Abstract
We evaluated the potential of two noninvasive genetic sampling methods, hair traps and bear rub surveys, to estimate population abundance and trend of grizzly (Ursus arctos) and black bear (U. americanus) populations in Banff National Park, Alberta, Canada. Using Huggins closed population mark-recapture models, we obtained the first precise abundance estimates for grizzly bears ( = 73.5, 95% CI = 64–94 in 2006; = 50.4, 95% CI = 49–59 in 2008) and black bears ( = 62.6, 95% CI = 51–89 in 2006; = 81.8, 95% CI = 72–102 in 2008) in the Bow Valley. Hair traps had high detection rates for female grizzlies, and male and female black bears, but extremely low detection rates for male grizzlies. Conversely, bear rubs had high detection rates for male and female grizzlies, but low rates for black bears. We estimated realized population growth rates, lambda, for grizzly bear males ( = 0.93, 95% CI = 0.74–1.17) and females ( = 0.90, 95% CI = 0.67–1.20) using Pradel open population models with three years of bear rub data. Lambda estimates are supported by abundance estimates from combined hair trap/bear rub closed population models and are consistent with a system that is likely driven by high levels of human-caused mortality. Our results suggest that bear rub surveys would provide an efficient and powerful means to inventory and monitor grizzly bear populations in the Central Canadian Rocky Mountains.
Highlights
Carnivore populations are disappearing globally at an incredible rate due to anthropogenic causes [1], but dedicated monitoring programs rarely exist due to technical, financial, and logistical constraints [2]
We demonstrated that bear rubs have higher detection rates than hair traps for grizzly bears and low detection rates for black bears in Banff National Park (BNP)
We provided empirical evidence that the grizzly bear population may have declined in the Bow Valley between 2006 and 2008
Summary
Carnivore populations are disappearing globally at an incredible rate due to anthropogenic causes [1], but dedicated monitoring programs rarely exist due to technical, financial, and logistical constraints [2]. Noninvasive genetic sampling (NGS) provides an alternative to conventional bear population monitoring methods such as biomarking and radiotelemetry [6]. Genetic monitoring can provide information on abundance, distribution, vital rates, and genetic interchange, but wildlife managers have at times been reluctant to embrace NGS methods because they are relatively new [7,8]. Barbed wire hair traps developed by Woods et al [10] have become the standard for collecting genetic data to estimate bear population parameters in North America [11,12]; the relative strengths and weaknesses of alternative NGS monitoring methods such as surveys using bear rubs (i.e. trees, power poles, etc) must be evaluated before one method becomes well-established
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
