. A betteralternative is allowing grizzly bearsto expand into all available habitatwithin the GYE, and into zones (e.g.,the Salmon-Selway-Bitterroot) thatwould link with more northerlysubpopulations.

Management PlansAre Guidelines,Not Binding Contracts

It is doubtful whether any statu-tory protection except the ESA cansufficiently limit human impacts tothe grizzly and its habitat. Stateplans are of little help because littleoccupied grizzly habitat is understate jurisdiction. Most occupiedhabitat outside Yellowstone National

Park is in NationalForests. SomeForest Plansinclude reasonableprovisions forprotecting grizzlyhabitat afterdelisting. Whenthey were written,the plans werelegally binding andfailure to implementcould trigger litigationby watchdog groups(essential in the past forcompelling enforcement of ESAconservation measures). Recently,however, litigation rights regardingForest Plans were terminated by theBush Administration.

ESA provisions mandate thatactions with potentially seriousimpact to grizzlies or habitat arecarefully considered before permit-ting. Delisting eliminates all suchmandatory checks.

IBA RoleAccordingly, we believe it would

be appropriate for IBA to take theposition that:

Because IBA’s mandate is topromote bear conservation, IBAcannot endorse de-listing until long-term viability is assured. Thisrequires: (a) achieving optimalpopulation size, (b) assuring long-term protection for necessary habitatthroughout the ecosystem, and (c)statutory guarantees that conserva-tion plans will be enforceable bylitigation. Those assurances aretacitly required by the ESA and areessential to minimizing risk ofinviability.

It would be premature for IBA tomake other recommendations untilthorough and objective assessmentof endangerment risk is completed.All appropriate data and ancillary

information should be made avail-able to all qualified experts who wishto participate in risk assessment,including individuals skeptical ofrecovery claims or critical of previousanalyses, so as to assure that allreasonable approaches and interpre-tations are considered. Recognizingthat some potential participants areemployed or funded by powerfulinstitutions with vested interests,participants should be allowed tocontribute anonymously.

In conclusion: IBA’s primary roleshould be fostering reliable assess-ment of long-term viability under avariety of realistic scenarios ofhuman impact and enforceablemanagement strategies.

This summary is highly con-densed, thus over-simplified. Forfurther details, contact the individualcontributors.

Literature CitedBoyce et al. (2001). IBA Monograph 4.Harris et al. (2005) Wildlife

Monographs 161.NRC. 1995. Science & the Endan-

gered Species Act. National ResearchCouncil of the National Academy ofScience. U.S. Government PrintingOffice. ©

Jo

an S

kid

mo

re


Opinion

Lance CraigheadCraighead EnvironmentalResearch Institute201 S. Wallace Ave.Bozeman, MT 59714, USAPhone (406) 585-8705Email [email protected]

These comments reflect myabbreviated thoughts on the pro-posal for the IBA to endorse thedelisting of the grizzly bear in theGreater Yellowstone Ecosystem(GYE). I feel that this is not anappropriate issue for the IBA, but ismore appropriate for individualmembers to address, primarilybecause of its highly political nature.The question of process seems clearto me: recovery goals have been met.The larger question is whether thosegoals are adequate. I feel they meetgoals for short-term populationstability, but there are no habitatstandards to ensure that currentconditions are sustainable. Goals fallfar short of long-term viability: thegenetic effective size of the currentpopulation is about one-fourth ofthat needed to maintain geneticvariability. Adding a new animalevery ten years is unlikely to providethe necessary gene flow consideringthe low success of transplants intohabitat that is already occupied,much less filled to carrying capacity.Also, genetic variability providesoptions for adaptation and it is fine-tuned by natural selection. A bearthat can survive in the currentenvironment, disperse to newhabitat, and breed successfully, likelyhas genes of greater survival valuethan an animal that is attracted to atrap and transplanted.

Yellowstone Grizzly Delisting IssueNot Appropriate for IBA

The overarching question is thepolitical climate in which thisproposal is being made. In myopinion, this puts it beyond themandate of the IBA. Delisting thegrizzly under the Bush Administra-tion is the worst possible decision.Nationwide recovery goals include“viable” populations in all recoveryareas, yet this administration blockedreintroduction of grizzlies into theSelway-Bitterroot area, effectivelypreventing long-term recovery. Thereis no reason to believe that delistingbears in the GYE will improvechances to recover them in theSelway-Bitterroot. Instead, I believethe most likely scenario is thatextractive industry activities willsurge in all habitat that was previ-ously off-limits due to the ESA,effectively shrinking the size of thehabitat island in which the bearsnow survive.

Current management has workedwell and the population in the GYEhas increased. To ensure that favor-able conditions continue, we shouldwait for a less hostile politicalclimate. Management plans devel-oped by Montana, Idaho, andWyoming may be sufficient tomaintain grizzly bear numbers, butthe population can decline markedlybefore such changes are detected andhabitat requirements are not suffi-ciently addressed. Moreover, Iunderstand that state managementplans are not legally binding.Although many state biologists andmanagers will do their best tomaintain grizzly populations, theywill not ultimately make the deci-sions regarding grizzly bear habitat.

Tanya RosenAttorneyEmail [email protected]

I am writing to urge that the IBArefrain from taking a position on thedecision to remove the Yellowstonegrizzly bear from the list of speciesprotected under the United StatesEndangered Species Act.

A core mandate of the IBA is toinvolve itself in issues of natural resourcepolicy relating to bear management. Thedebate over delisting the Yellowstonegrizzly of course implicates such issues.Curiously, however, this particular issueis too narrow in some respects and toosweeping in others to be a fitting subjectfor a formal IBA pronouncement.

It is too narrow because it does notconsider the key natural resource policyissue: then what? Through what meanswould the population be monitored?How will habitat issues be resolved?What challenges does climate changepose to food sources? How will those beevaluated? Delisting, in short, is not anatural resource policy. It is simply adecision to depart from a previous policy.The IBA should be more concerned withwhat lies ahead.

It is too sweeping because delistingunder existing American law requires theapplication of the so-called “discretepopulation segment” principle in a novelsetting, with potentially widespreadimplications. The legal and legislativeissues that lurk in the delisting debate,and their implications for other species,are well beyond the ken of the IBA and itwould be anomalous for the organiza-tion to take a position on such matters.

That said, I do think it would beproductive to have a full and frankexchange of views within the IBA onthe status of Yellowstone grizzlies.This would be perfectly consistentwith the IBA’s role to encouragecommunication and increase publicawareness on sensitive issues.

Refrain FromYellowstone Position


OpinionArgument Against Yellowstone Grizzly Delisting

Louisa WillcoxNatural Resources Defense CouncilEmail [email protected]

Has recovery under the Endan-gered Species Act (ESA) beenachieved?

Delisting proponents argue thatcurrent recovery standards have beenmet. But the current recovery criteriado not comply with the ESA, as thepopulation measures were rejectedby a 1995 court order as biased andunreliable. The underlying problemshave yet to be fixed.

Further, the recovery criteria wereestablished without evaluating long-term viability needs. These criteriaare mostly a function of historicaland physical constraints, as well aspolitical interpretations of what waspossible 20 years ago. They wereestablished without reference tohabitat-based viability analysis, andno such analysis has since been doneto link recovery criteria to habitatconditions. Thus, there is no way toknow if meeting these criteria willassure long-term viability.

Delisting proponents also supporta very restrictive interpretation ofthe ESA that emphasizes protectionfor species only “in the emergencyroom”—but not for those needingless urgent but essential care tosurvive. Nothing in the ESA inher-ently supports such a narrow inter-pretation, which is at its core, biasedtoward development interests at theexpense of the interests of thebroader public, including conserva-tionists.

Many experts argue that long-termrecovery requires large connectedpopulations of several thousandindividuals. This interpretation isconsistent with the ESA. Severalstudies show that such a vision isachievable biologically, and manyare working to implement that

vision. Statements made by the IBAin support of delisting would com-promise efforts by conservationistsand scientists, including some IBAmembers, who are seeking this morerobust definition of recovery.

What are the future trends?Delisting documents call for

maintaining habitat conditionsinside the recovery zone as they werein 1998. The underlying assumptionis that the future will look like thepast. That’s one model—but onlyone and not the most compelling.There has been no critical appraisalof other projections of the future,and an evaluation of which are mostdefensible.

A few facts: 1) the human popula-tion in the region is growing rapidly;and, 2) threats are mounting towhitebark pine, the engine drivingthe health of Yellowstone’s popula-tion. While delisting proponentswrite off these projections as “specu-lative,” they are considerably moredefensible than the notion that theecosystem will stay as it was in 1998.

Will delisting save the ESA andchange people’s view of bearconservation?

The proponents of delistingproduced no evidence to supporttheir argument that people willchange their views about bears as aresult of actions such as removingESA protections. Such a view is notsupported by the social sciences, andruns counter to what we know abouthumans and politics. There is evenless evidence to suggest that politi-cians hostile to the ESA will convertno matter how many species aredelisted, since their opinions aboutthe ESA are based on more funda-mentalist/conservative world views.

What can be said is that publicsupport for grizzly conservation can

be achieved with cooperative andcollaborative efforts of stakeholders.These efforts are happening nowunder the auspices of the ESA in avariety of settings and among diverseconstituencies with positive results.This work is successful preciselybecause of the constraints imposedby the ESA, which force people—many of whom would be otherwisehostile—to the table.

Delisting would not—as propo-nents argue—make such collabora-tive efforts easier. It would do theopposite by removing the incentivesfor inherently resistant parties tocompromise and coordinate.

Will the states be competentmanagers of grizzly bears?

Many of the state biologists inIdaho, Montana and Wyoming aretalented and dedicated to the futureof the grizzly, but they are not incharge. And the people at the top ofthe political ladder are, with theexception of Montana, extremelyhostile to bears, an attitude that isreflected in the state plans. Exacer-bating this problem is antipathy tobears at the county level. FourWyoming counties, poised to assumemore authority over grizzlies afterdelisting, have passed laws prohibit-ing bears within their borders.

We all know that if politicalcommitment to conservation islacking, it does not matter what’s ina plan. And the same holds true forrelisting—no matter what is on paperabout assurances for relisting, hostilepoliticians such as Wyoming Sena-tors Mike Enzi and Craig Thomaswill as vigorously oppose relisting inthe future as they are promotingdelisting now.


Opinion

Is an isolated population of severalhundred individuals large enoughto ensure persistence in the long-term?

To answer this question, analysessuch as PVA (population viabilityanalysis) must consider habitat issuesand future trends—a point empha-sized by Mark Boyce. But this has notbeen done. What we do know,however, is that the landscape isbecoming increasingly more deadlyas a result of human populationgrowth, and that habitat productiv-ity will continue to decline with theloss of whitebark pine. A populationof a few hundred animals, isolatedfrom other populations, in a habitatisland increasingly lethal and lessproductive, is not likely to be viablein the long-term by any reasonablestandards.

What is needed are steps to bufferthese known impacts; this can beaccomplished by expanding the areawhere bears can be and by maintain-ing a population of several thousandindividuals from Yellowstone toCanada. Only through such anapproach can we provide meaningfulassurances of long-term persistence—assurances encompassed by the ESA.

Argument AgainstYellowstone GrizzlyDelisting, cont’d.

Yellowstone Grizzly References

Selected references provided bySterling MillerNational Wildlife FederationEmail [email protected]

See the Miller et al. view of theYellowstone grizzly delisting issue inthe August 2005 newsletter.

Interagency Conservation StrategyTeam. 2003. Final ConservationStrategy for the Grizzly Bear in theYellowstone Ecosystem. Available at:http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/wildlife/igbc/ConservationStrategy/final_cs.pdf

Keating, K.A., C.C. Schwartz, M.A.Haroldson, and D. Moody. 2002.Estimating numbers of females withcubs-of-the-year in the YellowstoneEcosystem. Ursus 13:161-174.

Montana Fish Wildlife and Parks.2002. Grizzly Bear Management Planfor Southwestern Montana 2002-2012 Final Programmatic Environ-mental Impact Statement. Availableat: http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm

Schwartz, C.C., M.A. Haroldson,K. Gunther, and D. Moody. 2002.Distribution of grizzly bears in theGreater Yellowstone Ecosystem,

1990-2000. Ursus13:203-212.

Schwartz, C.C.,M.A. Haroldson,

and K. West(eds.). 2005.

YellowstoneGrizzlyBearinvestiga-tions2004.AnnualReport ofthe Inter-agency

Grizzly BearStudy Team.

Available at: http://nrmsc.usgs.gov/products/IGBST/2004report.pdf

State of Idaho. 2002. YellowstoneGrizzly Bear Management Plan toaccompany MCR 62. March. Avail-able at: http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm

U.S. Forest Service. 2004. ForestPlan Amendments for Grizzly BearConservation for the GreaterYellowstone Area National Forests,Draft Environmental Impact State-ment, USDA Forest Service. Availableat: http://www.fs.fed.us/r1/wildlife/igbcSubcommittee/yes/YEamend/gb_internet.htm

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.1993. Grizzly Bear Recovery Plan.Missoula, MT. Available at: http://ecos.fws.gov/docs/recovery-plans/1993/930910.pdf

U.S. Forest Service. 2005. GrizzlyBear (Ursus actos) biological assess-ment for the Forest Plan Amend-ments for Grizzly Bear Conservationfor the Greater Yellowstone AreaNational Forests: Beaverhead-Deerlodge National Forest, Bridger-Teton National Forest, Custer Na-tional Forest, Gallatin NationalForest, and Shoshone NationalForest. June, 2005. Available (in twoparts also PDFs of associated colorfigures) at: http://www.huntingandfishingjournal.org/archives/issues/GB-ForestPlan-06-05-Pages01-71.pdfhttp://www.huntingandfishingjournal.org/archives/issues/GB-ForestPlan-06-05-Pages72-142.pdf

Wyoming Game and Fish Depart-ment. 2002. Wyoming grizzly bearmanagement plan. February (pre-pared by Moody et al.). Available at:http://mountain-prairie.fws.gov/species/mammals/grizzly/yellowstone.htm

© C

ath

erin

e N

ork

in


Bear Specialist Group

Co-chairs:Djuro HuberEmail [email protected]&Jon SwensonEmail jon.swenson.umb.no

The European Brown Bear ExpertTeam (EBBET) is a section of the BearSpecialist Group belonging to theSpecies Survival Commission of theIUCN. This complex structure isbeginning to function for the benefitof most bear species worldwide.

Even though brown bears inEurope is a seemingly narrow scope,the issue of brown bears in Europe isnot a simple one. Here we have“populations” of only a few animalsin the Pyrenees (France, Spain,Andorra), Trento and Abruzzo (Italy),Cantabrian Mountains (Spain) andAustria. In addition there are largepopulations of thousands of bears(European Russia, CarpathianMountains, Scandinavia, DinariaMountians from Austria to Greece).The management also ranges fromstrict protection and over a millioneuros invested per bear in conserva-tion measures, to commercialhunting and even no management atall. We defined Europe to include allthe countries west of the UralMountains, including Turkey and thecountries in the CaucasusMountians. The total number ofcountries is greater than in any otherregion with bears in the world.Moreover this number grew consid-erably recently and may continue togrow. Also the spectrum of languagesis great. English, which we use in ourcommunication, is the nativelanguage in only one country, and ithas not had bears since the 13thcentury!

The current membership of ourExpert Team (ET) contains 61 namesfrom 29 countries. Twenty-three of

European Brown Bear Expert Team

us met in Riva del Garda, Italy, at the16th International Conference onBear Research and Management. Theshort time available allowed us onlyto introduce ourselves and to discussthe structure and the general targetsof our work. The state of knowledge,as well as the state of bear popula-tions, is extremely variable withinthe region. In cooperation with theLarge Carnivore Initiative for Europe(LCIE) we will first work on a beardistribution map. We will also workwith the LCIE to help each countrydevelop a comprehensive bearmanagement plan. The much desiredpan-European project would be thegenetic survey of all bear populationsand subpopulations. The needs forspecific projects are again veryheterogenic and depend on the localsituations. To find out the localpriorities, we launched a simplequestionnaire. It was sent out a weekago and the deadline for the newslet-ter came too soon to collect and

present the results. So far 12 ETmembers from 12 countries repliedand the first glance tells us thatsituations are much too specific todraw any conclusions at this stage.

However, we can conclude thatsuch a team is probably the bestavailable tool to better coordinatebear conservation and managementin all of Europe and hopefully tostart common projects. If the work ofthe group will generate some fundsfor local projects or political supportfor conservation measures, it will beadditionally useful. The ultimategoal is to manage the bears in Europeon the population level, and not onthe country level. Of course, we wantall bear populations to live in stablepopulations in the numbers that willsecure viability but will not createtoo much conflict with local resi-dents. Also, wherever possible it willbe good to see bears back where theyonce used to live.

Jon Swenson and Djuro Huber receive President’s Award fromIBA president Harry Reynolds at the 16th IBA conference in Italy (page 3).


Bear Specialist GroupBear Specialist Group

At the Bear Specialist GroupMeeting at the 16th IBA conferencein Italy, it was decided that all expertteams will henceforth have two co-chairs. We are still in the process offinalizing these seats.

Coordinating Committee Co-chairsBruce McLellanEmail [email protected]&Dave GarshelisEmail [email protected]

IBA RepresentativeHarry ReynoldsEmail [email protected]

Andean Bear Expert Team Co-chairsIsaac GoldsteinEmail [email protected]&Ximena Velez-LiendoEmail [email protected]

Asiatic Black BearExpert Team Co-chairsDave GarshelisEmail [email protected]&Mei-hsiu HwangEmail [email protected]

South Asian Brown BearExpert Team Co-chairsS. SathyakumarEmail [email protected]&Ozgun Emre CanEmail [email protected]

North Asian Brown BearExpert Team Co-chairsJohn PaczkowskiEmail [email protected]&Tsutomu ManoEmail [email protected]

European Brown BearExpert Team Co-chairsDjuro HuberEmail [email protected]&Jon SwensonEmail [email protected]

Giant Panda Expert Team ChairLu ZhiEmail [email protected]

Sloth Bear Expert TeamCo-chairsN.P.S. ChauhanEmail [email protected]&K. YoganandEmail [email protected]

Sun Bear Expert Team Co-chairsGabriella FredrikssonEmail [email protected]&Rob SteinmetzEmail [email protected]

Captive BearExpert Team Co-chairsLydia KolterEmail [email protected]&Jackson ZeeEmail [email protected]

Trade in Bear Parts Expert TeamChristopher ServheenEmail [email protected]

Mexican Black Bear CoordinatorDiana Doan-CriderEmail [email protected]

Polar Bear Specialist GroupAndrew DerocherEmail [email protected]

Committee MemberJohn SeidenstickerEmail [email protected]

Piero GenovesiINFS-National Wildlife InstituteVia Ca’ Fornacetta 9I-40064 Ozzano Emilia BO, ItalyEmail [email protected]

Videotapes and photos haveconfirmed that a brown bear hasentered Switzerland.

Genetic analysis conducted byMarta De Barba in our laboratorieshas shown that the bear, born in2003, is the offspring of Jurka andJoze, two of the bears translocated toItaly from Slovenia.

The bear is roaming among Italy,Switzerland and Austria. It hasattacked several sheep and is causingsome alarm because it is quitefearless.

We are now working on a com-mon strategy among the threecountries to capture and radiocollarthe animal in order to improve ourability to prevent damage, andrespond to possible risks to people.

Swiss Brown Bear

© C

ath

erin

e N

ork

in

Eurasia


Eurasia

Koji YamazakiIbaraki Nature Museum/Japan Bear Network700 Osaki, Bando-city, Ibaraki306-0622 JapanEmail [email protected]&Toru OiKansai Research Center, Forestry andForest Products Research InstituteMomoyama, Fushimi, Kyoto612-0855 JapanEmail [email protected]&Tsutomu ManoNature Conservation DepartmentHokkaido Institute ofEnvironmental SciencesKita-19 Nishi-12 Kita-ku, Sapporo060-0819 JapanEmail [email protected]

During July 31-August 5, 2005, theNinth International MammalogicalCongress was held in Sapporo-city,Hokkaido, Japan with more than1,000 participants. At the meeting,53 symposiums were held on avariety of topics.

A symposium and a workshopabout Asian bears were presented atthe congress. The aim was to sharerecent bear status in each Asiancountry, to discuss the biggest issuesaffecting bear populations, and toconsider conservation priorities.

Asian Bear SymposiumThe Japan Bear Network (JBN:

http://www.japanbear.org/index-e.html) hosted the symposium:Conservation Priorities for Brownand Black Bears in East Asia. About80 participants from many countriesattended the symposium.

Recent economic growth in EastAsia has contributed to both conver-sion of bear habitats and increasedharvest of bears, two major threats tobear populations. Despite being the

most densely human populatedregion in the world, Asia still sup-ports five species of bears, includingthe brown bear, the Asian black bear,the Malayan sun bear, the sloth bearand the giant panda. Conservationof bears in the 21st century in Asiawill depend on both sound ecologi-cal information and the creativeresolution and prevention of con-flicts between bears and people. Inthis symposium, we discussed thecurrent status and conservationneeds of brown bears and Asian blackbears, two species distributed widelyin the temperate zones of Asia.Presentations included:

Toshiki Aoi, Iwate University,Japan, Present status and conservationpriorities of Asian black and Ezo brownbears in Japan.

Hang Lee, Seoul National Univer-sity, South Korea, Prioritization ofconservation actions for Asian blackbears in South Korea.

Ying Wang, National TaiwanNormal University, Taiwan, Conserva-tion status of Formosan black bears inTaiwan.

Alexander Kostin, Sakhalin OblastGovernment, Russia (read by LarryVan Daele, Alaska), The brown bears(Ursus arctos) of Sakhalin and theKuril Islands: Population monitoringissues

Badamjav Lhagvasuren, Mongo-lian Academy of Sciences, Mongolia,Current status and conservationpriorities for brown bears in Mongolia.

Asian Bear WorkshopAt the same conference, the JBN

and the Northern Forum (http://www.northernforum.org/) organizedthe Asian Bear Workshop about theco-existence of bears with humans.Fifty people from 10 countriesattended, including IBA councilpresident Harry Reynolds, and vicepresident for Eurasia Jon Swenson.

Asian Bear Symposium and Workshop in Japan

The workshop included threesessions with the following presenters:1. Co-existence of bears withhumans in Russia

Alexander Kostin, Sakhalin OblastGovernment, Russia (read by LarryVan Daele, Alaska).

Tatiana Gordienko, KamchatkaGovernment, Russia.

Fedor Yakovlev, Sakha Govern-ment, Russia.2. Co-existence of bears withhumans in the Far EastYing Wang, Asiatic Black Bear Expert

Team, National Taiwan NormalUniversity, Taiwan.

Han San-Hoon, Black Bear ExpertTeam, National Park Authority,South Korea.

Toshihiro Hazumi, Wildlife Manage-ment Office, Japan.

3. Sun bear in Southeast AsiaGabriella Fredriksson, Sun Bear

Expert Team Co-chair, Universityof Amsterdam, Netherlands/Indonesia.

Siew Te Wong, Sun Bear Expert TeamCo-chair, University of Montana,Malaysia/USA.Following the sessions, there was

time for discussion and an exchangeof opinions on conservation priori-ties for Asian bears and plans for the2006 17th IBA conference in Japan(pages 48-50). We also exchangedideas about a report on the statusand conservation of bears in Asiascheduled to be published for the17th IBA conference.

We would like to thank all thespeakers and participants who madeboth events possible and successful!The symposium and workshop weregood preliminary events for theupcoming conference in Japan.

The symposium and workshopwere financially supported by theJapan Fund for Global Environmentand the WWFJapan-Nikko InvestorsFund.


Eurasia

Siew Te WongDanum Valley Field CenterPO Box 6028291112 Lahad Datu, Sabah, MalaysiaEmail [email protected]

A new field study on Malayan sunbear (Helarctos malayanus) andbearded pig (Sus barbatus) began inMarch 2005 at Ulu Segama ForestReserve and Danum Valley Conserva-tion Area, with a field station inDanum Valley Field Center, Sabah,Malaysian Borneo. The projectinvestigates the effects of selectivelogging on Malayan sun bears andbearded pigs by comparing ecologicalparameters of bears and pigs inlogged and primary forests. Theseparameters include home ranges,activity and movement patterns,population densities, habitat selec-tion, physical condition, food habits,and food qualities. Research methodsinclude radio-tracking, cameratrapping, scat analysis, and collectingbasic information on fruit andinvertebrate production in bothforest types for 24 months. Duringthe first phase of the project (March-August 2005), three focal areas inprimary and logged forests have beenidentified, and 2-km transect lineshave been established in each. SinceMarch 2005 we have collected fruitproduction information using fruittraps, fruit-on-trail, and monthlymonitoring of tree phenology. Wemonitor invertebrate abundance bysetting nightly pitfall traps andrecording the abundance of twospecies of beetle. We collect informa-tion on animal signs, such as feedingsites, bear claw marks on trees, treeswith pig rubbing signs, mud wallows,and microhabitat features to investi-gate habitat preference. Animaltrapping started on September 17.The trapping operation has beenvery successful compared with efforts

in 1999-2000. In the first week, wecaught and radio-collared three adultsun bears, one female and two males.The female, Bear 101 was capturedon September 21st and weighed 28kg; and the two males, Bear 102(cover photo) and Bear 103 wereboth captured on September 25thand weighed 56 kg and 45 kg,respectively. Bear 102 had severalbite wounds and was captured atINFAPRO nursery, a big camp withinthe study area with about 80 resi-dents. He is well known at the campwhere he frequently feeds on gar-bage. We released him about 8 kmwest of the camp, but he has re-turned to the vicinity although hasnot visited the camp after threeweeks of close monitoring. Trackingand locating the radio-collared bearsis a daily routine. Trapping is con-tinuing for sun bears and beardedpigs until sufficient numbers of eachspecies are captured and radio-collared.

There are already some interestingfindings: First, all of the bearscaptured were in great physicalcondition, a contrast to the skinny,emaciated bears we caught in 1999-2000. Their unusually heavy weights,especially the two males, are prob-ably related to the high fruitingactivity this year. Unlike othertropical forest ecosystems, therainforests of Borneo, Sumatra, andPeninsula Malaysia display a supra-annual fruiting cycle, where almostall members of the tree familyDipterocarpaceae and up to 88% ofthe canopy trees fruit almost simulta-neously after many years of lowfruiting activity. This observation fitsan earlier hypothesis that sun bearsmay store fat during the fruiting yearand deplete this energy reserve inlow fruiting years. The secondinteresting discovery was that allthree bears are infected with malaria

and have Plasmodium spp. parasitesin their blood. This is the firstdocumentation of wild sun bearsinfected with malaria. This findinghas immense implications for humanand wildlife health in these forests.Further investigation on thiszoonotic disease is in progress.

This project has grown into notjust pure research, but also incorpo-rates many conservation elements onsun bears, bearded pigs, and tropicalrainforests. Many public talks on theproject and conservation of sun bearand bearded pigs have been deliveredduring the past few months, andmore are planned. Two full-scaleMaster’s degree studies are alsoplanned under the umbrella of thisproject: one study will focus on thecomparison of the ecology of wildand reintroduced bears, and theother will study the impacts ofbearded pigs on oil palm plantations.We will launch the official website ofthe project at the end of the year,with general information, interestingfindings and regular project updates,and conservation facts about sunbears and bearded pigs, for the publicand scientific communities.

The project also seeks hard-working volunteers who are willingto work long-hours in a harshtropical rainforest environment. Theproject not only will provide anopportunity for volunteers to helpon field data collection, but alsoprovide a rare opportunity forvolunteers to learn about techniquesto study tropical bears and otherrelated conservation skills. Please feelfree to contact us if you are inter-ested in volunteering or havequestions regarding our project. Wehope this project will encouragemore studies and conservationprojects on these two little-knownspecies that play important roles inthe rainforest ecosystem of Borneo.

Bornean Sun Bear and Bearded PigResearch and Conservation Project


Eurasia

Dave M. AugeriDepartment of Conservation BiologyDenver Zoological FoundationDenver, CO 80205, USAPhone 303-376-4944Email [email protected]

Both natural and anthropogenicfactors can influence bear ecologyand habitat use. The character, size,distribution, and availability ofsuitable habitat will either facilitateor limit a bear’s use of criticalresources, ultimately affecting itspersistence and evolutionarypotential. This study comparednatural patterns of Malayan sunbear (Helarctos [Ursus] malayanus)habitat selection, ecology andlandscape use with the effects ofdisturbance. We conducted twophases of field work during 2000–2004 at 16 study sites groupedamong three focal areas in theLeuser Ecosystem (ca. 24,000 km2)in northern Sumatra and three focalareas in the Kayan Mentarang/Bulungan ecosystems (ca. 18,226km2) in East Kalimantan, Borneo. Arepresentative sample of 50 habitattypes (e.g., swamp, montane, heath,and lowland forest types, etc.) andbiogeographic conditions, 44disturbance types, and 60 humanactivity types were surveyed.Habitat types and biogeographicconditions in undisturbed primaryforests similar to those examined indisturbed areas within the sameecosystems were used as controltreatments.

Phase I consisted of bear signcensuses using distance- and fixed-width transect sampling, primarysun bear forage productivity anddiversity surveys, tree stand andmicro-habitat surveys, and geneticsampling of scat and hair. Phase IIentailed a remote camera capture-recapture and presence-absence

study for population density andabundance estimates and to test signsurvey efficacy. I tested site occu-pancy probabilities and the frequen-cies, densities, encounter rates, anddetection probabilities of distinct sunbear sign and photographic events asrelative indices of habitat use.

We conducted a total of 335 km oftransects, 512 km2 of camera trap-ping, and 64.2 ha of fruit and treestand surveys across the 16 studysites as well as an additional ca.1,200 km of pre- and post-transectsurveying. We recorded 4,886 sunbear sign events via sign censustransects and 10,804 photographswere taken over 15,897 trap nights,107 of which were distinct sun bearphotos. We encountered only onebear (adult male) during 13,902transect survey hours. The bearobserved us calmly at a distance of10 m for about 5 seconds and walkedaway slowly at a 90 degree anglefrom our position.

The direct and interactive effectsof habitat disturbance on sun bearecology and landscape use wereconsistently the most significantinfluences across all other variablesand tests, regardless of habitat type,ecosystem, biogeographic condition,habitat productivity, site, area, orregion. The type, intensity, age, andgeographic extent of disturbancesaccounted for the significant major-ity of variance in sun bear sign andphoto capture events. The mostsignificant effect was the interactionbetween the age of, and distance to,intensive habitat disturbance (i.e.forest clearing) relative to where andwhen bears were active. Logging,agriculture, and persistent humanactivity by trails, hunting, non-timber forest product harvesting, andso forth, were the most statistically-significant factors associated withhabitat use by bears, with 92.7% of

all bear signs observed in undis-turbed forest. As the level, intensity,and extent of disturbance increased,significantly less bear activity wasobserved. A total of 6.8% of signswere observed near post-disturbedareas (0-30 years old) and 86% ofthese were >500 m and 74% were>1,000 m from any form of distur-bance. Only 2.3% of all signs wereobserved within 50 m of disturbedareas <1 year old. No photographs orgenetic samples were recorded insecondary forests of any age, or inconventionally logged forests,agricultural areas, roads, edgehabitats, or other disturbed areas.

Disturbance also created a form ofhabitat compression that may beinducing density-dependent spatialpatterning among bears and subse-quently aggregating bear activity inthose sites. Human activities also hadsignificant effects on bear habitat useand a form of virtual fragmentation(i.e. avoidance of areas withouthabitat disturbance or hunting) maybe occurring. Overall, results showedthat sun bears in these sites werechoosing security over food, whichhas implications for their persistence.

In these sites the sun bear isprimarily an interior forest-depen-dent species with a strong affinity formature, diverse, and heterogeneouslystructured primary forests. Tests ofbiogeographic influences in undis-turbed forests revealed that maturetree stand characteristics wereprominent variables in micro-siteand habitat-type selection by sunbears. Tree densities were low tomoderate, while tree species diver-sity, maturity, girth (dbh), height,number of emergents, and canopycover were all significantly higher inthose stands with significantly morebear activity and indicated a strongpreference for older and morecomplex primary forest character.

Biogeographic Ecology of the Malayan Sun Bear

g p


Eurasia

These mature stand traits, especiallya predominance of mature fruitingtrees, high tree species diversity, andescape cover were the most statisti-cally significant effects on bearhabitat use in 97% of undisturbedsites and were indicators of interiorforest affinity for bears.

Consistently-occupied sun bearhabitat in these sites is mainly inremote and less accessible primaryforests at elevations of 400–1,000masl, most likely due to intensedisturbance and human use inhighly productive lowland habitats<500 masl. Such ranges are probablylimited to specific areas withinundisturbed primary forest and oldersecondary forest (>25–30 years old)and shift on a seasonal and annualbasis. Due to loss of suitable habitatand avoidance of highly disturbedareas, young secondary forests, andhigh-human use areas, sun bearranges are patchy and fragmentedacross the overall landscape andsome smaller bears are likely com-pelled to forage occasionally inagricultural areas.

Presence-absence modelling(McKenzie et al. 2002, 2003) ofcamera-trapping data for all 16 studysites on Borneo and Sumatra werevalid and sufficient to estimatepopulation sizes in these sites. Thelargest population estimate was 582-873 bears in Kayan MentarangNational Park (1.4 million ha) in EastKalimantan at a density of 0.042bears/km2, while in the adjacentunprotected lowland BulunganForest (4,226 ha) densities were lower(0.025 bears/km2) with an estimatedpopulation of 104-156 bears. InSumatra’s Gunung Leuser NationalPark (800,000 ha) the populationestimate was 186-280 bears at adensity of 0.023 bears/km2. Lowerdensities in Sumatra and theBulungan region are likely due to

more extensive habitat loss, fragmen-tation, and hunting. Althoughhunting occurs in Kayan MentarangNational Park, where we found thehighest densities and abundance,habitat disturbance is minimal. Allabundances accounted for theproportion of consistently occupiedhabitat, along with gaps betweenranges, and are consistent withpublished densities for the sun bear’sclosest phylogenetic relatives.

Results indicate that the IUCN RedList (v. 3.1) for H. Malayanus can beupdated from Data Deficient (DD) toVulnerable (VU C2ai) in Indonesia.Considering the low abundances inIndonesia, which likely stewards thelargest populations and protectedareas in the sun bear’s range, thespecies is probably Endangered (EN,based on criteria B1bi-v, C2ai and D)or Critically Endangered (CR, basedon criteria B1a and B1bi-v) in regionswhere they are more isolated. Thesedata also support the CITES Appen-dix 1 listing that H. malayanusprobably is in danger of extinctionand is or may be affected by interna-tional trade. The bear’s affinity forprimary forest and the increasingrate of forest loss suggest scientifi-cally-based conservation measuresshould be implemented withoutdelay. A time and space mosaic canhelp planners create ecologically-sound reserve networks in thesefragmented landscapes.

This was the first study of its kindto generate empirically-based densityand abundance estimates of sunbears, and this is the first study ofbears using presence-absence model-ling, such as that proposed byMacKenzie et al. (2002, 2003), toproduce these estimates. Thus, theseestimates provide an initial baseline,for which further research should

validate and examine trends throughmulti-year mark-recapture studies inrepresentative habitat types andconditions across the bear’s range.

Hunting is affecting sun bearpopulations in some areas, but inIndonesia the most immediatethreats to sun bear persistence arepresently forest loss and disturbance.Sun bear survival depends on:

(a) our ability to predict howbiogeographic conditions, changinglandscape structures, environmentalstochasticity, and anthropogenicdisturbances affect bear movementand foraging patterns across timeand in increasingly patchy land-scapes;

(b) improving long-term bearaccess to critical resources andhabitat; and

(c) implementing species andhabitat-specific protective mecha-nisms at landscape scales.

AcknowledgementsThis research would not have been

possible without the hard work anddedication of my Indonesian fieldassistants. In particular, I am in-debted and grateful to Tarmizi,Giman, Zul, Ijar, and Rusman inSumatra and to Oko Jangin, DanUdau, Lis Mayaidi, and Ahmad inKalimantan. The IBA provided partialfunding for the preliminary fieldwork as well as for genetic sampleanalyses. Other supporting organiza-tions included The National Geo-graphic Society, the Denver Zoologi-cal Foundation, the HarrimanFoundation, the Leuser ManagementProgramme, the Great Bear Founda-tion, WWF Indonesia, CIFOR, WCS,Institute of the Rockies, University ofCambridge, and Colorado StateUniversity.

Biogeographic Ecology of the Malayan Sun Bear, cont’d.


Americas

Luz Eliana Bossa QuinteroEmail [email protected]&Julio Mario FernandezEmail [email protected] Colombia

Early one morning, the crunch ofleaves and a movement among thebushes unsettled Lelio Niño as hechecked on his sheep. Unnerved,Lelio decided to collect the flock,when he noticed one animal wasmissing. Down the mountainsidewere the remains of the sheep, andfootprints of an Andean bear leadingaway from the carcass.

Lelio has 19 sheep which pastureon a small piece of rented landcooled by the nearby mountains ofthe Guanentá Alto Río Fonce Na-tional Park in the department ofSantander, Colombia. “We are poorpeople, we just have a few animalsand this is how we take care of ourfamilies, but we don’t want to killthe bear, we want to protect it.” Thisportrays Lelio’s attitude and that ofother families living in the village ofPatios Bajos. In the last few monthsthere have been two other Andeanbear attacks against livestock in thearea.

Fortunately in this case, theresidents decided to give the bearanother chance and not hunt it.However, there is not always ahappy ending for the bear in thesesituations.

According to the IUCN’s 1999Spectacled Bear Conservation ActionPlan by Colombian bear researchersOrejuela and Jorgensen, “the princi-pal threats to the survival of bears inthis country are related to destruc-tion and transformation of habitatand hunting as a result of damagecaused to maize crops and predationof domestic animals, mainly cattle inparamo areas.”

Dialogue Helps Andean Bear Conservation

The species is also killed due tofalse beliefs associated with themedicinal and aphrodisiac propertiesof its organs. Bears are also sold aspets or to circuses.

Several months ago, hunters fromthe village of Las Mercedes (munici-pality of Sardinata, department ofNorte de Santander) found a femalebear with three cubs. The motherand one cub were killed; a femalecub was caught by the hunters whilethe third escaped alone into theforest.

Fortunately, Isidro Lisarazo, anemployee of the Municipal Office forAgricultural Assistance (UMATA)rescued the female cub from hercaptors. Weighing only 3.5 kg,Juanita (as she was named) was takento a wildlife recovery unit of theregional environmental authoritywhere she is being held. It is hopedthat she will begin a rehabilitationprocess allowing her to return to thewild. However, the cub has alreadyspent much time with humans and isgetting used to them. As the monthsgo by, the probability of Juanita’srehabilitation being successfuldecreases and the possibility in-creases that she will be placed in azoo, as have other Andean bears.

A step forward through educationand communication.

WWF Colombia published theNorthern Andes Ecoregional Strategy forthe Conservation of the Spectacled Bearin 2003. The strategy was designed aspart of WWF Colombia’s NorthernAndes Ecoregional Programme, incollaboration with the WildlifeConservation Society, FundaciónWii, EcoCiencia and Red Tremarctos,among others. The strategy employsa holistic and interdisciplinary visionto maintain viable populations ofAndean bears in the long termthrough five key areas for action:

landscape conservation and manage-ment; management policies andinstruments; conservation andmanagement of individuals andpopulations ex situ; research andmonitoring; education and commu-nication.

Some months ago, WWF Colom-bia developed a pilot communica-tions strategy for the departments ofSantander and Norte de Santander toestablish links with local communi-ties and environmental authorities tocreate opportunities for dialogue andconsensus for conservation of theAndean bear. The initiative issupported by Universidad Pontificiade Bucaramanga and the NationalParks Unit.

The project implements educa-tion, information and communica-tion initiatives and workshops withrural communities in Andean bearareas. Initiatives are also directed atemployees of municipal institutions,such as UMATA and regional envi-ronmental authorities with jurisdic-tion in the two regions.

“The communications initiativerepresents an opportunity to tran-scend planning exercises and arriveat specific and strategic actions,”stated Juan Carlos Troncoso, fromthe National Parks Unit. “Workingtowards the Andean bear’s welfare,not only in protected areas, meansconserving water sources andrecovering paramo and forest areas.People should be aware of theseactions.”

Daniel Rodriguez, a biologist withFundación Wii, created the workshopcontent for bear biology, manage-ment and conservation importance.The workshops also cover legalprotection for the threatened bear,and legal implications of harming abear. Communities in several regionsare unaware of the bear’s presenceand its legal status.


Americas

“In our country the Andean bearis protected by law, given that it is aspecies on the verge of extinction, inthe same way as the Andean condor,manatee, sea turtle and the Orinococrocodile, among others. It cannot beexploited or sold. Violation of thislaw is a crime, punishable under thepenal code,” explained DanielRodriguez.

The game “Wildlife Boxes” wasplayed during the workshops withthe communities. It was designed toconvey the message of conservingthe Andean bear not as an isolatedspecies, but in coexistence with otherimportant animal and plant speciessharing the bear’s habitat.

The educational material wascreated by Sonia Rodriguez, a biologystudent at the Universidad Industrialde Santander. She was responsible forthe project’s environmental educa-tion activities and is currentlyworking on a community conserva-tion project with threatened species

Dialogue Helps Andean Bear Conservation, cont’d

Saskia Flores&Macarena Bustamante&Gioconda Remache&Isaac GoldsteinEmail [email protected]&Jaime CamachoEmail [email protected] WildlifeConservation SocietyEcuador

For the first time in Ecuador anintegrated study on livestock depre-dation by Andean bear has been

Andean Bear-livestock Conflict:Applying the Landscape Species Conservation Model

conducted. The study area wasOyacachi, a small indigenouscommunity inside Cayambe-CocaEcological Reserve, a governmentalprotected area in the northern Andesof Ecuador. Within the paramos andcloud forests between 1,600 and4,300 masl, the Andean bear feeds oncattle and sheep. Between January2001 and October 2004, 41 predationevents occurred and 61 cattle werelost in Oyacachi. Local livestockhandlers started to develop negativeattitudes towards the Andean bear(their flagship species for conserva-tion processes and ecotourismactivities) and became worried abouttheir economic losses. The commu-

nity, the Ministry of Environmentand EcoCiencia decided to conduct astudy on this conflict to look forpossible management alternatives thatcould reduce the number of attacksand the economic losses, and improvepeople’s perceptions and attitudes.

The research objective was tounderstand the ecological andgeographical aspects that cause theconflict in Oyacachi and analyze itssocial and economic consequences.The investigation gathered geo-graphical, ecological, social andeconomic information related to allthe depredation events that tookplace between January 2001 andOctober 2004.

in the private reserve of El Diviso inthe department of Santander.

Using the communicationsstrategy, opportunities were createdwith government institutions andNGOs in the two regions to imple-ment joint efforts towards theconservation of the Andean bear.

As a result of these meetings, it ishoped that actions will be coordi-nated among the different national,regional and local institutions.Progress has also been made at theinternational level with the Venezu-elan National Parks Authority(INPARQUES) in its joint work withthe National Parks Unit in Colombiatowards the definition of a bearconservation strategy for the TamáBinational Park. Commitments havealso made by regional environmentalauthorities such as CORPONOR toinclude budgets and actions for localbear conservation and managementplans within their working areas.

The success of a strategy ismeasured in changes of attitudes orin actions. It is still too early to seeradical changes at this initial stage.This experience may provide thebasis for a communications processreaching other areas of the Colom-bian Andes.

Members of some local commu-nities had to walk more than sixhours to attend the workshops,which included women withchildren, as well as young people.They will now return to theirvillages with a positive vision ofthe Andean bear and its impor-tance in protecting their naturalresources. Environmental organiza-tions should also contribute topreserving this way of thinking bymeans of their activities.

Communication made it possibleto bring the Andean bear to theattention of communities andinstitutions.


AmericasAndean Bear-livestock Conflict, cont’d.

The method used to integrate andanalyze this information is theconceptual model for landscapespecies conservation developed byEric Sanderson and collaborators in2002. Four of the five steps proposedin this method were achieved: (1) thedefinition of the biological landscapeof the target species (the Andeanbear), (2) the definition of thehuman landscape (the cattle land-scape), (3) the definition of theconservation landscape through theintersections of the first two land-scapes and (4) the identification ofthe focal landscape for conservationactions. Within the human land-scape (step 2) two additional vari-ables were analyzed: social andeconomic aspects of the conflict. Thefifth step is the reiteration of theprocess once the conservationactions have been implemented. Thisstep will be accomplished once themanagement actions suggested bythis study are implemented.

The Andean bear biologicallandscape was defined by a model ofhabitat use and availability devel-oped in Oyacachi by EcoCiencia in2003, which was based on thecompilation of evidence of Andeanbear presence. The cattle landscape(human landscape) was based oninformation about land use inOyacachi, but focused on expressinggeographically the cattle use areasand the cattle management type. Toanalyze the social and the economicvariables, micro-scale methodologieswere used such us the evaluation ofknowledge, perceptions and attitudestowards the Andean bear and theconflict itself, and the estimate of thedirect and indirect costs of theconflict, respectively.

Once the target species and thecattle landscape were mapped, thenext step was to combine themthrough an overlay process to

fractionate the landscape by humanuse and the biological need of thelandscape species. The model of theAndean bear presence probabilitywas combined with the grazing areas.This is the conservation landscape.Finally, to determine the focallandscape, a depredation probabilitymodel was developed based on theidentification of areas where live-stock depredation occurred. Thismodel permitted evaluation of thecontribution of every identifiedlandscape element to the focalconservation landscape, recognitionof threats and the interventionsnecessary to reduce them.

Five habitat quality categorieswere defined to evaluate the Andeanbear probability presence (Andeanbear landscape) in the study area,and two were used in the analysis (1)0<D <7.2; (2) 7.2<D≤<10.1). For thecattle landscape, the livestockhusbandry in Oyacachi was dividedinto two management types. Thefirst is unsupervised cattle grazing onopen grasslands, mainly in theparamo, which represents 21.7% ofthe study area. The second manage-ment type is dairy cattle manage-ment mainly on the farms in theOyacachi river valley, less than twohours away from the village, whichrepresents 9.7% of the study area.

The social component revealedthat people in Oyacachi have littleknowledge about Andean bear-livestock conflict (number of attacks,amount of losses, solutions imple-mented) and a negative perceptiontowards its solution (local people feelthat some external organizationshould solve the problem by finan-cially compensating the affectedlivestock owners). Yet, attitudestowards Andean bears remainpositive, which shows that killingbears is not an alternative consideredby the local people. We calculated

that the meat of the 61 cattle killedwas a loss of US$31,516. The eco-nomic loss in milk production wasUS$42,534 and the loss of potentialcalves reached US$3,747. These arethe direct costs related to cattle loss.Only one indirect cost was evaluated,the transfer of cattle from area toanother which totaled US$829.

The combination of the cattlelandscape with the Andean bearlandscape created 12 new landscapeelements in which two variables ofhabitat type (forest and paramo),three variables of human use (no use,farming, hunting and timber har-vest) and three variables of Andeanbear presence probability (high,medium, low) were combined. Thisis the conservation landscape, inwhich 52.6% of the total availableparamo area is used for open-rangepasture. Only 30.1% of the wholeparamo area has a high or mediumAndean bear presence probability. The49.6% of the paramo areas with bearpresence probability are areas of no useand 57.2% of the bear habitat (highand medium probability) coincidewith areas of open-range pasturage.

In order to define the focallandscape for conservation actions aprobability model of the conflict wascreated on the basis of 43 depreda-tion points, which were located andgeoreferenced in the field. Thismodel proved that all cattle depreda-tion points were located along thealtitude of the forest-paramo ecotone(mean=3,525; SD=578; eco-tone=3,680 m). When the finalprobability model of cattle depreda-tion was applied to the conservationlandscape, the geographic represen-tation of the focal landscape forconservation actions was obtained.This representation of the focallandscape showed that only 742.8(2.9%) of the 25,912.5 hectares ofthe study area with medium and


Americas

high bear presence probability have amedium or high (p>0.6) cattledepredation probability.

Now the livestock handlers inOyacachi have valuable informationabout the conflict so they candevelop alternatives to manage thesituation. These alternatives includeecological/geographical variables, butalso include social and economiccomponents of the conflict. Somemanagement actions suggested inthe study include (1) Cattle land-scape management (defining grazingareas and “bear areas,” removingcattle from areas with high predationprobability, increasing surveillancefrequency in grazing areas); (2)Andean bear population manage-ment (removing problematic indi-

viduals that cause massive attacksnear areas with human presence); (3)Implementation of a compensationmechanism (through insuranceschemes that compensate the loss ofinsured animals, and by generatingadditional funds throughecotourism); and (4) Building localcapacities for managing the conflict(communication activities to gener-ate awareness in the population andtraining efforts with key people).

Once these actions are imple-mented it will be possible to reiteratethe process and evaluate the successor failure of the alternatives pro-posed to reduce the conflict. Theprobability of success of this manage-ment proposal will be significantlyhigher if the actions are imple-

Andean Bear-Livestock Conflict, cont’d.

mented all together. We believe thatthere is a profound need to beginworking with multidisciplinaryapproaches in wildlife-humanconflicts in order to address all theaspects of the conflict (especiallypeople’s needs). Also, without thecommunity members’ participationthese actions will not be successful.People in Oyacachi have to acceptresponsibility for the problem even ifthe process requires more time ormoney. This is the only way to makelasting changes and to capitalize onlocal peoples’ capacities to managetheir own territories and solve theirown problems without dependingupon external donors, NGOs orgovernmental agencies.

� Bear sighting at Maiz Gordo, Dept. of Anta.

�� Photograph of bear tracks, Santa Maria, Dept. of Oran

* Bear tracks and feces reported by settlers

• Bear sightings reported by settlers

Reports of Andean BearsSalta ProvinceNorthwest Argentina(1999–2005).See article on next page.

�


Americas

Julio Fernando Del MoralSchool of BiologyFaculty of Natural SciencesNational University of Salta (4400)Salta, ArgentinaEmail [email protected]&M.V. Andrés E. Bracho S.Graduated Students’ ProgramFaculty of Veterinary SciencesUniversity of ZuliaVenezuelaEmail [email protected]

Northwest Argentina is consideredan important center of biodiversity,speciation, endemism, and is abiological corridor for many verte-brates and plants (Duellman, 1979;Fjeldsa and Krabbe, 1990;Vuilleumier, 1993). It includesspecies of carnivores (Jayat et al.,1999), particularly in the ecosystemof the Bolivian-Tucuman Forest orYungas (Cabrera, 1976; Brown andGrau, 1993); a region in Argentinawith a high diversity of mammalsincluding nine orders, 25 families,more than 90 genera, and 110species (Jayat et al., 1999). Herecarnivores remain little-studiedmammals (Olrog and Lucero, 1981;Heinonen Fortabat and Chébez,1997; Mares et al., 1997). MostArgentinian species occur in theBolivian-Tucuman Forest. Thereforeit’s urgent to collect basic informa-tion to determine the presence anddistribution of carnivores in thezone.

Perhaps, the most controversialcase is the Andean bear (Tremarctosornatus) whose presence has beenmuch discussed in the literature(Olrog, 1979; Olrog and Lucero,1981; Brown and Rumiz, 1989; PerézTorres, 2001). It has been thoughtthat bear presence was unlikely dueto the lack of verified sightingsduring the last 200 years (Brown,

Evidence of Andean Bear in Northwest Argentina

1995). Today many Andean bearexperts don’t believe the bear existsin Argentina and the country hasbeen removed from the distributionlist of the species. But surely, theabsence of precise data could be theresult of lack of field studies.

Eighteen recent sightings of thejuco, ucumari, ucu or creole panda(T. ornatus) have been reported bysettlers in the Argentinean northwest.In addition, tracks were photographedon July 30, 2004 in the locality ofSanta Maria (Oran, Salta), whichdocuments the bear’s presence (DelMoral, 2005). See map on page 30.

Recently, a sighting was made atone of the most southern locations.The report was considered reliablebecause the evidence was observedby the informant. The bear sightingwas communicated on May 10, 2005,at the Maiz Gordo Mountains (Dept.of Anta, Salta, 24°15’ S-64° 12’ W)(Cuellar, com. per.). The geographicalcoordinates were determined at theMilitary Geographic Institute ofArgentina. As with other evidence,this sighting was in the Bolivian-Tucuman Forest.

In the past, timber was intensivelyharvested in the Maiz Gordo Moun-tains; nevertheless, its state ofconservation is still acceptable. Thereare other high conservation valuecarnivore species in the area includ-ing jaguar (Panthera onca), ocelot(Leopardus pardalis), and margay (L.wiedii), etc. However, the lack ofconservation policy in the arearepresents an important threat forthe mountain ecosystem. A provin-cial reserve in the Maiz GordoMountains has been reclassified todevelop intensive cattle activities,and has been promoted for conver-sion to agricultural uses by theprovincial government. Humanactivities in the area include agricul-ture, cattle ranching and hunting.

The juco is considered dangerousto humans because of the beliefs thatmale bears have a sexual preferencefor human women, and female bearsseek to enrapture people. There areno reports of predation on cattle bybears, but damage to corn (Zea mays)crops have been reported in areas ofthe department of Oran.

The new evidence of the juco innorthwestern Argentina generatesexpectations of the possible occur-rence of the species in the area.While most of the juco sightingshave been by made by settlers; thephoto of tracks confirms its presencein the Argentinean northwest.

Literature CitedBrown, A. D. 1995. “Las selvas de

Montaña del noroeste de Argentina:problemas ambientales e importanciade su conservación.” In: Investigación,Conservación y Desarrollo en SelvasSubtropicales de Montaña (Brown, A.D. y H. R. Grau, Eds). Proyecto deDesarrollo Agroforestal/L.I.E.Y.Tucumán, Argentina. Pp. 9-18

Brown, A. D. and H. R. Grau.1993. “La naturaleza y el hombre enlas selvas de montaña.” ColecciónNuestros Ecosistemas. Proyecto GTZ,Salta, 143 pp.

Brown, A. D. And D. I. Rumiz. 1989.“Habitat and distribution of thespectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatus) inthe southern limit of its range.” In:Rosenthal, M (ed). Proceedings of thefirst internat. Symp. on the SpectacledBear: 93-103. Lincoln Park ZoologicalSociety, Chicago.

Cabrera, A. 1976. “Regionesfitogeográficas argentinas.” EnciclopediaAgricultura y Jardinería, 85 pp.

Del Moral, J. F. 2005. “Contribución alconocimiento de la distribución del osoandino (Tremarctos ornatus): un casodocumentado de ocurrencia en Argen-tina.” Manuscrito no publicado.


Americas

Duellman, W. E. (ed.) 1979. “TheSouth American Herpetofauna: Its origin,evolution, and dispersal.” Monograph ofthe Museum of Natural History, TheUniversity of Kansas, 7: 1-485.

Fjeldsa, J. Y N. Krabbe. 1990. “Birds ofthe high Andes.” Zoological Museum.University of Copenhagen, 876 pp.

Heinonen Fortabat, S. and J. C.Chebez. 1997. “Los mamíferos de losparques nacionales de la Argentina.”Monografía L.O.L.A., Buenos Aires,14:1-70.

Jayat, J. P.; R. M. Bárquez; M. M.Diaz And P. G. Martinez. 1999.“Aportes al conocimiento de ladistribución de los carnívoros delnoroeste de Argentina.” MastozoologíaNeotropical, Tucumán, 6 (1):15-30.

Mares, M. A.; R. A. Ojeda; J. K. BraunAnd R. M. Bárquez. 1997. “Systematics,distribution, and ecology of the mam-mals of Catamarca Province, Argentina.”Pp. 89-141. In: Life among the muses:papers in honor of James S. Findley(Yates, T. L.; W. L. Gannon y D. E.Wilson, eds.). Albuquerque, TheUniversity of New Mexico.

Olrog, C. C. 1979. “Los mamíferosde la selva hámeda, Cerro Calilegua,Jujuy.” Acta Zoológica Lilloana,Tucumán, 33 (2):9-14.

Olrog, C. C. y M. Lucero. 1980.“Guía de los mamíferos argentinos.”Ministerio de Cultura y Educación,Fundación Miguel Lillo. Tucumán,Argentina, 154 pp.

Perez Torres, J. 2001. “Guía para laconservación del oso andino u oso deanteojos, Tremarctos ornatus (F. G.Cuvier, 1825).” Convenio AndrésBello, Serie Ciencia y Tecnología, N°

93. Bogotá, Colombia. 51 pp.Vuilleumier, F. 1993.

“Biogeografía de aves en elgeotrópico: jerarquías conceptualesy perspectivas para futurasinvestigaciones.” Revista Chilenade Historia Natural, 66:11-51.

Evidence of AndeanBear in NorthwestArgentina, cont’d.

Matt AustinBritish ColumbiaMinistry of EnvironmentBritish Columbia, CanadaEmail [email protected]

The progress report from theGrizzly Bear Scientific Panel on ourimplementation of their recommen-dations as well as the Minister’sresponse have been posted on theGrizzly Bear Conservation Strategywebsite: http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/wld/grzz/index.htm.

We have also recently posted fivetechnical papers that describe ournew population estimates andharvest procedure on the same site.

Finally, we have provided fundingto 15 communities in British Colum-bia to facilitate them in achieving“Bear Smart” community status. MikeBadry ([email protected]) isthe contact for this initiative.

Grizzlies inBritish Columbia

Steve HerreroChair, ESGBP Steering CommitteeEmail [email protected]

The final report of the EasternSlopes Grizzly Bear Project (ESGBP)was released in July, 2005. The reportculminates 11 years of researchregarding the biology, demography,ecology and management of grizzlybears in and around Banff NationalPark and Kananaskis Country, Alberta,Canada. More than 225 individualsand 55 supporting organizationscontributed to the study. Supportingagencies included Parks Canada of theCanadian federal government, variousagencies from the Provinces of Albertaand British Columbia, the Universityof Calgary, and groups representingconservation, business and industry,recreation and other interests. TheESGBP’s mandate was to contributescientific understanding regardinggrizzly bear population status and thecumulative influences of humanactivities on it. The ESGBP had nomanagement authority. Despite this,results have led to managementactions and will provide the scientificbasis to support future managementactions.

The final report is composed of 30individual contributions, including adetailed summary and managementrecommendations. The core paper ison grizzly bear demographics in theBow River Watershed. This wasrecently published in volume69(1):277–299, of the Journal ofWildlife Management. Twenty-nineother papers are included in the finalreport, some previously published,others not. Demographics, especiallyvarious mortality analyses, are amajor focus of the report. The finalreport is available on the website ofthe ESGBP, www.canadianrockies.net/Grizzly. A limited number of printedand CD copies are also available.

Final Report:Eastern SlopesGrizzly Bear Project

© E

layn

e B

arcl

ay


Americas

Pam CoyMinnesota Departmentof Natural ResourcesForest Wildlife Populations andResearch Group1201 East Highway 2Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USAPhone (218) 327-4159Email [email protected]

Ontario Black Bear AttacksDr. Jacqueline Perry, 30, a family

practitioner from CambridgeOntario, and her husband MarcJordan, also 30, were attacked by anAmerican black bear in MissinaibiLake Provincial Park, about 80 kmnorth of Chapleau, on September 6,2005. The attack occurred around 5PM at a remote campsite. The bearfirst attacked Perry and tried to dragher into the woods then attackedJordan as he tried to save his wife. Hemanaged to stab the bear severaltimes with a Swiss army knife. Hewas eventually able to drag hisseverely injured wife away from thebear and place her in their kayak butshe died of her injuries on the tripout of the park. Jordan was airliftedto a hospital in Sudbury, Ontariowith sever lacerations and puncturewounds.

On September 10th ministry staffshot and killed a black bear nearwhere the fatal attack occurred. Theanimal fit the description of the bearthat attacked the couple, including awound in its neck like one thatJordan inflicted as he tried to fightoff the bear. The carcass was sent fortesting.

The last fatal bear attack inOntario occurred in 1992, when ageologist in the Cochrane area wasmauled.

Northcentral USA/Southcentral Canada

Another attack occurred onSeptember 21, 2005 when a 22-year-old forestry worker was dragged fromhis tent while he slept by a blackbear in the Pakwash Forest, about150 km northeast of Kenora. Otheremployees were able to fight off thebear and the victim was taken to thehospital for treatment of puncturewounds and abrasions.

MinnesotaNon-fatal Bear Attack

Mary Munn, 50, was attacked by ablack bear on July 29, 2005 as shewalked on a trail in the woods nearher home 30 miles south of Duluth.She was walking with her dog whenshe encountered a bear. The bearcharged and Mary turned and ran acouple of steps but then stopped andturned because she didn’t want to betackled from behind. The bear veeredoff but then charged again, at whichtime Mary punched it in the noseseveral times with her fist. Her dogdrew the bear away several times butit kept returning to Mary. At onepoint the bear clawed her knee andshe fell down. The bear then bit herthigh and then began biting herarmpit and shaking her. The bear leftfor no apparent reason and she wasable to walk home and call for help.

Minnesota Department ofNatural Resources conserva-tion officers set traps inthe area but wereunable to catch anybears.

Charity A. KraftCaesar KlebergWildlife Research InstituteTexas A&M University Kingsville700 University Blvd., MSC 218Kingsville, TX 78363, USAPhone (361) 593-4500Email [email protected]

Yes, it’s true. Whispers of Ameri-can black bear sightings throughoutSouth Texas have been stirringthroughout the area for the lastseveral years. However, most of thebear movements through thismesquite-dominated brushland havebeen transient in nature. The latestreport came through Texas Parks andWildlife Department on September11, 2005 when a gas well workerspotted a female and her cub on aranch southeast of Laredo, Texas.This observation came the day aftera subadult was spotted by a statetrooper, a sheriff’s officer, and aborder patrol agent on a nearbyhighway no more than 200 yardsfrom the female and cub. All threebears were said to be in goodcondition.

Bear Sightings inSouth Texas?

© M

ich

ael

Kee

ney


Americas

Stephen HerreroEnvironmental ScienceUniversity of Calgary2500 University DriveCalgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4Phone (403) 220-7436Fax (403) 243-5012Email [email protected]

During 2005 through October 14,2005, I know of seven people whohave been killed by American blackbear (3), or brown (grizzly) bear (4)in North America (Table 1). This ismore recorded fatal injuries thanduring any previous year since 1900.During the decade of the 1990sAmerican black bears are known tohave killed 11 people and brown(grizzly) bears 18. From 2000 untilOctober 14, 2005, American blackbears are known to have killed 11people and brown (grizzly) bears 8(Table 2).

There are an estimated 900,000American black bears in NorthAmerica and 60,000 brown (grizzly)bears. American black bears outnum-ber brown (grizzly) bears by approxi-mately 15:1 and they have killedfewer people since 1990. Thissuggests roughly how much morelikely a person is to be killed by abrown (grizzly) bear versus anAmerican black bear.

Identification of a bear’s motiva-tion in such incidents requiresinterpretation and in some instancesmay not be possible. To aid interpre-tation, some classification guidelineshave been developed (Herrero andHiggins 2003). Application of theseguidelines characterizes all but oneof the fatal attacks during 2005 aseither predatory or probably preda-tory. The seventh fatal attack mayhave been defensive or predatory ormore complex than either of thesesimple categories. It is still underinvestigation. Each of the six fatal

During 2005 More People Killed By Bearsin North America Than in Any Previous Year

Date and location Number of people killed

Species of bear

Sex of bear Predatory, defensive, or other motivation

June 5, 2005 1 brown male Probably predatoryCanmore, Alberta (grizzly)Canada

June 14, 2005 1 Amer. male PredatoryNowacho Lake, NWT blackCanada

June 25 or 26, 2005 2 brown male Probably predatoryHulahula River, Alaska (grizzly)USA

August 26, 2005 1 Amer. male PredatoryEast Selkirk, Manitoba blackCanada

September 6, 2005 1 Amer. male PredatoryMissinaibi Provincial Park blackOntario, Canada

September 20, 2005 1 brown probably Unknown: Possibly Bowron Lakes Road (grizzly) female defensive by female British Columbia with cubs, thenCanada becoming predatory

or scavenging

Table 1: Fatal Attacks on People in North America by American Black Bear or Brown (Grizzly) Bear During 2005

Year American black bear

brown (grizzly)

bear

Total

2000 2 1 3

2001 2 1 3

2002 3 0 3

2003 1 2 3

2004 0 0 0

2005 3 4 7

Total 11 8 19

Table 2: Fatal Attacks on People in North America by American Black Bear or Brown

(Grizzly) Bear, 2000-2005


Americas

attacks classified as predatory orprobably predatory was inflicted by amale bear. This is consistent withprevious findings (Herrero andHiggins 1995, 1999) and seems toreflect a dramatic behavioral differ-ence between the sexes of bears.

Bear attacks may have major costs.Any serious or fatal bear attack hastragic costs to the person(s) injuredand to their families. Bear conserva-tion efforts may also be negativelyaffected. For example, in Alaska,“defense of life or property kills”(DLP) of bears, “appear to increasefollowing newspaper accounts ofattacks by bears and deaths caused bybears” (Miller and Tutterow 1999).

Some fatal attacks that occurredduring 2005 could have beenavoided. I believe that it is ourresponsibility, as bear research andmanagement professionals andsupporters of bear conservation, towork toward educating interestedpeople regarding how to be as safe aspossible around bears at the sametime as working to conserve bearpopulations and habitat.

Literature CitedHerrero, S. and A. Higgins. 1995.

Fatal injuries inflicted to people byblack bear. Pages 75-82 in J. Augerand H.L. Black, editors. Proceedingsof the Fifth Western Black BearWorkshop, Brigham Young UniversityPress, Provo, Utah, USA.

_____, and _____. 1999. Humaninjuries inflicted by bears in BritishColumbia: 1960-97. Ursus 11:209-218.

_____, and _____. 2003. Humaninjuries inflicted by bears in Alberta:1960-98. Ursus 14:44-54.

Miller, S.D. and V.L. Tutterow.1999. Characteristics of nonsportmortalities to brown and black bearsand human injuries from bears inAlaska. Ursus 11:239-252.

Thomas EasonBureau of WildlifeDiversity and ConservationFlorida Fish and Wildlife CommissionBryant Building, 620 S. Meridian St.Tallahasse, FL 32399-1600, USAPhone (850) 413-7379Fax (850) 921-1867Email thomas.wason@fwc,state.fl.us

Ten public meetings were con-ducted from November 30, 2004 toFebruary 3, 2005 in east Texas toexplain the draft East Texas BlackBear Conservation and ManagementPlan (Plan). Over 500 people at-tended and approximately 70% werein favor of the conservation andmanagement of bears in east Texas.The Plan was presented to the TexasParks and Wildlife Department(TPWD) Commission for final reviewand comment in May 2005 and it isnow ready for release. The Plan maybe viewed at http://www.tpwd.state.tx.us/publications/huntwild/ and click on WildlifePublications or request a hard copyfrom:Nathan GarnerTexas Parks and Wildlife Department11942 FM 848Tyler, TX 75707, USAEmail [email protected]

A dedicated team of privatelandowners, government agencies,timber companies, universityresearchers, conservation groups andothers have been working on thePlan since 2002. The Plan is sup-ported by more than 30 diversegroups from the public and privatesector, and was created for severalreasons.

“The American black bear is apart of Texas’ natural heritage andforest ecology. The Louisiana blackbear is on the federal threatenedspecies list and is thus the focus ofongoing restoration efforts in

Louisiana, Arkansas and Mississippi,and bears appear to be poised for aslow return in east Texas,” saidNathan Garner, TPWD wildlifedivision regional director in Tyler.“Having a proactive plan to managethe situation is good natural resourcemanagement.”

The Plan has various strategies toachieve specific goals. These includeeducating the public about bears tominimize potential conflicts andallow reasonable control of nuisancebears, and encouraging farm andforest management that providesbear habitat as part of a naturallydiverse system. The Plan suggests adetermination of the survivabilityand reproductive capacity of reintro-duced bears in east Texas. First,public support for this research mustbe documented. If strong supportexists, several adult females withcubs could be relocated in winterfrom out-of-state to forests in deepeast Texas. Bears would be fitted withradio collars to monitor theirmovements.

Black bears are already in eastTexas to a limited extent, mainlysolitary males wandering in fromadjacent states. TPWD has docu-mented 47 reliable bear sightings ineast Texas since 1977, about two-thirds of those were between 1991and 2004. There is occupied bearhabitat adjacent to east Texas inOklahoma, Arkansas and Louisiana,where wildlife agencies are experi-menting with reintroducing bears insome areas. No nuisance bear actionshave occurred to date in east Texas.

The PhD study titled “IntegratingEcology and Socioeconomics forSpecies Restoration Feasibility of aLouisiana Black Bear ReintroductionIn and Around Big Thicket NationalPreserve, Texas” was completed inthe summer of 2005 by AnitaMorzillo from Michigan State

East Texas Report


Americas

University. As part of that study, asurvey was completed of 3,000households in southeast Texas todetermine human attitudes aboutblack bears. A great deal of informa-tion useful to bear conservation andmanagement was collected. A few ofthe highlights included that themajority of respondents said bearsshould exist in east Texas and thatthe presence of bears indicates ahealthy environment. Roughly 50%were aware that bears were histori-cally in east Texas, bears in east Texasare protected, and that bears aremainly vegetarian. Approximately50% felt that bears are not a poten-tial danger or a nuisance and supportrestocking bears into east Texas. Ofthe respondents who hunt, slightlyless than 50% were interested inhunting bears. Slightly over 50% feltthe bear population in east Texasshould be increased if a managementstrategy was in place to minimizehuman-bear conflicts.

East Texas Report,cont’d

Dave TelescoBlack Bear Conservation CommitteePO Box 80442Baton Rouge, LA 70898, USAPhone (225) 763-5457Email [email protected]

As researchers and agency person-nel continue to learn from previousefforts, the Louisiana repatriationproject has improved and become agenuine success. The project involvesmoving adult female American blackbears with their cubs from winterdens in an existing population toartificial dens at a release site wherefew, if any, bears are present. Thegoal of the project is to establish bearsubpopulations in areas that willencourage movement and geneticexchange between isolated subpopu-lations. The cooperative effort of theBlack Bear Conservation Committee,Louisiana Department of Wildlifeand Fisheries, Louisiana StateUniversity (LSU), USDA WildlifeServices, and U.S. Fish and WildlifeService was joined by Arkansas Gameand Fish Commission (AGFC) andthe University of Tennessee (UT) in2005. AGFC and UT personnelshared their extensive experiencegained from their own repatriationproject in Arkansas, and in March2005, the Louisiana team was able tomove seven adult female bears andtheir 15 cubs in five days! All theanimals were moved to the ThreeRivers Wildlife Management Area(WMA) in lower Concordia Parish,Louisiana.

Louisiana Bear Repatriation ProjectDocuments Cub Adoption

Since 2001, a total of 23 adultfemales and 55 cubs have beenmoved to the repatriation complexin east-central Louisiana. Thecomplex includes Three Rivers WMA,Red River WMA, Grassy Lake WMA,and Lake Ophelia National WildlifeRefuge. If success continues, spring2006 will likely be the last year formoving bears into this complex.

As if the repatriation effort has notbeen successful and rewardingenough, the repatriation teamdocumented a rare and significantevent in 2005. In early April, LSUgraduate students and technicianswere monitoring post-release bearmovements. Bears typically leavetheir den boxes within a week or twofollowing relocation and occupyground nests as the cubs grow andare better able to move about withtheir mother. About two weeks afterthe moves, bear D21 moved anunusually long distance from herden and did not return. An effort tolocate her two cubs was unsuccessful,but it was noted that another of therelocated adult female bears (bear T5)had moved to a ground nest nearD21’s artificial den box. When LSUgraduate student Jarod Raithel movedin to observe cubs, he found that bearT5, who was relocated with only onecub, now had three cubs with her.

The exact chain of events that ledto the adoption of the cubs is openfor speculation. D21 could havemoved because of a confrontationwith T5, or perhaps after the femaleabandoned her cubs, T5 heard theircries and went to their rescue. Wewill never know exactly whathappened, but we do know that thecubs were adopted by the secondbear. D21 has crossed the MississippiRiver and was last located in the hillsin Wilkinson County, Mississippi,while T5 remains in the repatriationcomplex in Louisiana.


Americas

Rich BeausoleilWashington Dept. of Fish & Wildlife3515 State Highway 97AWenatchee, WA 98801, USAEmail [email protected]

Washington Department of Fishand Wildlife (WDFW) has completeddrafts of two important manuals forfield personnel:

Managing Black Bear Conflict andProcedure for Investigation of WildlifeAttacks on Humans.

Managing Black Bear Conflict isintended to be a guide for WDFWfield personnel (wildlife and enforce-ment programs) responding toAmerican black bear conflicts. It wascreated to: (1) convey an accurateand consistent message about bearsto the public; and, (2) increaseWDFW’s consistency and profession-alism when addressing bear conflictissues in the field. The manual hastwo sections:

Section 1: Bear Behavior andAvoiding Conflict; and Section 2:Trapping Bears and Trap Safety. Section1 includes: Understanding Bears, Typesof Bear Encounters, What To Do if YouEncounter a Bear, and Tips To Avoid

Washington Manualsfor Managing Bear Conflictsand Investigating Wildlife Attacks

Negative Bear Interactions. Section 2includes: Trapping and ImmobilizingBears, Culvert Trap Safety (for bearsand people), and What To Do WithCaptured Bears. The manual is mostlyin a bulleted format for quick andeasy retrieval of information. Alongwith first-hand professional experi-ences, many other informationsources were used in developing thismanual including: Staying Safe inBear Country, A Behavioral Approach toReducing Risk (page 45, order formpage 55) and Bear ShepherdingGuidelines For Safe and EffectiveTreatment of Human/Bear Conflicts(Wind River Bear Institute, Missoula,Montana). The manual coversimmobilizations but does not discussdrug types and dosages as all WDFWpersonnel using immobilizing drugsare required to attend a yearly coursetaught by WDFW veterinarians. Themanual also covers: (1) possibleactions for resolving black bear-human conflicts based on the levelof risk; (2) bear behavior and publicsafety risks to consider when trap-ping and relocating black bears; and,(3) site factors to consider whencapturing black bears for on-siterelease, relocation, or aversiveconditioning.

Procedure for Investigation ofWildlife Attacks on Humans wasdeveloped to assist WDFW officerswith the investigation of wildlifeattacks. We hope we will never needto use the manual, but feel it isnecessary to have it in place consid-ering the potential litigious ramifica-tions. In the event of a wildlifeattack and a human fatality, it isimperative to remain focused and bemindful of the investigative processto insure an effective and completeinvestigation. Numerous peoplefrom many agencies may be re-sponding to the scene, potentiallyfollowed by the media with cameras

and video recorders; these dynamicscan affect the overall process. Thepurpose of this manual is to guaran-tee the integrity of all the evidence,much like a crime scene investiga-tion. The manual was designed to bea step-by-step guide to assist wildlifeofficers and others with their investi-gation. The intent is that all WDFWpersonnel that may use this manualwould review it and be familiar withit prior to its need. Personnel fromBritish Columbia Ministry of Envi-ronment, Lands and Parks providedthe template for this manual after afatal human attack and subsequentlawsuit several years ago. We drew ontheir experience, and customized themanual for use in Washington. Wealso added track identification platesand travel patterns to help identifycarnivores (American black bear,grizzly bear, cougar, bobcat, wolf,coyote, dog) that could be involvedin a human attack in Washington.After several revisions, the manual isin the process of becoming part of aformal regulation and is beingincorporated into statewide wildlifeofficer training programs. Uponcompletion of those tasks, themanual will become part of the list ofrequired field equipment carried byall wildlife officers and biologistswho may respond to a wildlife attack.


Captive Bears

Marco A. Enciso, DVM StudentLaboratory of Animal Reproduction,Faculty of Veterinary MedicineSan Marcos University, Lima, PeruCorrespondence address:Jr. San Miguel 257, 2° piso, Urb.Cahuache, San Luis, Lima 30Lima, PeruPhone 51-1-97060016Email [email protected]

Peru has the biggest population ofAndean bears (Tremarctos ornatus) inSouth America (Peyton, 1999),however several factors are causingreduction of wild Andean bearpopulations. Therefore it is necessaryto study the species for its preserva-tion, and understanding reproduc-tion is one of the most importantgoals.

Our work focuses on Andean bearsemen collection and cryopreservation.Andean bear semen collection byelectroejaculation is not well-docu-mented. Howard (1993) mentionssemen analysis from samples collectedusing 2 volts, without providingdetails of the process. Platz et al.(1983) also mentions Andean bearsperm morphometric measureswithout describing the method ofsemen collection. A report by Malev etal. (1991) says that work with an adultbear used 25 volts, and a sample wasnot obtained because of the absence oftestes, a diagnosis corroborated post–mortem.

A preliminary study (Enciso etal., 2004) discusses semen collec-tion using an electroejaculator forsmall ruminants applying 6 volts,which resulted in a sample with a50% motility. Because a significantsample was not obtained using thismethod, equipment was designedfor Andean bear requirements,using the electroejaculator modelfor Ursos arctos yesoensis (Ishikawaet al., 1998). The electroejaculator

Semen Collection in Captive Andean Bears

(Eletrojet®, Eletrovet, Sao Paulo,Brazil) consists of a 50 cm x 2 cmrectal probe (length by diameter),three longitudinal electrodes and amaximum 12 volts.

The work was done with twoadult Andean bears at the HuachipaZoological Park, Lima, Peru. Bothanimals were anesthetized and thesame electroejaculation protocolwas used for both. They receivedprogressive electrical dischargesfrom 2 volts to 12 volts, generatingvariable responses and ejaculation:in the first case the seminal volumeand quality were regular, and in thesecond one, good, in relation to theprevious sample. Using generalanesthesia during semen collectionlimited the time to evaluate differ-ent ways of applying electricalstimuli. In addition each animal’sphysiological state and stress levelfrom capture was different. Also,the captive bears’ stereotypicalbehavior may have significantlyaffected semen collection. Thebears masturbated several times aday in their rest area, and it is verylikely that this reduced the quan-tity and quality of the ejaculation.

Semen collection protocols can bedeveloped, but will always be partlydependent for success on the indi-vidual bear. The samples obtained bythe electroejaculation procedureallowed a semen analysis thatincluded measurement of parameterslike volume, PH, motility, concentra-tion and spermatic morphology.

Ongoing studies will improve ourprotocol to increase sample quality insemen collection for Andean bears. Itis important to continue trying tostandardize a collection protocol forsemen cryopreservation as a tool forAndean bear conservation.

ReferencesEnciso, M.A., Bermúdez, L.,

Evangelista S. and Rojas, G. 2004.First essay of semen collection in anAndean bear in Peru. InternationalBear News 13(4):26.

Howard, JG. 1993. Semen collec-tion and analysis in carnivores. In:Zoo & Wild Animal Medicine. CurrentTherapy 3. Fowler, ME (ed). WBSaunders. USA. pp:392.

Ishikawa, A., Matsui, M., Tsuruga,H., Sakamoto, H., Takahashi, Y. andKanagawa, H. 1998. Electroejaculationand semen characteristics of thecaptive Hokkaido brown bear (Ursusarctos yesoensis). J. Vet. Med. Sci. 60(8):965-968.

Malev, A.V., Saghirov, R.G., Pavlov,U.I., Christyakov, R.E., Mirolyuvob,M.G. and Eremeev, AM. 1991.Obtaining sperm from a Spectacledbear at the Kazan Zoological Gar-dens. In: International Studbook for theSpectacled Bear. Wheinhardt, D. (ed).Lincoln Park Zoological Gardens.Chicago, Ill, USA. pp:83-85.

Peyton, B. 1999. Spectacled Bearconservation action plan. In: Bears:Status survey and conservation actionplan. Servheen, C.; Herrero, S. andPeyton, B. (eds). IUCN/SCC BearSpecialist Group. Switzerland andCambridge. U.K. p:157-198.

Platz, C.C. Jr., Wildt, D.E.,Howard, J.G. and Bush, M. 1983.Electroejaculation and semenanalysis and freezing in the GiantPanda (Ailuropoda melanoleuca). J.Reprod. Fertil. 67:9-12.

Renner, M.J. and Lussier, J.P. 2002.Environment enrichment for thecaptive Spectacled bear (Tremarctosornatus). Pharmacol. Biochem. Behav.73:279-283.


Captive Bears

Wendy GardnerWoodland Park ZooSeattle, Washington, USAPhone (360) 363-1052Email [email protected]&Rebecca J. SnyderZoo AtlantaAtlanta, Georgia, USA

While caring for two captiveAndean bears (Tremarctos ornatus) Inoticed they periodically passedmucous stools, which seemed tocoincide with decreased appetite.The bears showed no obviouschanges in health or behavior, andfecal/mucous tests revealed nothingunusual. Other institutions reportedsimilar observations.

Experience with giant pandas(Ailuropoda melanoleuca) and discus-sions with other keepers indicate thatmost captive giant pandas also passmucous stools with varying frequency.They tend to show simultaneousbehavioral changes, including de-creased appetite, restlessness (e.g.,increase in locomotion/pacing), andcurling up and honking (a distressvocalization). Once the mucous stoolpasses, their appetite and behaviorusually return to normal.

Giant pandas have a high densityof mucous producing cells in thelining of their gut that presumablyaid in digesting bamboo (Schaller etal., 1985). Sloughing excess mucousperiodically may be a normalfunction or the result of decreasedbamboo consumption.

Andean bears and giant pandas areclosely related (Talbot and Shields,1996) which might facilitate under-standing mucous stools in bothspecies. Our goal was to determinethe frequency of mucous stools incaptive North American Andeanbears and evaluate the effects of sex,age, and diet on their frequency.

Mucous Stools in Andean Bears

A 28-question survey was sent tofacilities housing a total of 81Andean bears. Fifty-three surveyswere returned from 32 facilities,providing data for 32 males and 21females, ages 4-25 years. All werecaptive born. Keepers recorded size,quantity and timing of any mucousstools, and diet, enrichment, health,behavior changes, age, and sex ofbears.

To analyze the effect of diet onmucous stools, bears were classifiedaccording to the frequency and typeof diet and food enrichment. Wemeasured the effect of different foods(browse, meat, omnivore biscuit, dogfood, eggs) on the rate of mucousstools (Sheskin, 2000).

No significant sex differences werefound in the yearly rate of mucousstools. No significant relationshipwas found between any of the foodstested and mucous stools.

Bamboo is 98% of the giant panda’swild diet, (Schaller et al., 1985) as wellas some captive animals. A decrease inbamboo consumption seems tocontribute to giant pandas’ creatingmucous stools (unpublished data).Plants, especially bromeliads can be92% of wild Andean bear diet(Dierenfeld, 1989). Could captiveAndean bears not offered the equiva-lent plant material experience mucousstools? Sources of fiber and roughagefed captive Andean bears in this studyincluded, browse (bamboo, willow,etc.), omnivore biscuits and dog food.However, lack of or minimal amountsof these foods did not affect mucousproduction. Eggs, sugarcane and breadwere evaluated because they were notfed to all bears. They were not signifi-cant in producing mucous stools,though two bears passed mucous aftereating sugar cane. Fruits and veg-etables were offered to all bears in thesurvey, but were not analyzed. It maybe that fruit fed to captive Andean

bears has more simple sugar and lessfiber than fruits eaten by wild Andeanbears (Dierenfeld, 1989). The similarityof diets and food enrichment offeredto bears in this survey could explainthe lack of affect on mucous stools.

Sex was not a significant factor inproducing mucous stools. Only 11bears (6 males and 5 females) surveyedpassed mucous stools and they hadsimilar diets, browse and enrichment.The effect of age class was not ana-lyzed due to insufficient data.

Some bears may pass mucous stoolsdue to differences in behavior, healthor environment, or multiple causes.Determining if wild Andean bears passmucous stools, analyzing their diet,behavior, health risks and environ-mental pressures would be helpful andmight also identify factors for mucousstool production in giant pandas.

ReferencesDierenfeld, E.S. (1989). Nutritional

considerations in feeding the captivespectacled bears. Proceedings of theFirst International Symposium on theSpectacled Bear. pp.114-130.

Mainka, S.A., Zhao G.L., and Mao,L. (1989). Utilization of a bamboo,sugarcane, and gruel diet by twojuvenile giant pandas (Ailuropodamelanoleuca). Journal of Zoo WildlifeMedicine, 20(1), 39-44.

Schaller, G.B., Hu, J., Pan, W., andZhu, J. (1985). The giant pandas ofWolong. Chicago: University ofChicago Press.

Sheskin, D.J. (2000). Parametric andnonparametric statistical procedures. NewYork: Chapman & Hall/CRC.

Siegel, S., and Castellan, N.J. (1988).Nonparametric statistics for the behav-ioral sciences. New York: McGraw-Hill.

Zhang, Y.P., and Ryder, O.A.(1993). Mitochondrial DNA sequenceevolution in the Arctoidea. Proceed-ings of the National Academy Science.USA, 90, 9557-9561.


Student Forum

Diana Doan-CriderIBA Student CoordinatorKing Ranch Institute forRanch ManagementMSC 137Texas A&M University-KingsvilleKingsville, TX 78363-8202, USAPhone (361) 593-5407Email [email protected]

Some storms were good, and somestorms were very, very bad. One badstorm had already left about 140 ofour Louisiana neighbors sleeping oncots in our Kingsville rodeo arena.Another bad storm left me all dressedup with nowhere to go when myflight to Italy was abruptly cancelleddue to a somewhat exaggeratedhurricane evacuation in Houston. Iwould have been dreadfully disap-pointed if it were not for beingreminded that I could have beensleeping on a cot in a rodeo arena, soI muffled my complaints and justasked for a refund from the frazzledairline desk attendant. It all turnedout quite well, given that the IBA hassome student superheroes thatstormed Italy (in a very good way),and were supernaturally able to carryout Truman’s mission at the confer-ence in Riva del Garda with greatsuccess.

First of all, I need to take the timeto thank our wonderful Italian hosts,Claudio Groff, Piero Genovesi, andLorenza Negri, for going the extramile to make the student session asuccess. Because of the distancefactor, they made all of the arrange-ments for the location and meal, andit turned out fabulous! IBA studentsXimena Velez, Andreas Zedrosser,and Alexandros Karamanlidisliterally took over the entire eventwith the help of Brian Scheick, whohas been a great friend to the IBAstudents from the beginning. IBAprofessionals also came to the

Truman TakesItaly by Storm(s)!

rescue and attended with highnumbers and interest. Trumanwould like to thank everyone!

Ximena reports that approxi-mately 50 students attended, alongwith IBA professionals Frank vanManen, Lisette Waits, Brian Scheick,Kate Kendall, John Hechtel, JonSwenson, Harry Reynolds, AndyDerocher, Mike Vaughan, KarenNoyce and Djuro Huber. Groupdiscussions were broken down intosix categories based on studentrequests: genetics, GIS and ecologicalmodelling, ecology, diet studies,trapping methods, and conservationand hunting. Each discussion wasthen led by individual IBA profes-sionals who specialize in those areas.

All of this was done over a wonderfulItalian luncheon that was sponsoredby the IBA. The student session wasalso honored by the presence of JuliaBevins who founded the JohnSheldon Bevins Memorial Founda-tion which has contributed substan-tially to student research.

Students felt that the discussionswere helpful in developing new ideasfor their research, but above all,benefitted from the interaction andnetworking with IBA professionalswho will be valuable ongoingcontacts. All of this input will helpus to develop future student sessions,in particular, our upcoming event atthe 17th IBA conference in Japannext year. We hope to see you there!

IBA students Ximena Velez (Bolivia), Alexandros Karamanlidis (Greece) andAndreas Zedrosser (Austria) at the 16th IBA conference in Italy.


Information Please

IBA Student?The List Serve is for You!

Sign up for the Student List Serve(Truman)• For students only• Discussions pertaining to bear

biology, management, or studydesign challenges

• Assistance with proposals andstudy design through IBA profes-sionals

• Job searches, announcements,information regarding the IBAand student membership

• Planning for IBA student activitiesand meetings

• IBA membership is encouraged, butnot required for initial sign-up

Instructions• Email Diana Doan-Crider at

[email protected] to enroll• After enrollment, go to:http://aristotle.tamuk.edu• Click on Agricultural Lists• Click on Truman• Enter your email address and the

password “Bears01”• Go to Create Message

Do NOT reply to list serve mes-sages using your “reply” button. Youmust return to Truman and respondwithin the list serve or else othermembers will not receive yourresponse.

A.C. SmidBear Trust InternationalPO Box 4006Missoula, MT 59806, USAPhone (406) 523-7779Email [email protected]

Bear Trust International has receivedfunding to compile a book of bearstories, with the working title TheBear Book: The Stories Behind theScience as Told to Bear Trust. Theinitial idea for the book came aboutover breakfast during the San DiegoIBA meeting in February 2003. Theidea further took shape after thedinner hour, when bear stories canbe at their best. Conference attend-ees from Bear Trust, a nonprofitorganization headquartered inMissoula, Montana, thought the ideafor the book was so interesting thatthe organization began looking for afunding source. Now that thefunding has been secured from agenerous donor, Bear Trust is lookingfor nonfiction stories.

The purpose of the book is to givethe general public a look at bearsthat is accurate, but that is told froma personal point of view. While thetone of the stories will be more livelyand intimate than scientific faretends to be, each story will beaccompanied by information on theresearch or other type of project thatwas underway when the story tookplace. Bear Trust has recruited aneditorial board of wildlife profession-als to guide us in making decisionsabout which stories to use basedupon each story’s merits.

As we learned in San Diego,having good stories to tell is abeneficial byproduct of working withbears. Or to put it another way, when

Bear Trust Looking for Good Bear Stories

you scratch a bear biologist, you finda storyteller. Recently, it seems as ifmany stories appearing in the mediahave provided the public withsignificantly distorted views of bearsand their relationship to humans.While The Bear Book does not haveany type of agenda behind it otherthan good conservation expressedthrough good stories, we believe thebook can nonetheless attract a wideaudience without resorting tosensationalism.

If you have a story to share,please email Bear Trust [email protected]. We willsend you a packet explaining how tosubmit information about your storyand the story compilation process. Asthe book’s title states, the compila-tion will be “as told to Bear Trust.”We will be using a professional writerto compile the stories, so contribu-tors will not be burdened with thetask of providing a finished productfor the book. However, contributorswill be credited as the source for thestory. Additionally, each story will beaccompanied by information on thecontributor, including any details onthe research being done relative tothe story, as well as contact informa-tion. We believe the book will be agood vehicle for connecting research-ers with readers who are interested inlearning more about bears and bearresearch.

So if you have a good bear storyyou’d like to see published in acompilation, please contact BearTrust. Or if you know someone witha good bear story, please pass alongthis information about the book andencourage them to contribute.


Bears in Culture

Anne RugglesBear Canyon Consulting, LLCPhone (303) 938-0490Email [email protected]

A Winter’s Tale is one ofShakespeare’s last plays, written in1611. The first half is a tragedy repletewith jealousy, dead children, brokenfriendships and marriages, andbanished babies. The second half is aromance of young love, courtship,marriage, and repentance. In thecenter of the play, dividing the tragedyfrom the comedy—comes a bear. Afterthe character Antigonus ends hissoliloquy with, “This is the chase! I amgone forever!” Shakespeare’s stagedirections say: “Exit, pursued by abear.” Nothing more, but far morethan the more typical lack of directionor simple exeunt when a characterleaves the stage. Why was it necessaryto have Antigonus pursued andconsumed by a bear?

This is perhaps the most famous ofstage directions. A later characterannounces Antigonus’ death, “I’ll go seeif the bear be gone from the gentleman,and how much he hath eaten…If therebe any of him left, I’ll bury it.”

Among theater and Shakespearescholars, there is little consensus aboutwhy this direction is given. Antigonuscould just as easily have died when hisship and crew sank soon afterwards ina storm. There has been enormousdiscussion on this bear as theatricaldevice, as a symbol, and as an allegory;centering on the symbolic nature ofthe bear as a stand-in for corruptofficials, or politicians; and on the useof the bear as a trope for the juxtaposi-tion of the grotesque with the hu-mane, the primitive with the refined.

The appearance of this bear, alongwith the change from verse to prose,does signal several things: the deathof Antigonus, the severing of anabandoned baby from her royal past,

Exit, pursued by a bear

a transition from winter to spring,from death to rebirth, and the dividebetween a tragedy of jealousy and apastoral romance.

Mucedorus, the play on whichShakespeare is supposed to havebased A Winter’s Tale and a popularElizabethan play, was staged in 1610and involved a “live bear.”

Shakespeare refers to bears and bear-baiting in others plays. In Julius Caesar,when Octavius Caesar and Antony aresurrounded by the forces of Brutus andCassius, Octavius cries, “We are at thestake/And bayed about by manyenemies.” When Macbeth is corneredin Dunsinane Castle he uses similarterms: “They have tied me to the stake;I cannot fly/But bear-like I must fightthe course.” And in King Lear,Gloucester realizes that he is to betormented by Lear’s daughters, andidentifies himself with a bear: “I amtied to th’stake, and I must stand thecourse.” One of the bears used inbaiting was so well known that itappears in The Merry Wives of Windsorby name when Slender boasts to AnnePage that, “I have seen Sackerson loosetwenty times; and have taken him bythe chain: but, I warrant you, thewomen have so cried and shrieked atit, that it passed.”

In 16th century England, thePuritans controlled the London citycouncil and resented the royalpatronage of decadent entertain-ments. In 1574, the Puritan councilbanished the theaters, stews (broth-els), and bear-baiting arenas.

They reappeared across theThames. Baitings, the theater, andthe brothels thrived side-by-side foryears and were common diversionsfor the public. There were 16 theatersand many baiting arenas for apopulation of only about 200,000.One arena for baitings could hold athousand spectators. The fee foradmittance to the baitings and the

theater started at a penny and thereare records showing thousands ofpeople crossing the Thames at ParisLanding from London to the SouthBank on Tuesday and Thursdayafternoons. In 1570, the bulls weremoved from the baiting arena at theParis Garden to an adjoining field,leaving the Paris Garden (subse-quently known as the Beare Garden)to specialize in bear-baiting.

At Beare-Garden, (a sweet RotuntiousColledge)

Hee’s taught the Rudiments of Artand knowledge.

There doth he learne to dance, and(gravely grumbling)

To fight and to be Active (bravelytumbling)

To practise wards, and postures, toand fro,

To guard himselfe, and to offend hisfoe...

John Taylor (1638):Bull, Beare, and Horse, &c., p. 56

Queen Elizabeth entertainedvisiting dignitaries and ambassadorsat the baitings and there were officialcourt offices devoted to the games:Master of the Queen’s Game in ParisGarden, and Master, Guyder andRuler of our Beares and Apes. Baitingwas so esteemed by royalty that in1591, at the beginning ofShakespeare’s career, the growingpopularity of the theaters resulted ina royal edict closing theaters onThursdays, so that bull and bearbaiting would not be neglected. Bearswere not killed but were honored fortheir skill, and known by name: Nedof Canterbury, George of Cambridge,Don John, Beefe of Ipswich, RobinHood, Blind Robin, Judith of Cam-bridge, Kate of Kent, Nell of Holland,Sackerson, Will Tookey and BesseRunner (two white bears) and TomDogged.


Bears in Culture

Many theaters were owned byPhilip Heslow and his son-in-lawactor, Edward Allyn. Henslowe was arenowned theater manager, but hespent an equal amount of timeorganizing baiting in the ParisGarden. Henslowe and Allyn boughtthe lucrative office of Master of theRoyal Game of Bears, Bulls, andMastiff Dogs, thereby controlling thesport for several years. In 1610, theywere paid for the upkeep of twowhite bears and a young lion.

In 1613-1614 Henslowe andAlleyn built the Hope Theatre toreplace the Bear Garden. The BearGarden provided only baiting withjigs as interludes whereas the Hopecombined bear-baiting and theater.

Henslowe and Allyne and theacting companies using their theatershad access to bears; bears werecommon in entertainments of theperiod; and bears were trained toperform. Henslowe and Allyne’stheater inventory included: onebear’s head, one bear’s skin, onebull’s head, two lions’ heads, onelion’s skin, and the head of aCerberus (a mythical three-headeddog, perhaps one of the dogs used inthe baitings).

Shakespeare went to London in1594 to join one of the great theatri-cal companies of the day as actor,manager, and playwright. Beginningin 1599 his troupe put on plays atthe Globe and he worked in Henslowand Allyne’s Fortune Theatre. So, didhis stage direction intend that a well-known bear of the time be used in apopular entertainment; was a livebear used; or was a costume, derivedfrom a bear who fought in thebaitings, employed?

In 1642, the Puritans won out andboth theater and baitings werebanned.

Ile write of baiting of the Bulls andBeares.

It is a Game so ancient, that I wotRecords can scarce shew when we

usde it not.Except now, in these sad infectious

times,That heav’ns just hand doth plague

us for our crimes,The Game is by authority supprest;And Beares, and Bulls, and Dogs,

have too much rest,Through want of baiting growne to

such a straine,(Hard to be tam’d, or brought in

frame againe)Almost all mad for want of exercise,Filling, the Aire with roaring and

with cries,That those who neer the Bear-Garden

are dwellingDo heare such bellowing, bawling,

yawling, yelling,As if Hell were broake loose, or (truth

to speake)The Devils at foot ball were on

Barley-breake.There’s three couragious Bulls, as

ever plaid,Twenty good Beares, as er’e to stake

was taid.

As for the Game I boldly dare relate,’Tis not for Boyes, or fooles effemi-

nate,For whoso’ere comes thither, most

and least,May see and learne some courage

from a Beast:And ’tis not only a base Rabble Crew,That thither comes, It may be proved

true,That to the Beare-Garden comes now

and than,Some Gamesters worth ten thousand

pounds a man.For rough behaviour that’s no great

disgrace,There’s more hors-play us’d at each

deere hors-race,

More heads, or legs, or necks, arebroake each day,

At Cards, Dice, Tables, Bowles, orfoot-ball-play.

The Game hath been maintain’d,and will, we hope

Be so againe (now favour gives itscope)

For Kings, for Princes, for Ambassa-dors,

Both for our Countrymen, andforreigners.

Which hath been held, a Royalty andGame,

And (though ecclips’d) will be againethe same.

John Taylor (1638):Bull, Beare, and Horse, &c. p. 59-60

ReferencesBiggins, Dennis. 1962. “‘Exit Pursued

by a Beare’: A Problem in The Winter’sTale.” Shakespeare Quarterly 13: 3-13.

Browner, J. 1994. Wrong Side of theRiver: London’s disreputable South Bankin the 16th and 17th century. Essays inHistory Vol. 36. Corcoran Dept. ofHistory at the Univ/ of Virginia.

Evans, G.B. ed. 1997. The River-side Shakespeare. Second Edition,Houghton Mifflin.

Gurr, A. 1992. The Shakespeareanstage:1574-1642. Third Edition.Cambridge Press.

Kay, D. 1992. Shakespeare: HisLife, Work, and Era. Great Britain:Sidgwick & Jackson Ltd. New York:William Morrow, Quill Editions.

Taylor, J. 1638. Bull, Beare, andHorse, Cut, Curtaile, and Longtaile. WithTales, and Tales of Buls, Clenches, andFlashes. As also here and there a touch ofour Beare-Garden-sport; with the secondpart of the Merry conceits of Wit andMirth. Together with the Names of allthe Bulls and Beares. M. Parsons.London. http://www.jsu.edu/depart/english/gates/shak/bearjtay.htm

Thomson, L. 2000. Shakespeare andthe art of making an exit. University ofToronto Quarterly. Vol 69:2.


By Will TroyerUniversity of Alaska Press,2005, 130 pages, US$24.95ISBN IO: 1-889963-72-0

Will Troyer condenses a wealth ofbrown bear knowledge and experienceinto an easy-to-read and richlyillustrated publication. Troyer workedas both refuge manager and bearresearcher on the Kodiak NationalWildlife Refuge, conducted brown bearstudies in Katmai National Park and,after retirement, guided bear viewersand photographers on the AlaskaPeninsula. In the introduction hestates that the major goal of the bookis “to provide biological informationwithout losing readers in scientificjargon.” He works toward that goal inthe first nine chapters, drawing on hisexperience as well as research reportedby others. In the next two chapters hepursues a second goal—to documentattitudes and conflicts between bearsand people in the early years of Alaska.His thought is that we should notforget that historical perspective ashuman encroachment on bear habitatgives rise to new conflicts. His nextchapter, my favorite, recounts hishands-on adventures while conduct-ing research on Kodiak Island and theKatmai coast. In Chapters 13 and 14he provides advice, reinforced bypersonal experience, on how to travelin bear country, how to recognizedangerous situations and handle closeencounters, proper behavior of peopleat bear viewing sites, and how to safelyview and photograph brown bears. Inthe final chapter (15) Troyer makes aplea for enlightened conservation ofbrown bears.

Throughout the book Troyer beginseach chapter with a short story tohighlight the chapter theme. Some areactual experiences while others arefictional accounts based on knownbiology or behavior. All are entertaining.

Book Review Into Brown Bear Country

Troyer accomplished his goal oftaking scientific information andmaking it palatable to the public.There are only a few statements hemakes that I would question. Forexample, when writing about femalesrearing young he states that amother’s most difficult time is duringsalmon season. I’m not sure data areadequate to make that judgment andI suspect that the period immediatelyafter den emergence is an equallydifficult time. He also indicates thatbrown bears generally wean cubs inthe third spring whereas my work onKodiak Island indicated nearly half ofthe litters were weaned in the fourthspring. But, these are minor points.Some of the information Troyer relatescan be found in the many popularbear books now available but hisaccounts seem to have more cloutbecause of his background. My onlyconcern in the chapters on bearbiology is that, in a few instances,Troyer tended to assign humanthoughts and emotions to the bears.Hopefully, this won’t convey thewrong message to some readers. Whileit is important to dispel, in Troyer’swords, “the ferocious killer image sooften depicted in popular literature,” itis also important that people under-stand and respect bears as wildanimals.

In Chapter 10 Troyer writes aboutbear predation on ungulates, marinemammals, bird eggs and salmon, buta good portion of the chapter dealswith the conflict between bears andsalmon on Kodiak Island. This wasan important conflict and I think thelessons would have been conveyedmore effectively in a separate andperhaps expanded chapter. Anotherminor quibble on my part. The nextchapter, on the Kodiak bear-cattlewar, provides many insights into thepolitics of the cattle-bear controversyand how the conflict is linked to

establishment of the Kodiak NationalWildlife Refuge.

Chapter 12 on Troyer’s pioneeringbear research on Kodiak Island andKatmai National Park is a must readfor anyone who has been involved inthe capture and handling of bears.Try to imagine the adrenaline rushesinvolved in lassoing a snared bearand anesthetizing it with an ether-saturated bucket placed over thebear’s head. After I had finishedreading this chapter my only wish isthat he had included more stories.

In the final chapter Troyer relatessome of the important conservationefforts on behalf of coastal brownbears in Alaska. However, the tone issomewhat pessimistic and suggeststhat in the future bears may be greatlyreduced or exterminated in manyareas. My view is more optimistic.Brown bears on the Alaska Peninsula,Kodiak Island and Admiralty Islandsare healthy, well managed, and theirfuture seems bright.

Into Brown Bear County has goodinformation, captivating stories andgreat photos. I enjoyed the book.

Reviewed byVic BarnesU.S. Fish and Wildlife Service &U.S. Geological Service (retired)Email [email protected]

Publications


Dave TelescoBlack Bear Conservation CommitteePO Box 80442Baton Rouge, LA 70898, USAPhone (225) 763-5457Email [email protected]

The third edition of the Black BearManagement Handbook is nowavailable online at the Black BearConservation Committee’s (BBCC)updated website www.bbcc.org. TheHandbook is a resource for privatelandowners interested in managingtheir property in a way that benefitsthe federally threatened Louisianablack bear (Ursus americanus luteolus).It promotes good land stewardshipand encourages the use of incentiveprograms for wildlife habitat restora-tion and enhancement. The Hand-book also contains the most up-to-date information on Louisiana blackbear ecology, research, and nuisancebehavior. Since 1992, the BBCC hasdistributed over 16,000 copies of theHandbook. The third edition hasbeen completely updated with 62additional pages, including new in-depth sections on how to avoidnuisance bear behavior, descriptionsof habitat improvement incentiveprograms for Arkansas, Louisiana,Mississippi, and Texas, and many fullcolor maps and pictures. The Hand-book can be downloaded from thewebsite or a bound copy can berequested directly from the BBCC.

Bear HabitatManagementGuide Online

Grant MacHutchonSafety in Bear Country SocietyPhone (250) 339-5260Email [email protected]

On behalf of the Safety in BearCountry Society, I’d like to thank IBAfor its continued cooperation andhelp with the Safety in Bear Countryvideo series.

The Safety in Bear Country Societyis pleased to announce the release oftheir third program in the Safety inBear Country video series: Living inBear Country.

Living in Bear Country portrays theconsensus opinion of leading expertson living safely in bear country. Itprovides practical advice on ways tominimize problems with bears in theplaces that people live. This programshows how making a few simpleadjustments to our daily routine canreduce property damage and increasehuman safety. If bears start frequent-ing places where people live, then it’stime for the entire community toacknowledge the problem and worktogether. By living responsibly inbear country both individuals andcommunities can help preventconflicts with bears; making thingssafer for themselves and bears.

Living in Bear Country Video/DVD

Living in Bear Country is presentedby the Safety in Bear Country Societyin cooperation with the Interna-tional Association for Bear Researchand Management and was producedby Wild Eye Productions, Atlin, B.C.

Living in Bear Country is availablein VHF or DVD formats from Distri-bution Access at: toll-free 1-888-440-4640, Fax 1-780-440-8899,www.distributionaccess.com, [email protected]

The Safety in Bear CountrySociety’s other two programs, StayingSafe in Bear Country and Working inBear Country, also are available inVHF or DVD formats from Distribu-tion Access (They are no longerdistributed by Magic Lantern Com-munications).

For more information, pleasecontact myself (above) or one of theother members of the Safety in BearCountry Society:John HechtelEmail [email protected]&Stephen HerreroEmail [email protected]&Andy McMullenEmail [email protected]&Phil TimpanyEmail [email protected]

Publications

© C

ali

M. C

ork

ran


August 23-27, 2006Eger, Hungary

Owen T. Nevin, SecretaryEuropean SectionSociety for Conservation BiologyEmail [email protected]

The European Section of theSociety for Conservation Biology ispleased to announce the FirstEuropean Congress of ConservationBiology (ECCB). We are determinedto promote the development and useof science for the conservation ofEuropean species and ecosystems,and to make sure that conservationpolicy is firmly supported by the bestavailable scientific evidence. For thisreason, and because of the multi-disciplinary nature of conservationbiology, we aim to attract a widearray of academics, students, policymakers, stakeholders, naturalresource managers, and media andNGO representatives from all overEurope. We hope to establish amulti-disciplinary network ofconservationists across Europedrawing on global expertise inconservation biology. The ECCB willalso be hosting a meeting of theLarge Carnivore Initiative for Europeenabling you to gain the greatestbenefit from your travel budget!Deadline for submission of ab-stracts is February 2006.

For current information, visit theECCB web page (www.eccb2006.org).

First EuropeanCongress ofConservation Biology

Events

June 12-16, 2006Baddeck, Nova ScotiaCanada

Management Challenges ofExtremes in PopulationDensity

Nova Scotia Department ofNatural Resources is pleased to hostthe North American Moose Confer-ence and Workshop which will beheld at the Inverary Resort in thescenic community of Baddeck, NovaScotia. The conference will facilitatethe exchange of scientific andexperimental knowledge amongmoose biologists throughout NorthAmerica and beyond.

As conference plans develop, moredetailed information will be postedat: http://gov.ns.ca/natr/mooseconference.

Eastern Regional MeetingMarch 29–April 1, 2006Jacksonville ZooJacksonville, Florida, USA

Western Regional MeetingApril 25–28, 2006Vancouver AquariumVancouverBritish ColumbiaCanada

Call for Proposals for the2006 Regional Meetings

The Regional Program ConferenceCommittee invites your proposals.You can submit your proposalsonline at AZA’s website. http://www.aza.org/ProposalsRegional/. Thedeadline is December 16, 2005.

If you are interested in attending,details on each meeting are at AZA’swebsite http://www.aza.org on theConferences/Meetings page.

42nd NorthAmerican MooseConference

American Zoo andAquarium Assn.Regionals

© C

ath

erin

e N

ork

in


Ninth Western Black Bear Workshop:Human Dimensions in Black Bear Management

April 19-22, 2006Raton, New Mexico, USA

First Call for PapersHuman Dimensions in Black Bear

Management will be one of theworkshop sessions in addition to:science and research, populationmonitoring, and food habits. Ac-cepted papers will not be limited tothese topics. We will also have apanel discussion on bear manage-ment in human-dominated land-scapes.Oral Presentations

You are invited to submit abstractsfor 20-minute oral presentations (15minute presentation and 5 minutesfor questions).Poster Presentations

You are invited to submit abstractsfor poster presentations aboutongoing studies, new technology ormethods, management results, etc.Maximum size: 4 x 4 ft.State/Province Status Reports

State and province wildlifebiologists and managers are invitedto submit status reports for Americanblack bears in their jurisdiction forpublication in the proceedings(please send a report even if you arenot able attend the workshop).Emphasis should be placed on newresearch results, managementmilestones, and information gath-ered since the 2003 workshop.Abstracts Deadline January 31, 2006

Abstracts submitted will beprinted in the conference booklet,which will be part of the confer-ence registration packet. Weencourage oral presentations to besubmitted as full manuscripts forpublication in the proceedings.Poster presentations will be limitedto abstract publication. The abstractsubmission deadline for oral andposter sessions is January 31, 2006.

Please prepare abstracts usingMicrosoft Word software in Journal ofWildlife Management format (includ-ing email or telephone at the end ofthe contact information). Indicatewhether the abstract is for an oral orposter presentation. For oral presen-tations, please identify the present-ing author by printing “presenter”on the abstract at the end of theauthor’s contact information.

If you do not have access toemail, submit your abstract on afloppy disk or CD with a hard copy,and clearly label your submissionwith the name of the lead authorand abstract title. Faxes will not beaccepted. Authors will be notifiedabout the selection of their presen-tation by February 15, 2006.

The deadline for oral andposter presentation abstracts isJanuary 31, 2006 to:New Mexico Dept. of Game and FishAttn: Rick WinslowPO Box 25112Santa Fe, New Mexico 87504, USAPhone (505) 268-6347Email [email protected]

WorkshopRegistration

Registration is US$120 (US$65students) and attendees are respon-sible for lodging and meals.Lodging and Facility Information

The workshop is at:National Rifle AssociationWhittington CenterRaton, New Mexico, USA

Reservations will be acceptedbeginning February 1, 2006.

Contact:Wayne ArmacostNRA Whittington Centerphone (505) 445-3615Websitewww.nrawc.org.

Events

Costs are:26$/single bed;44$/double in Founder’s Cabins

and Competitor housing;14$/bed bunkhouses;18$/night RV space.

150+ rooms (250+ beds) areavailable; room sharing is encour-aged. This is not a hotel, bring yourown towels and soap! Raton (15minute drive) also has ample lodging.Meals

To be arranged on site. Dinnersprovided chuckwagon style as part ofthe registration fee. Raton (15-minute drive) has many restaurants.Travel

The nearest large airports areAlbuquerque International andDenver International. ColoradoSprings, a smaller airport, is closer.There will be shuttle service from theAlbuquerque airport.More Information

A workshop website is beingdeveloped. Contact Rick Winslowphone (505) 268-6347 or [email protected].


Toshiki AoiPlanning Committee ChairFaculty of AgricultureIwate University3-18-8 Ueda, Morioka-cityIwate 020-8550, JapanPhone & Fax +81 19 621 6136Email [email protected]&Koji YamazakiPlanning Committee Secretary GeneralZoological LaboratoryIbaraki Nature Museum700 Osaki, Bando-cityIbaraki 306-0622, JapanPhone +81 297 38 2000Fax +81 297 38 1999Email [email protected]

The 17th IBA conference will bethe first IBA conference held in Asia.The planning committee has beencoordinating with governmentagencies, NGOs, and local organiza-tions to arrange a successful meeting.We hope that the conference willinspire more research and effectivemanagement plans for bears in Asia.

Websites and UpdatesMore information for the confer-

ence will be announced in upcomingissues of this newsletter and on ourconference website http://www.japanbear.org/iba/.

For more details on Karuizawatown, visit http://www.town.karuizawa.nagano.jp/html/English/index.html.

17th International Conference on Bear Research and ManagementOctober 2-6, 2006Karuizawa Town, Nagano, Japan

Conference VenueKaruizawa is a popular resort town

located in the central part of Japan.Half of the town is within theJyoshin-etsu Plateau National Parkwhich has 2000 m mountains,several volcanoes, and many hotsprings. A rich natural environmentin the park includes healthy popula-tions of large mammals, such asJapanese black bears (Ursusthibetanus), wild boars (Sus scrofa),sika deer (Cervus nippon), Japaneseserows (Capricornis crispus), andJapanese macaques (Macaca fuscata).

Since the 1990s, bear-humanconflicts have become a majorconcern in Karuizawa. Food-condi-tioned bears repeatedly visit garbagestations in residential areas. In 1998,efforts to manage garbage bears werebegun by a private institute, estab-lished by a resort company.

The conference site, Hotel BlestonCourt of Hoshino Resort, has sophis-ticated facilities. There are manylodging facilities nearby. Leisureactivities available in the areainclude hiking and bicycle trails,tennis courts, golf courses, shoppingmalls, art museums, and historicsites.

Using the super-express rail fromNarita international Airport, it takesabout 2.5 hours to reach Karuizawa.

Conference ProgramThe conference will begin on

Monday morning October 2nd andwill end Friday afternoon October6th. The tentative schedule is:

Sunday October 1RegistrationIBA Council MeetingIce Breaker

Monday October 2RegistrationWelcomeOpening remarksOral session 1, 2Special Workshop:

Status and Conservationof Asian bears

Public Event:History of Human-bearInteraction in Japan

Tuesday October 3Oral session 3, 4, 5IBA Council MeetingPoster sessionStudent Session (with dinner)

Wednesday October 4Field TripPublic Event:

Education Program About Bearsfor Japanese Students

Banquet

Thursday October 5Oral session 6, 7Workshops A, B

Friday October 6Oral session 8, 9Closing paper for Asian bearsAwards ceremonyClosing remarks

Events


Events

Call for Papersand Posters

The conference willcover all aspects of bearbiology and conserva-tion. Topics coveringbiology, conservation,culture, and conflicts withhumans of the six bearspecies distributed in Asiancountries (polar, brown, Asianblack, sloth, sun, giant panda)are especially encouraged.

Presentation TypesIn addition to invited presen-

tations, three types of presenta-tions are open for submissions:oral, poster A, and poster B.

(1) Invited presentations (20minutes and five minutes forquestions)

(2) Oral presentations (15minutes and five minutes forquestions) intended for publica-tion in Ursus.

(3) Poster presentation A:intended for publication in Ursus.

(4) Poster presentation B: notintended for publication in Ursus.

The program committee will selectpresentations and determine if theyare oral or poster.

Abstract DeadlineMarch 31, 2006

Abstracts for oral and posterpresentations can be submittedfrom October 10, 2005 untilMarch 31, 2006 via the conferencewebsite: http://www.japanbear.org/iba/. The deadline for all abstractsis March 31, 2006. Any questionson presentations should be sent tothe program committee [email protected].

UrsusSubmission of a full manuscript to

Ursus (the peer-reviewed journal ofthe International Association forBear Research and Management) isencouraged and will be taken intoaccount in selecting presentationtypes. Consult the journal website(www.ursusjournal.com) for In-structions to Authors and otherinformation.

Authors submitting manuscriptsto Ursus are reminded that pagecharges ($90US/printed page) aretheir responsibility, and are encour-aged to budget accordingly. A goodrule of thumb is that 2.5 pages ofdouble-spaced manuscript textequals one page of final printed text.

continued...


17th International Conference on Bear Research and ManagementOctober 2-6, 2006Karuizawa Town, Nagano, Japan, cont’d.

Events

Schedule Workshops andMeetings by December 31

Six workshops are plannedduring the conference. Two work-shops have been scheduled:1. Conflicts Between Humans and

Bears,2. Trade of Bears and Bear Parts.

We invite suggestions for theremaining four workshops.

Please contact the program commit-tee ([email protected]) toschedule workshops and meetings.Requests should include an abstract,outline, and expected size of theworkshop or meeting. Deadline forrequests is December 31, 2005.

Tentative Proposal:Conflicts Between Humansand Bears Workshop

In Japan, there are many human-bear conflicts every year and manybears are being killed as a result.

These conflicts occur becausehuman residential areas shareborders with bear habitats, and thereis no system for managing human-bear conflicts. This situation seemsto be unique to Japan. In thisworkshop, we hope that participantsshare their views about the situationin Japan, discuss similarities anddissimilarities in other countries, anddevelop solutions for the problem.

Post ConferenceExcursions

After the conference, we will offera choice of several enjoyable,reasonably priced excursions. Sometrips will visit bear habitat guided byJapanese researchers. Please planyour schedule for the conferencenow! We look forward to seeing youin Japan!

Fees will automatically change at 00:01, April 1, 2006 Japan StandardTime (GMT+9).

Field trip, post conference excursion, and accommodation fees are notincluded.

Students must provide evidence of university registration at the on-siteregistration desk.

The deadline for application through this site is 12:00 noon, September20, 2006 Japan Standard Time (GMT+9). After that only on-site registra-tion is possible.

Banquet, field trip and/or post conference excursion application willnot be accepted after September 21, 2006.

Early Registration (on or before

March 31, 2006)

Standard Registration (on or after

April 1, 2005)Regular JP/19,000 JP/24,000Student JP/10,000 JP/15,000BanquetUS$1=~JP/110 (as of October 2005)

JP/5,000

Conference Fees


Events

direct flights from major cities. TheMonterrey Office of Conventionsand Visitors (OCV) has coordinatedUN meetings at the CINTERMEXConference Facility, and will helporganize the IBA conference at thesame venue (www.cintermex.com.mx/and www.parquefundidora.org/)including translation services(Spanish, Russian, Japanese, et al.),field trips, travel permits, andlogistics. Five-star lodging (US$80/night/2004) is connected to the 350-acre enclosed site, which includes aneco-park, museums, banks, restau-rants, family areas and an immacu-late, newly renovated internationalhostel (225 beds, US$6/night/2004).Cheaper hotels (US$30-45/night) arewithin a five-minute metro-ride.Corporate sponsorship shouldsupport conference meals, field trips,and special events, keeping registra-tion costs at a minimum. The OCV isfunding organization and printing.

18th International Conference on Bear Research and ManagementFall 2007Monterrey, Mexico

Monterrey’s two distinguisheduniversities are assisting so studentparticipation should be high. Directcommunication with the MexicanConsulate will ensure smooth travelfor non-North Americans. Canadianand USA visitors need a Tourist Visaon entry which requires a passport orbirth-certificate (2004 regulations).

Nearby are the historic downtown,natural, and scenic areas. Field tripswill include Chipinque, Sierra losPicachos, and Cumbres NationalParks (American black bear studyareas), Garcia Caves, Horsetail Fallsand Mina Archeological Area. Naturewatching includes red-frontedparrots, migratory songbirds andmonarch butterflies. The OCV willalso coordinate discount travel forthose wishing to visit more ofMexico.

Diana Doan-CriderKing Ranch Inst. for Ranch ManagementMSC 137Texas A&M University-KingsvilleKingsville, TX 78363-8202, USAPhone (361) 593-5407Fax (361) 593-5404Email [email protected]&David G. HewittCaesar Kleberg Wildlife Research Inst.MSC 218Texas A&M University-KingsvilleKingsville, TX 78363-8202, USAPhone (361) 593-3963Fax (361) 593-3924Email [email protected]&Rodrigo Medellin L.Centro de EcologiaUniversidad Autonoma de MexicoApartado Postal 70-27504510 Mexico, DF, [email protected] +52-5-5622-9042Fax +52-5-5622-8995

Monterrey, Mexico’s third largestcity (two hours south of the USA), isbeautifully situated in theTamaulipan thornscrub/Chihuahuandesert at 800 masl next to the SierraMadre Oriental Mountains whichrise dramatically 2,000 m to pine/oakforests. Autumn promises bearactivity and pleasant weather.

Nearby increasing bear-humanconflicts make interest in bears high.Bear research and management hasstate and federal attention, but thereis no active conservation strategy.This conference will focus attentionon bear conservation at a criticalpoint, and will encourage biologiststo seek bear research and manage-ment training.

Monterrey is very progressive, andconference facilities are ideal. Aninternational airport has 250 daily


IBA Officers & Council

Harry Reynolds, President*PO Box 80843Fairbanks, AK 99708, USAPhone (907) 479-5169Email [email protected]

Piero GenovesiVice President for Eurasia^INFS-National Wildlife InstituteVia Ca’ Fornacetta 9I-40064 Ozzano Emilia BO, ItalyPhone +39 051 6512228Fax +39 051 796628Email [email protected]

Karen NoyceVice President for Americas*Minnesota Dept. of Natural Resources1201 East Highway 2Grand Rapids, MN 55744, USAPhone (218) 327-4432Fax (218) 327-4181Email [email protected]

Joseph Clark, Secretary*U.S. Geological SurveySouthern Appalachian Field LaboratoryUniversity of Tennessee274 Ellington HallKnoxville, TN 37996, USAPhone (865) 974-4790Fax (865) 974-3555Email [email protected]

Frank van Manen, Treasurer*U.S. Geological SurveySouthern Appalachian Field LaboratoryUniversity of Tennessee274 Ellington HallKnoxville, TN 37996, USAPhone (865) 974-0200Fax (865) 974-3555Email [email protected]

^term expires 2008*term expires 2007

Andrew Derocher*Department of Biological ScienceUniversity of AlbertaEdmonton, Alberta T6G 2E9, CanadaPhone (780) 492-5570Fax (780) 492-9234Email [email protected]

Isaac Goldstein^Wildlife Conservation SocietyPO Box 833IPOSTEL MeridaEstado Merida, VenezuelaPhone 58-414-7176792Email [email protected]

John Hechtel*Alaska Department of Fish and Game1800 Glenn Highway, Suite 4Palmer, AK 99645, USAPhone (907) 746-6331Fax (907) 746-6305Email [email protected]

Djuro Huber^University of ZagrebBiology Department, Veterinary FacultyHeinzelova 55, 10000 ZagrebRepublic of CroatiaPhone 385 1 2390 141Fax 385 1 244 1390Email [email protected]

Ole Jakob Sørensen*Nord-trondelag University CollegeFaculty of Social Sciences andNatural ResourcesBox 2501N-7729 Steinkjer, NorwayPhone +4774112052Fax +4774112101Email [email protected]

Michael R. Vaughan^Virginia CooperativeFish and Wildlife Research Unit148 Cheatham Hall, Virginia TechBlacksburg, VA 24061-0321, USAPhone (540) 231-5046Fax (540) 231-7580Email [email protected]

Koji Yamazaki*Zoological LaboratoryIbaraki Nature Museum700 OsakiIwai-city, Ibaraki 306-0622, JapanPhone +81 297 38 2000Fax +81 297 38 1999Email [email protected]

Teresa DeLorenzo (non-voting)International Bear News Editor10907 N.W. Copeland St.Portland, OR 97229, USAPhone (503) 643-4008Fax (503) 643-4072Email [email protected]

Diana Doan-Crider (non-voting)IBA Student Affairs CoordinatorKing Ranch Institutefor Ranch ManagementMSC 137Texas A&M University-KingsvilleKingsville, TX 78363-8202, USAPhone (361) 593-5407 (361) 593-5401 KRIRM OfficeFax (361) 593-5404Email [email protected]

Richard B. Harris (non-voting)Ursus Editor218 EvansMissoula, MT 59801, USAPhone & Fax (406) 542-6399Email [email protected]


OFFICE USE ONLY

Date Received__________ Amount Received__________ Start Issue__________ End Issue__________ Date Entered DB__________

IBA Membership Application

November 2005 Vol. 14, No. 4

Please Complete Both Sides of Form. Mail or Fax to Address Below.

�

�

Name_________________________________________________________________________________________

Affiliation_____________________________________________________________________________________

Address_______________________________________________________________________________________

City________________________________________State/Province____________________________________

ZIP+4 or Postal Code______________________ Country__________________________________________

Telephone______________________________________Fax___________________________________________

Email_________________________________________________________________________________________

❏ New ❏ Renewal ❏ Address Change ❏ You may share my membership information with similar organizations.MEMBERSHIP

❏ Standard Membership US$50.00/year, US$45.00/year for three or more years.

Includes International Bear News & Ursus. # Years_____ US$_____________

❏ Please donate my copy of Ursus to a library or deserving recipient.

❏ Institutional Membership US$100.00/year, US$250.00/three years. # Years_____ US$_____________

❏ For those who cannot afford a Standard Membership, US$25.00/year.

Includes International Bear News. If needed, a free copy of Ursus may be requested. # Years_____ US$_____________

❏ Please send Ursus. I have no access to it, need it & cannot afford Standard Membership.

❏ Donation (if possible!) included to help defray costs of sending Ursus. US$____________GIFTS & CONTRIBUTIONS

❏ Gift Standard Membership US$50/year, US$45/year for three or more years.

Includes International Bear News & Ursus. # Years_____ US$_____________

❏ Gift Institutional Membership US$100/year or US$250/three years. # Years_____ US$_____________

❏ Gift Low-cost Membership US$25/year. Includes International Bear News, not Ursus. # Years_____ US$_____________

_____Gift Membership for: _____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____________________________________________

_____ IBA Please Choose a Deserving Gift Recipient.

❏ Tax Deductible Contribution to IBA General Fund. US$____________

❏ Tax Deductible Contribution to IBA Bear Conservation Fund. US$____________

TOTAL AMOUNT US$_____________

❏ Check or Money Order in US$ payable to IBA. ❏ MasterCard ❏ VISA

Cardholder Name________________________________________________________________________

Card #___________________________________________________________________________________

(government cards include customer #) ____________________________________________________

Signature __________________________________________________ Expiration Date_______________

™

SEND TO: Joseph Clark, IBA SecretaryUSGS-SAFL, University of Tennessee274 Ellington Hall, Knoxville, Tennessee 37996, USAFax (865) 974-3555 or Email [email protected] P

leas

e co

mp

lete

bo

th s

ides

of

for m

! D

ow

nlo

ad f

orm

at

ww

w.b

earb

iolo

gy.c

om

.


Please check columns in which you have expertise and/or are willing to assist/advise IBA:1. Expertise 2. Advise/Assist IBA 1. Expertise 2. Advise/Assist IBA

Accounting Legal

American Black Bear** years Legislative Processes

Asiatic Black Bear** years Life History

Andean Bear** years Management

Awards* Member Concerns*

Bear-Human Conflict Media Relations

Bears in Culture Mentoring/Training*

Behavior Newsletter*

Bylaws* Nominations*Brown Bear** years Nuisance/Damage Management

Conferences* Nutrition

Conservation* Organizational Development

Disease Pathology

Economic Development* Physiology

Education/Outreach* Polar Bear** years

Enforcement Policy*

Ethics* Population Dynamics

Evolution Quantitative Analysis

Field Research Sloth Bear** years

Financial Management Strategic Planning*

Food Habits Sun Bear** years

Genetics Toxicology

Giant Panda** years Travel Grants*

GIS Ursus Journal*

Grant Review* Veterinary

IBA History/Archive Website*

Habitat Evaluation Wildlife Rehabilitation

Husbandry/Zoo Other—Specify

**Please indicate number of years of experience with each species *Indicates an IBA committee

Please check all academic degrees earned: BA/BS_____MA/MS_____PhD/DVM_____Other (list)__________

Please list major field of study

Please list all countries in which you have worked with bears.

Please list languages in which you are fluent.

What changes/improvements would you like to see in the IBA (newsletter, Ursus, conferences, etc.)?

How can IBA better serve its membership and/or help you?

Check here to include your name in the IBA member directory

Please Complete Information on Both Sides of Form!

Thank you for completing the survey, please tear out and mail or fax!

IBA Member Application, cont’d.


™

Ple

ase

fill

ou

t fo

rm l

egib

ly!

IBA Publications Order Form

Form

als

o a

vail

able

at

ww

w.b

earb

iolo

gy.c

om

.

Ursus Journal & IBA Conference Proceedings* Cost* Quantity Total

4th 1980 Montana 1977 $30.00

5th 1983 Wisconsin 1980 $30.00

6th 1986 Arizona 1983 $30.00

7th 1987 Virginia/Yugoslavia 1986 $35.00

8th 1990 British Columbia 1989 $40.00

9th (1) 1994 Montana 1992 $45.00

9th (2) 1997 France 1992 $25.00

10th 1998 Ursus-Alaska/Sweden '95 $40.00

11th 1999 Ursus 11 $45.00

12th 2001 Ursus 12 $45.00

13th 2002 Ursus 13 $45.00

14th 2003 Ursus 14 Volumes 1 & 2 $45.00

15th 2004 Ursus 15 Volumes 1 & 2 $45.00

16th 2005 Ursus 16 inc.w/ Std. Membership $45.00*40% discount for 3 or more volumes, except Ursus 13, 14, 15 & 16. Less 40% Discount (-$)

Eastern Black Bear Workshop Proceedings, USA10th 1991 Arkansas 1990 $15.00

11th 1992 New Hampshire 1992 $15.00

13th 1996 Vermont 1996 $15.00

14th 1997 Mississippi 1997 $15.00

15th 2002 Massachusetts 1999 $15.00

16th 2001 South Carolina 2001 $15.00

Western Black Bear Workshop Proceedings, USA 4th 1993 California 1991 $15.00

5th 1995 Utah $15.00

6th 2003 Washington 1997 $15.00

7th 2001 Oregon 2000 $15.00

Safety in Bear Country Videos Staying Safe in Bear Country $20.00

Staying Safe in Bear Country & Working in Bear Country $30.00Staying Safe in Bear Country Public Performance Rights $69.00Staying Safe in Bear Country/Working in Bear Country PPR $129.00

Monographs of the IBAA Proposed Delineation of Critical Grizzly Bear Habitat in the Yellowstone Region (#1, 1977)

By F. Craighead $10.00The Status and Conservation of the Bears of the World (#2, 1989)

By C. Servheen $10.00Density-Dependent Population Regulation of Black, Brown and Polar Bears (#3, 1994)

Edited by M. Taylor $10.00Population Viability for Grizzly Bears: A Critical Review (#4, 2001)

By M. Boyce, B. Blanchard, R. Knight, C. Servheen $10.00

TOTAL US$

MasterCard_____ or VISA_____ Card # _________________________________________________

Expiration Date______________ Customer # (for government cards)______________________

Signature on Card____________________________________________________________________

Name

Address

City/State/Zipcode/Country

Phone, Fax & Email

SEND TO (Please allow 4 to 6 weeks for delivery): Terry D. White, Southern Appalachian Field Laboratory,

274 Ellington Hall, University of Tennessee, Knoxville, TN 37996, USA; Fax (865) 974-3555

Make US$ Check or Money Order PAYABLE to IBA

International Bear NewsThe Newsletter of the International Associationfor Bear Research and Management (IBA)10907 Northwest Copeland StreetPortland, Oregon 97229-6145, USA

ADDRESS SERVICE REQUESTED

NONPROFITU.S. POSTAGE PAID

PORTLAND, ORPERMIT NO. 1992

printed with soy-based ink on Vanguard Recycled Plus chlorine-free, acid-free, 10% hemp or flax, 90% post-consumer waste paper

IBA Mission StatementGoal: The goal of the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) is to promote the conservation

and restoration of the world’s bears through science-based research, management and education.Objectives: In support of this goal, IBA’s objectives are to:1. Promote and foster well-designed research of the highest professional standards.2. Develop and promote sound stewardship of the world’s bears through scientifically based population and habitat management.3. Publish and distribute, through its conferences and publications, peer-reviewed scientific and technical information of high quality addressing broad issues of ecology, conservation and management.4. Encourage communication and collaboration across scientific disciplines and among bear researchers and managers through conferences, workshops and newsletters.5. Increase public awareness and understanding of bear ecology, conservation, and management by encouraging the translation of technical information into popular literature and other media, as well as through other educational forums.6. Encourage the professional growth and development of our members.7. Provide professional counsel and advice on issues of natural resource policy related to bear management and conservation.8. Maintain the highest standards of professional ethics and scientific integrity.9. Encourage full international participation in the IBA through the siting of conferences, active recruitment of international members and officers, and through financial support for international research, travel to meetings, member ships, and journal subscriptions.10. Through its integrated relationship with the Bear Specialist Group of the World Conservation Union (IUCN)/Species Survival Commission, identify priorities in bear research and management and recruit project proposals to the IBA Grants Program that address these priorities.11. Build an endowment and a future funding base to provide ongoing support for IBA core functions and for the IBA Grants Program.12. Support innovative solutions to bear conservation dilemmas that involve local communities as well as national or regional governments and, to the extent possible, address their needs without compromising bear conservation, recogniz- ing that conservation is most successful where human communities are stable and can see the benefits of conservation efforts.13. Form partnerships with other institutions to achieve conservation goals, where partnerships could provide additional funding, knowledge of geographical areas, or expertise in scientific or non-scientific sectors.

Deadline for the February 2006 issue is January 15, 2006

About the International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA)The International Association for Bear Research and Management (IBA) is a non-profit tax-exempt (USA tax # 94-3102570)organization open to professional biologists, wildlife managers and others dedicated to the conservation of all bear species.The organization has over 550 members from over 50 countries. It supports the scientific management of bears throughresearch and distribution of information. The IBA sponsors international conferences on all aspects of bear biology, ecologyand management. The proceedings are published as peer-reviewed scientific papers in the journal Ursus.