Towards grizzly bear population recovery in a modern landscape

Coogan, Sean C. P.; Coops, Nicholas C.; Janz, David M.; Cattet, Marc; Kearney, Sean P.; Stenhouse, Gordon B.; Nielsen, Scott E.

doi:10.1111/1365-2664.13259

Cited by 9 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 26 publications

(28 reference statements)

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…But again, like many large carnivores, the majority of grizzly bears die from hunting and non-hunting anthropogenic mortality (e.g., from state wildlife agencies, poachers, train and vehicle collisions; Mattson and Merrill, 2002;Mowat and Lamb, 2016). Thus, land sharing between grizzly bears and humans is occurring in some areas, especially those with low human densities, and is currently limited primarily by human intolerance, habitat loss and modification, and climate change impacts to important food sources (Doak and Cutler, 2014;Bruskotter et al, 2016;Cristescu et al, 2016;Coops et al, 2018).…”

Section: Grizzly Bears In the Northern Rockiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Evidence exists for cautious optimism that coexistence is currently occurring because people (and their domestic livestock) are sharing landscapes with bears; humans are adapting to bears through non-lethal methods of preventing conflict; bears are apparently adapting to the presence of humans; and at least some ranchers accept some level of risk by allowing some depredations to occur without retaliation. Coexistence in this context is tenuous due to future environmental change from climate impacts on food sources and availability, human development in grizzly bear habitat and the possible interaction of these changing dynamics (e.g., reduced natural food availability may encourage shifts to anthropogenic food sources from cow carcasses to compost; Coops et al, 2018;Laufenberg et al, 2018). Regulatory changes to grizzly bear protections may also shift current humanbear dynamics in ways that are difficult to predict.…”

Section: Are We Coexisting With Grizzly Bears?mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are We Coexisting With Carnivores in the American West?

Lute

Carter

2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human-carnivore coexistence is an oft-stated goal but assumptions about what constitutes coexistence can lead to goal misalignment and undermine policy and program efficacy. Questions about how to define coexistence remain and specific goals and methods for reaching coexistence require refining. Co-adaptation, where humans adapt to carnivores and vice versa, is a novel socioecological framework for operationalizing coexistence but has yet to be comprehensively examined. We explored co-adaptation and two additional coexistence criteria through analysis of three case studies involving large carnivores in the American West, each addressing differing approaches on how and what it means to coexist with carnivores: Mexican gray wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) in Arizona and New Mexico, grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and coyotes (Canis latrans) throughout the American West. We used a multiple case study design that analyzed within and across cases to understand coexistence broadly. For each case, we asked (1) are landscapes shared in space and/or time, (2) is co-adaptation occurring and (3) do stakeholders consider risks tolerable? To identify whether coexistence criteria are met, we investigated peer-reviewed published articles and news media and conducted key informant interviews. We found clear evidence to support land-sharing between humans and coyotes and limited spatial overlap between humans and grizzly bears and Mexican gray wolves. Co-adaptation was variable for wolves, possible with bears and clearly evident with coyotes. Tolerable risk levels are likely achievable for bears and coyotes based on the available literature assessing risk perceptions and tolerance. But disagreement regarding risk management is a driver of conflict over wolves and persistent barrier to achieving coexistence among diverse stakeholders. Patterns in coexistence criteria did not emerge based on taxonomy or geography but may be influenced by body size and behavioral plasticity. The common key to coexistence with each considered carnivore may be in more equitable distribution of costs and benefits among highly diverse stakeholders. Better understanding of these three coexistence criteria and innovative tools to achieve them will improve coexistence capacity with controversial carnivores on public and private lands in diverse American West contexts and beyond.

show abstract

Section: Grizzly Bears In the Northern Rockiesmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Are We Coexisting With Grizzly Bears?mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are We Coexisting With Carnivores in the American West?

Lute

Carter

2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…However, policy implementation can be challenging given that different people have different knowledge and experiences with grizzly bears, different normative thoughts on what should be done about bear management, and different familiarity with recovery policy (Nate Webb, personal communications, 2011). Added to this, grizzly bear recovery is potentially even more challenging in BMAs with stable to increasing populations and increasing human-bear conflicts (Alberta Environment and Parks, 2016;Morehouse and Boyce, 2017;Coogan et al, 2018). Further compounding the complexity of policy implementation are the different views people across different BMAs may have of bear populations, which may influence their support or opposition to recovery actions (Hughes and Nielsen, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Hughes

Yarmey

Morehouse³

et al. 2020

Front. Ecol. Evol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Since their threatened species listing in 2010, grizzly bear recovery has been a controversial policy issue in Alberta, Canada particularly because this charismatic carnivore represents a diverse set of values, both positive (e.g., an icon of beauty and the wilderness) and negative (e.g., a safety threat and economic risk to peoples' livelihoods). Previous human dimensions research on grizzly bear conservation has accounted for the values and attitudes different groups of people hold for these bears, as well as their views on conflict mitigation strategies. However, the conservation literature is more limited in assessing the perspectives different people hold for grizzly bear conservation in a policy context. Arguably, understanding the policy landscape in which carnivore conservation occurs is important to achieve desired goals and objectives for species and the people expected to live with them and implement policy action. Using a case study approach between 2012 and 2014 and borrowing from the policy sciences problem-oriented framework, we identify the dominant problem perspectives in Alberta's grizzly bear recovery policy using document review and interviews with participants from government, the natural resource sector, and environmental non-governmental organizations. We identify that ordinary and constitutive problem perspectives share common features across participants in this study, including frustrations with lack of policy clarity, implementation inefficiencies and committed political and financial action, and perhaps even more important, the challenges in policy decision-making and governance. We discuss the importance of meaningful engagement of people who live with large carnivores and the impacts of conservation policy, which is applicable to both a local and global scale, as success in large carnivore conservation must include the people who will ultimately implement conservation action.

show abstract

“…Roads create forest edge habitat but also increase the risk of human-caused grizzly bear mortality, especially within 500 m of a road or 200 m of a trail [16,33]. Snow interacts with these variables and previous studies have commented on the potential influence of snow on spring habitat selection due to snow creating undesirable landscape conditions for bears [23,34–35]. Recent availability of fine-scale snow data may be key to better understanding spring selection [36].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Grizzly bear response to fine spatial and temporal scale spring snow cover in Western Alberta

et al. 2019

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Snow dynamics influence seasonal behaviors of wildlife, such as denning patterns and habitat selection related to the availability of food resources. Under a changing climate, characteristics of the temporal and spatial patterns of snow are predicted to change, and as a result, there is a need to better understand how species interact with snow dynamics. This study examines grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) spring habitat selection and use across western Alberta, Canada. Made possible by newly available fine-scale snow cover data, this research tests a hypothesis that grizzly bears select for locations with less snow cover and areas where snow melts sooner during spring (den emergence to May 31 st ). Using Integrated Step Selection Analysis, a series of models were built to examine whether snow cover information such as fractional snow covered area and date of snow melt improved models constructed based on previous knowledge of grizzly bear selection during the spring. Comparing four different models fit to 62 individual bear-years, we found that the inclusion of fractional snow covered area improved model fit 60% of the time based on Akaike Information Criterion tallies. Probability of use was then used to evaluate grizzly bear habitat use in response to snow and environmental attributes, including fractional snow covered area, date since snow melt, elevation, and distance to road. Results indicate grizzly bears select for lower elevation, snow-free locations during spring, which has important implications for management of threatened grizzly bear populations in consideration of changing climatic conditions. This study is an example of how fine spatial and temporal scale remote sensing data can be used to improve our understanding of wildlife habitat selection and use in relation to key environmental attributes.

show abstract

Towards grizzly bear population recovery in a modern landscape

Cited by 9 publications

References 26 publications

Are We Coexisting With Carnivores in the American West?

Are We Coexisting With Carnivores in the American West?

Problem Perspectives and Grizzly Bears: A Case Study of Alberta’s Grizzly Bear Recovery Policy

Grizzly bear response to fine spatial and temporal scale spring snow cover in Western Alberta

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About