Biological consequences of relocating grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem
-
Published source details
Blanchard B.M. & Knight R.R. (1995) Biological consequences of relocating grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem. Journal of Wildlife Management, 59, 560–565.
Published source details Blanchard B.M. & Knight R.R. (1995) Biological consequences of relocating grizzly bears in the Yellowstone ecosystem. Journal of Wildlife Management, 59, 560–565.
Actions
This study is summarised as evidence for the following.
| Action | Category | |
|---|---|---|
|
Translocate problem mammals away from residential areas (e.g. habituated bears) to reduce human-wildlife conflict Action Link |
 |
-
Translocate problem mammals away from residential areas (e.g. habituated bears) to reduce human-wildlife conflict
A controlled study in 1975–1993 in a forested national park in Wyoming, USA (Blanchard & Knight 1995) found that grizzly bears Ursus arctos translocated away from bear-human conflict situations had lower survival rates than did non-translocated bears and over one third required multiple translocations. Translocated bears had a lower annual survival rate (83%) than that of non-translocated bears (89%). Of 81 translocated bears, 50 were moved once, 15 were moved twice, nine were moved three times, four were moved four times and three were moved five times. In a 20,000-km2 study area, 81 bears were translocated 3–128 km away from human conflict situations, such as having entered residential areas. With recaptures, there were 138 bear translocations in total between 1975 and 1993. Survival was compared with that of 160 bears captured and released without translocation during the same period. Bears were monitored by radio-tracking from an aircraft.
(Summarised by: Nick Littlewood)
