Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents

Abstract Protection of humans and livestock from disease has been used to justify many aggressive and costly wildlife control programs. Recent regulatory changes on livestock carcass disposal aimed at controlling the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Canada have led to substantial increa...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Wildlife Society Bulletin
Main Authors: Northrup, Joseph M., Boyce, Mark S.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2012
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wsb.167
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1002%2Fwsb.167
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wsb.167
id crwiley:10.1002/wsb.167
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.1002/wsb.167 2024-06-02T08:15:36+00:00 Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents Northrup, Joseph M. Boyce, Mark S. 2012 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wsb.167 https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1002%2Fwsb.167 https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wsb.167 en eng Wiley http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor Wildlife Society Bulletin volume 36, issue 3, page 499-505 ISSN 1938-5463 journal-article 2012 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.167 2024-05-03T11:10:40Z Abstract Protection of humans and livestock from disease has been used to justify many aggressive and costly wildlife control programs. Recent regulatory changes on livestock carcass disposal aimed at controlling the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Canada have led to substantial increases in exposed livestock carcass dumps. Such “boneyards” are known to attract grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ), which leads to human–bear conflict. We compiled data on human–grizzly bear interactions in an agricultural landscape in southwestern Alberta over a 12‐year time period (1999–2010) overlapping regulatory changes. Boneyards increased markedly after regulations were enacted and grizzly bear incidents increased correspondingly, particularly those related to dead livestock. The high rate of conflict results in frequent management captures, relocations, and translocations that create a likely population sink. Although work is underway to reduce human–bear interactions, revisions are needed to recent regulatory changes, such that they take wildlife into account. When combined with programs aimed at ensuring proper storage of attractants, we believe that such policy reforms will make it possible for humans to coexist with grizzly bears in southwestern Alberta. © 2012 The Wildlife Society. Article in Journal/Newspaper Ursus arctos Wiley Online Library Canada Wildlife Society Bulletin 36 3 499 505
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Abstract Protection of humans and livestock from disease has been used to justify many aggressive and costly wildlife control programs. Recent regulatory changes on livestock carcass disposal aimed at controlling the spread of bovine spongiform encephalopathy in Canada have led to substantial increases in exposed livestock carcass dumps. Such “boneyards” are known to attract grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ), which leads to human–bear conflict. We compiled data on human–grizzly bear interactions in an agricultural landscape in southwestern Alberta over a 12‐year time period (1999–2010) overlapping regulatory changes. Boneyards increased markedly after regulations were enacted and grizzly bear incidents increased correspondingly, particularly those related to dead livestock. The high rate of conflict results in frequent management captures, relocations, and translocations that create a likely population sink. Although work is underway to reduce human–bear interactions, revisions are needed to recent regulatory changes, such that they take wildlife into account. When combined with programs aimed at ensuring proper storage of attractants, we believe that such policy reforms will make it possible for humans to coexist with grizzly bears in southwestern Alberta. © 2012 The Wildlife Society.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Northrup, Joseph M.
Boyce, Mark S.
spellingShingle Northrup, Joseph M.
Boyce, Mark S.
Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
author_facet Northrup, Joseph M.
Boyce, Mark S.
author_sort Northrup, Joseph M.
title Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
title_short Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
title_full Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
title_fullStr Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
title_full_unstemmed Mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
title_sort mad cow policy and management of grizzly bear incidents
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2012
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wsb.167
https://api.wiley.com/onlinelibrary/tdm/v1/articles/10.1002%2Fwsb.167
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/wsb.167
geographic Canada
geographic_facet Canada
genre Ursus arctos
genre_facet Ursus arctos
op_source Wildlife Society Bulletin
volume 36, issue 3, page 499-505
ISSN 1938-5463
op_rights http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/termsAndConditions#vor
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.167
container_title Wildlife Society Bulletin
container_volume 36
container_issue 3
container_start_page 499
op_container_end_page 505
_version_ 1800739839079874560