Abstract

Many wildlife species are threatened in Asia, including the five species of terrestrial bears (Asiatic black, Ursus thibetanus; brown, U. arctos; sloth, Melursus ursinus; sun, Helarctos malayanus; giant panda, Ailuropoda melanoleuca): many populations of these bears are thought to be declining or imperiled by small population size. Here our aim is to document how population assessments have been conducted for bears in Asia. We searched the literature and identified 102 studies published during 1999–2021 that investigated the status of an Asian bear population; these occurred in 24 of the 32 bear range countries in Asia. At the most basic level, 11% of studies verified presence of bears in places where they were not known to exist. The most common objective (53% of papers) was a distribution map, often derived from presence locations in a habitat-based model. Occupancy studies (15%) used temporal (time stamps on images from cameras) or spatial (transect segments) replicates, but tended to focus on “use”, so detector spacing was sometimes not appropriate for occupancy. Purported population indices, such as sign density or camera trap encounter rates, were reported in 16% of studies. One third of studies provided a population estimate, but only 10 studies in two decades used a rigorous method (e.g., mark–recapture). Sign surveys and interviews were the most common methods for determining bear presence, and local interviews were heavily relied upon for assessing population trend. Camera trapping has become increasingly prevalent, but only one study obtained a population estimate using photographs to distinguish natural individual markings. Only three studies used hair traps to obtain DNA-based population estimates, and three other studies obtained population estimates from DNA in scats. Just three studies quantitatively measured change in population size or occupancy over time, and none of these showed a decline. Unique rangewide sign surveys of giant pandas showed significant geographic expansion. The opinions of experts and local people, now heavily relied upon for population assessments, are not reliable or sensitive enough for monitoring. Quantitative population assessments are desirable to direct conservation actions toward the most perilous situations, and provide a means to gauge the effectiveness of conservation actions. This paper demonstrates the paucity of rigorous monitoring of Asian bears, and leads off a series of papers that propose improved methods for assessing distribution, occupancy, and density.

Full Text
Published version (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