Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: 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. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 59, 560–565


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Translocate problem mammals away from residential areas (e.g. habituated bears) to reduce human-wildlife conflict Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

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)