Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment

Context. To mitigate conservation conflicts, some jurisdictions translocate large carnivores into novel environments where they have no previous experience. Behavioural responses of these individuals are not typically monitored to evaluate the impacts of this management approach on the animals or po...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Wildlife Research
Main Authors: Gordon B. Stenhouse, Terrence A. Larsen, Cameron J. R. McClelland, Abbey E. Wilson, Karen Graham, Dan Wismer, Paul Frame, Isobel Phoebus
Format: Text
Language:English
Published: CSIRO Publishing 2022
Subjects:
Online Access:https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060
id ftbioone:10.1071/WR21060
record_format openpolar
spelling ftbioone:10.1071/WR21060 2024-06-02T08:15:37+00:00 Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment Gordon B. Stenhouse Terrence A. Larsen Cameron J. R. McClelland Abbey E. Wilson Karen Graham Dan Wismer Paul Frame Isobel Phoebus Gordon B. Stenhouse Terrence A. Larsen Cameron J. R. McClelland Abbey E. Wilson Karen Graham Dan Wismer Paul Frame Isobel Phoebus world 2022-03-30 text/HTML https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060 en eng CSIRO Publishing doi:10.1071/WR21060 All rights reserved. https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060 Text 2022 ftbioone https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060 2024-05-07T00:50:12Z Context. To mitigate conservation conflicts, some jurisdictions translocate large carnivores into novel environments where they have no previous experience. Behavioural responses of these individuals are not typically monitored to evaluate the impacts of this management approach on the animals or populations. Aims. We examined how grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) involved in conservation conflict responded to novel environments after translocation. Methods. We used GPS location data to compare grizzly bears translocated to a novel environment (n = 12) with bears resident within the new area (n = 12). Our analyses investigated differences between these groups in relation to exploration behaviour, habitat use and response to human-caused mortality risk. Key results. Translocated bears had higher movement rates, greater daily displacement and revisited areas less frequently than did resident bears. They spent more time in poor-quality habitat and the habitat used was of even lower quality in the second year after translocation. Translocated bears selected for agricultural lands and active oil and gas wellsites. They also spent more time in areas with higher potential mortality risk than resident bears. However, translocated bears avoided residential areas, which resident bears selected, and crossed roads at the same rate as did resident bears. Both groups avoided campgrounds and recreation sites. Only 25% of bears engaged in further conflict behaviour after translocation and 67% of translocated bears survived over the 2-year monitoring period. Conclusions. This work found differences in exploration behaviour and habitat use between translocated and resident bears, and showed that translocated bears can survive without reoffending during the critical few years following translocation. Implications. Managers and the public should recognise potential impacts for translocating grizzly bears. Translocated bears require time to explore and learn within their new environment, a process that can occur without repeating ... Text Ursus arctos BioOne Online Journals Wildlife Research 49 6 540 556
institution Open Polar
collection BioOne Online Journals
op_collection_id ftbioone
language English
description Context. To mitigate conservation conflicts, some jurisdictions translocate large carnivores into novel environments where they have no previous experience. Behavioural responses of these individuals are not typically monitored to evaluate the impacts of this management approach on the animals or populations. Aims. We examined how grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) involved in conservation conflict responded to novel environments after translocation. Methods. We used GPS location data to compare grizzly bears translocated to a novel environment (n = 12) with bears resident within the new area (n = 12). Our analyses investigated differences between these groups in relation to exploration behaviour, habitat use and response to human-caused mortality risk. Key results. Translocated bears had higher movement rates, greater daily displacement and revisited areas less frequently than did resident bears. They spent more time in poor-quality habitat and the habitat used was of even lower quality in the second year after translocation. Translocated bears selected for agricultural lands and active oil and gas wellsites. They also spent more time in areas with higher potential mortality risk than resident bears. However, translocated bears avoided residential areas, which resident bears selected, and crossed roads at the same rate as did resident bears. Both groups avoided campgrounds and recreation sites. Only 25% of bears engaged in further conflict behaviour after translocation and 67% of translocated bears survived over the 2-year monitoring period. Conclusions. This work found differences in exploration behaviour and habitat use between translocated and resident bears, and showed that translocated bears can survive without reoffending during the critical few years following translocation. Implications. Managers and the public should recognise potential impacts for translocating grizzly bears. Translocated bears require time to explore and learn within their new environment, a process that can occur without repeating ...
author2 Gordon B. Stenhouse
Terrence A. Larsen
Cameron J. R. McClelland
Abbey E. Wilson
Karen Graham
Dan Wismer
Paul Frame
Isobel Phoebus
format Text
author Gordon B. Stenhouse
Terrence A. Larsen
Cameron J. R. McClelland
Abbey E. Wilson
Karen Graham
Dan Wismer
Paul Frame
Isobel Phoebus
spellingShingle Gordon B. Stenhouse
Terrence A. Larsen
Cameron J. R. McClelland
Abbey E. Wilson
Karen Graham
Dan Wismer
Paul Frame
Isobel Phoebus
Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
author_facet Gordon B. Stenhouse
Terrence A. Larsen
Cameron J. R. McClelland
Abbey E. Wilson
Karen Graham
Dan Wismer
Paul Frame
Isobel Phoebus
author_sort Gordon B. Stenhouse
title Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
title_short Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
title_full Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
title_fullStr Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
title_full_unstemmed Grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
title_sort grizzly bear response to translocation into a novel environment
publisher CSIRO Publishing
publishDate 2022
url https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060
op_coverage world
genre Ursus arctos
genre_facet Ursus arctos
op_source https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060
op_relation doi:10.1071/WR21060
op_rights All rights reserved.
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1071/WR21060
container_title Wildlife Research
container_volume 49
container_issue 6
container_start_page 540
op_container_end_page 556
_version_ 1800739857573609472