Anda di halaman 1dari 12

Analysis on Population Trends and Management Implications for

Grizzly Bears in the Continental U.S.


April 2015
Prepared by
DANA N. ANDRES, Student, University of Idaho
College of Natural Resources, Ecology and Conservation Biology
Moscow, ID, USA

One of the largest and most commonly known mammals in the United States is the
grizzly bear (Ursus arctos horribils). The grizzly is the North American subspecies of the brown
bear. Due to their large body size, bears occupy around 50 to 300 square miles (USFWS 2007).
Though they are solitary animals, grizzly bears are not territorial and are able to overlap ranges.
The reproduction is slow, and occurs about every two to three years, after reaching sexual
maturity at four to nine years. Females will give birth during hibernation to one, two, or three
cubs. Along with a slow reproductive rate, cub mortality is high before reaching sexual maturity.
Grizzly bears are expected to live for 15 to 20 years. Grizzly bears are threatened in the United
States and less abundant than the black bear (Ursus americanus). Grizzly bears are also typically
brown, larger in size with have a hump on their shoulders, longer claws, and straighter toes in
comparison to the black bear (USFWS 2007). Morphologically, the grizzly bear differs from the
black bear, but are still commonly mistaken. Because of their life history traits morphology, and
physiology, these bears are difficult to gather population data on difficult for management of
population size. The management to increase populations is necessary to prevent the grizzly
bears extinction.
Grizzly bears are habitat generalists, thriving in a wider variety of environments and
making use of varying resources. The diet of a grizzly bear is highly omnivorous, including
berries, white pine nuts, and carcasses of fish and ungulates. Bears are seed dispersers and
nutrient providers based on these eating habits. Bears disperse and fertilize seeds within their
ecosystem, aiding in shrub density and species richness. By foraging through soil and by
dispersing dead carcasses (especially that of salmon), there is an increase in species richness and
amount of nitrogen in the soil (USFWS 2007). Grizzly bears are umbrella species; in conserving
the habitat of grizzly bears, many other species are protected and their interactions are integral to

their ecosystem. As keystone predators, grizzlies are important for regulating ungulate
population levels, and are overall indicators of ecosystem health (IDFG 2015). It is important to
preserve the remaining grizzly bear habitats due to their large ecological role. The conservation
of bears leads to healthy ecosystems and provides benefits for numerous species.
The grizzly bear is an icon of Americas wildlife that has drastically decreased in
population. In the 1920s, grizzly bears were widely distributed throughout the United States, and
rapidly declined in population. It was legal to hunt grizzly bears until the species was listed as
threatened under the Endangered Species Act in 1975 (Boyce and Waller 2003). There are
currently five isolated populations, the Selkirk area in northern Idaho and Washington, the
Cabinet-Yaak in Montana, Yellowstone in Wyoming and parts of Idaho and Montana, the
Northern Continental Divide in Montana, and the North Cascades in Washington (USFWS 2007)
Reduced to a small fraction of their natural habitat, grizzly bears require conservation
management. Grizzly bears are referred to as a conservation-reliant species by Scott et al.
(2005:384) because the species is at risk from persistent threats, requiring continuous
management to maintain population levels. Because of the factors that have decreased grizzly
populations and their significant role in the environment, many agencies have researched and
established management policies in hopes of restoring the population of this symbolic bear.
Throughout the habitats in the United States, there are around 500 grizzly bears at both
the Yellowstone and North Continental Divide habitats, 30 to 40 in each of the Cabinet-Yaak,
North Cascades, and Selkirk sites (USFWS 2007). There is no dispersal among these small
isolated populations. The fragmentation of the population compromises the viability of these
populations, reduces the ability to respond to climate change and could potentially reduce
biodiversity (Proctor et al. 2012). Because of low genetic diversity and low reproduction, the

population will likely become extinct before changes in climate selects for traits. There is also
less probability for breeding pairs to find each other, and over time, even lower genetic diversity
rates. Discontinuity in these habitats is caused by large spatial gaps expanding beyond grizzly
range, highways, valleys, and glaciers in the Northern Continental Divide habitat. Proctor et al.
(2012) found that grizzly bears are susceptible to population fragmentation because of their low
population density, slow reproductive rate, short dispersal, male-biased dispersal, and sensitivity
to anthropogenic mortality and habitat degradation. The lack of dispersals of these populations
will negatively influence the grizzly population and increase the likelihood of extirpation in these
areas.
Yellowstone National Park has the largest population in the contiguous United States.
Being one of the most well-known and visited national parks, the conservation of the grizzly bear
species is important to visitors, workers and general public. The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
has conducted numerous studies that serve as a model for other grizzly habitats (Boyce and
Waller 2003). It is one of the few viable grizzly habitats, providing results on variables that can
aid in the recovery of bear populations at other sites across the northwest. Though grizzly bear
numbers in the continental United States are low, populations in Yellowstone are slowly
increasing. Schwartz et al. (2006) noted that the grizzly bear population and range in
Yellowstone has been increasing over the past two decades and produced models analyzing the
variables responsible for this expansion. The best model indicated that high litter size, three cubs
per litter, was influenced by population size and Whitebark pine (Pinus albicaulis) cone
production. The Whitebark pine production increased litter size, but litter size decreased with an
increase in population, exhibiting a density-dependent relationship. This suggests that grizzly

bears reproduction and life history traits are flexible in order to maintain population density and
resource availability (Schwartz et al. 2006).
Roads through Yellowstone and proximity to humans negatively affect bear survival, as
well as terrain, vegetation and sex, age, and management history according to Schwartz et al. in
2010. Areas around Yellowstone, extending beyond to Idaho, Wyoming, and Montana were
chosen as sites to test variables that effect survivorship. The survival was highest in the regions
of federal wilderness outside the park, followed by national parks, multiple-use land, and
nonfederal land. Idaho had the lowest survival rates of the three states. The most important
predictor variables of survival were road densities outside of each habitat and the percent of
secure habitat in the bears home range. Public lands had the greatest effect on grizzly bear
survival due to the lack of management and high percent of nonsecure habitat. Protecting
habitats with the correct food resources (Whitebark Pine) and secure habitats from roads will
likely increase litter size and ultimately population size. Yellowstone, however, is a larger, more
protected ecosystem of grizzly bears, with more research on population trends and data than the
other ecosystems. Populations increased in Yellowstone because the research on the variables of
survivorship and reproductive success allowed managers to implement less human exposure and
more secure habitat. The same management has proven not sufficient for the smaller populations
of Cabinet-Yaak, Selkirk, North Cascades and the Northern Continental Divide.
Populations in northern Washington and Idaho have not seen increasing populations
despite management efforts starting in 1995 (Miller and France 2004). Reductions in road
densities in the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak ecosystems merely managed to keep the populations
from extinction. Extinction of small grizzly populations is more probable due to a pattern of
isolation, habitat shrinkage, and excessive human-caused mortality (Mattson and Merrill 2002).

Reducing habitat fragmentation in these areas will be the most successful in aiding recovery
(Singleton et al. 2004). Successful management in the Cabinet-Yaak and Selkirk region will
increase probability for reproduction, genetic diversity, while also reducing mortality. Proctor et
al. (2004) simulated management options for a sample population of around 50 bears, similar to
the Selkirk and Cabinet-Yaak populations. The simulation displayed the effects of population
augmentation, enhanced population interchange, and reduced mortality due to management
actions. The baseline simulation resulted in an 85 percent chance of extinction in the next 100
years. Over short-term, augmentation had the highest effect. The addition of females to the
population was not as effective over time as the reduction in mortality. From a management
perspective, using all three options would be ideal, but a reduction in mortality has a higher
probability of resulting in population growth. Kasworm et al. (2007) reported successful
augmentation of four female grizzly bears from Canada into the Cabinet-Yaak habitat, with
positive genetic results of reproduction from the introduced bears.
Humans have been negatively influencing the grizzly bear population since the settlement
of America. The movement and development of the west contributed to the extirpation of grizzly
bears in 98 percent of their historical habitat. Grizzly bears were killed for meat, pelts and when
they were seen as a threat to human safety and livelihood. Livestock depredation control, habitat
degradation and deterioration, commercial trapping, hunting, and death by threats and proximity
to humans resulted in the decrease from approximately 50,000 to 1,000 bears, where the
population currently remains USFWS 2015). Though the Endangered Species Act federally
protects grizzly bears, humans still have a significant impact on population numbers. Proximity
to humans, human interaction and development is the highest cause of mortality (USFWS 2015).

Solitary in nature, grizzly bears prefer to avoid human contact and development. Habitat
selection and range is heavily influenced by the proximity to humans; humans have been the
cause of all habitat loss for grizzly bears (McLellan 1990). Developing rural areas, recreational
activities and even creating logging roads are enough to drive a grizzly bear from their habitat,
and alter movement and behavioral patterns (Boulanger and Stenhouse 2014, McLellan 1990).
Roads also have increased mortality and body condition of the animals and created barriers to
habitats. Grizzly can be hit by traffic while crossing, or not cross onto formerly used habitat at
all. Wildlife managers in Canada built trans-Canada highways specifically for wildlife crossings
between homogenous ranges. The crossings resemble bridges with grass and trees across the top.
The highway in Banff, Canada observed 27 percent of the population of bears using the bridge
by hair sampling. Sawaya et al. (2014) found that the 27 percent that crossed the bridge
successfully reproduced. The grizzly bears rely on movement throughout this range and the
bridge has enabled the dispersal between the two areas. No highways exist in the United States
that provide movement across without exposure to traffic. Roads are detrimental to bear
populations, contributing to lower genetic diversity and survival rates when dispersal is not
easily accessible.
Bears have been increasingly closer to humans as development encroaches on habitats.
Humans have long seen grizzly bears as a threat, killing the animal when they are too close to
homes, recreational areas, or industrial developments. Grizzly bears are drawn to human food
sources such as dumps (Pierce and Van Daele 2006). Mortality and relocation is common in sites
where grizzlies are deemed a threat to the human population. As habitats are lost, more grizzly
bears will rely on dumps for food sources, continuing closer to rural developments. McLellan et
al. (1999) used radio telemetry on 388 bears. Of the 99 deceased, approximately 77 to 85 percent

were killed by humans. Even though the species is protected in the United States, bears are
hunted illegally for their pelts (IDFG 2015). Grizzlies can also be mistaken for black bears and
are accidentally shot as game. In the regions connected to Canadian ranges, such as the Selkirk
habitat, it is legal to hunt across the border (Weilgus et al. 1994). The whole range is influenced
by the mortality rates in Canada, though management has made it illegal in the United States.
Humans are the main cause of mortality in the grizzly bear populations, fragmenting habitats as
well as direct mortality.
The primary focus of the research conducted on grizzly bears in the United States is on
the factors that are effecting population growth, mortality, and dispersal. The extinction of the
populations of grizzly bears needs to be addressed by management of lands with existing
populations, with goals of improving mortality rates, population growth and increasing dispersal.
Because of low sample size, studies using Akaikes Information Criterion (AIC) were adjusted to
reflect values closer to true values. The wildlife biologists have identified that habitat
selection, reproduction and life history are factors influenced by humans and human impacts
(Weilgus et al. 1994, Schwartz et al. 2006, Schwartz et al. 2010). Human use in areas
surrounding grizzly bear habitats needs to be decreased in order to ensure that the recovery of the
population is successful (Miller and France 2004, Proctor et al. 2004, Schwartz et al. 2006,
Schwartz et al. 2010, Weilgus et al. 1994). The methods of resource selection functions and AICs
were used over a spatial range that the bears were occupying in Yellowstone and sampling fairly
small sample sizes, but were only tested in this ecosystem. The Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem
provided many baseline studies and research to address the current hazards to populations
(Schwartz et al. 2010), population trends (Schwartz et al. 2006) and the management required to
reduce human impacts in the park. The other ecosystems lack studies of their habitat growth, and

impacts. This is a need in the future because the Yellowstone population is larger and growing,
while the others are smaller and decreasing. The needs of each ecosystem may not be similar.
The births, deaths, and dispersal are not equal across all five ecosystems, requiring management
plans be specific to each population.
Grizzly bears area species of concern in all states they occur in. The Selkirk range,
Cabinet-Yaak and Northern Continental Divide ecosystems are somewhat contiguous with ranges
in Canada or cross the border where hunting is legal. Researchers need to focus on how to
minimize the effects of that mortality, while increasing growth in the United States. The
ecosystems that are bordering or include other countries or private land pose a challenge for
management. The recovery of these areas needs to be a collaboration of agencies and the public.
Another issue of research is the lack of census data for grizzly populations. It is very expensive
and dangerous to conduct mark- recapture methods on grizzly bears and estimating populations
may be harder with less funding. In order to apply management methods, researchers will need a
reliable method of capturing population trends in the smaller ecosystems, such as cameras or hair
sampling. The methodology of recovery management needs to shift to an interagency effort and
include sampling methods that increase sample size for accuracy.
U.S. Fish and Wildlife and each states department of fish and game are creating recovery
plans to establish a viable population size and a management plan to reach and maintain that
size. Finding the factors that most greatly affected the grizzly bears population was integral to
these recovery plans. In Idaho, there is a small number of grizzly bears in the northern Selkirk
ecosystem. However, U.S. Fish and Wildlife has proposed restoring grizzly bear populations in
the Bitterroot ecosystem of central Idaho, where there are currently no bears. Based on habitat
models of several known habitats and the Bitterroot system, Boyce and Waller (2003) analyzed

the quality of the Bitterroot system and probability of sustaining a viable grizzly population.
Boyce and Waller used resource selection functions with attributes of forage quality, road
density, and distance to roads, and elevation. According to the models, the Bitterroot is a better
habitat than that of Yellowstone. Wildlife managers in Idaho need to further research the
availability of the Bitterroot system to sustain bears and the likelihood of the grizzly bears
successfully reproducing after relocation.
Grizzly bears are an essential species for Northwest ecosystems. They are reliant on
conservation and management due to constant threat of extinction. The high mortality rates and
the slow reproduction rate decrease population growth in most of the remaining ecosystems.
Awareness of human impacts on this species would prove beneficial near the recovery areas.
Researchers study the variables needed to bolster population sizes, but have not had much
success because of outside influences of hunters, roads, private land and habitat loss. Sampling
methods that include larger sample sizes would increase the success rate of management
implications. Informing the public on the status of the populations and their importance can
influence the human impacts that are imposed on the population. The Grizzly bear population
can be restored and is important for the preservation of many other species and ecosystems.

10

Literature Cited
Boulanger, J., and G. B. Stenhouse. The Impacts of Roads on the Demography of Grizzly Bears in
Alberta. 2014. Public Library of Science One 9: 1-22.
Boyce, M. S., and J. S. Waller. 2003. Grizzly Bears for the Bitterroot: Prediciting potential abundance
and distribution. Wildlife Society Bulletin 31: 670-683.
Idaho Department of Fish and Game [IDFG]. 2015. Wildlife.
<http://fishandgame.idaho.gov/public/wildlife/?getPage=248>
Kasworm, W. F., M. F. Proctor, C. Servheen, and D. Paetkau. 2007. Success of Grizzly Bear Population
Augmentation in Northwest Montana. Journal of Wildlife Management 71: 1261-1266.
Mattson, D. J., and T. Merrill. 2002. Extirpations of grizzly bears in the contiguous United States.
Conservation Biology 16: 1123-1136.
McLellan, B. N. 1990. Relationships between Human Industrial Activity and Grizzly Bears. Bears: Their
Biology and Management 8: 57-64.
McLellan, B. N., F. W. Hovey, and J. G. Woods. 1999. Rates and Causes of Grizzly Bear Mortality in the
Interior Mountains of Western North America. Pages 673-678 in Proceedings of Biology and
Management of Species and Habitats at Risk, 1519 Feb. 1999, Kamloops, B.C.
Miller, S. D., and T. France. 2004. Small populations of grizzly bears in the US- Canada Transborder
Region: Introduction to Workshop Proceedings. Ursus:15: 61-64.
Proctor, M. F., C. Servheen, S. D. Miller, W. F. Kasworm, and W. L. Wakinen. 2004. A Comparative
analysis of Management options for grizzly bear conservation in the US-Canada Trans-border
area. Ursus 15: 145-160.
Proctor, M. F., D. Paetkau, B. N. McLellan, G. B. Stenhouse, K. C. Kendall, R. D. Mace, W. F.
Kasworm, C. Servheen, C. L. Lausen, and M. L. Gibeau. 2012. Population Fragmentation and

11

inter-ecosystem movements of Grizzly bears in Western Canada and the northern United States.
Wildlife Monogrpahs 180: 1-46.
Sawaya, M. A., S. T. Kalinowski, and A. P. Clevenger. 2014. Genetic connectivity for two bear species
at wildlife crossing structures in Banff National Park. The Royal Society 281: 1-10.
Schwartz, C. C., M. A. Haroldson, G. C. White, R. B. Harris, S. Cherry, K. A. Keating, D. Moody, and
C. Servheen. 2006. Temporal, Spatial and Environmental Influences on the Demographics of
Grizzly Bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Wildlife Monographs 161: 1-23.
Schwartz, C. C., M. A. Haroldson, and G. C. White. 2010. Hazards Affecting Grizzly Bear Survival in
the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Journal of Wildlife Management 74: 654-667.
Scott, J. M., D. D. Goble, J. A. Wiens, D. S. Wilcove, M. Bean, and T. Male. 2005. Recovery of
imperiled species under the Endangered Species Act: the need for a new approach. Frontiers in
Ecology and the Environment 3: 383389.
Singleton, P. H., W. L. Gaines, and J. F. Lehmkuhl. 2004. Landscape permeability for grizzly bear
movements in Washington and Southwestern British Columbia. Usrsus 15: 90-103.
United States Fish and Wildlife Service [USFWS]. 2007. Grizzly Bear Fact Sheet.
<http://www.fws.gov/mountain-prairie/species/mammals/grizzly/grizzly_bear.pdf>
Weilgus, R. B., F. L. Bunnell, W. L. Wakkinen, and P. E. Zager. 1994. Population Dynamics of Selkirk
Mountain Grizzly Bears. Journal of Wildlife Management 58: 266-272.

12

Anda mungkin juga menyukai