USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Kerry A. Gunther

Publications and source records attributed to Kerry A. Gunther.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2025

The influence of human presence and footprint on animal space use in US national parks

Given the importance of protected areas for biodiversity, the growth of visitation to many areas has raised concerns about the effects of humans on wildlife. In 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic led to temporary closure of national parks in the United States, offering a pseudonatural experiment to tease apart the effects of permanent infrastructure and transient human presence on animals. We compiled GPS tracking data from 229 individuals of 10 mammal species in 14 parks and used third-order hierarchical resource selection functions to evaluate the influence of the human footprint on animal space use in 2019 and 2020. Averaged across all parks and species, animals avoided the human footprint, whether the park was open or closed. However, although animals in remote areas showed consistent avoidance, on average those in more developed areas switched from avoidance to selection when protected areas were closed. Findings varied across species: some responded consistently negatively to the footprint (wolves, mountain goats), some positively (mule deer, red fox) and others had a strong exposure-mediated response (elk, mountain lion). Furthermore, some species responded more strongly to the park closure (black bear, moose). This study advances our understanding of complex interactions between recreation and wildlife in protected areas.

western United States↗
USGS2025

Female and male grizzly bears differ in their responses to low-intensity recreation in a protected area

Strategies animals use to navigate human-dominated landscapes frequently mimic anti-predator responses employed by prey species. Understanding how large carnivores respond to outdoor recreation is important for conservation, particularly in protected areas with preservation mandates. Visitation to Yellowstone National Park doubled from 1980 to 2015, increasing the need to examine potential changes in behavior of grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) in relation to human recreation sites (trails, backcountry campsites). We developed integrated step-selection functions to explore how recreation sites influenced the movement rate and selection by male and female grizzly bears. Further, we tested whether time of day (diurnal, crepuscular, nocturnal) and restrictions to human access (i.e., restricted, unrestricted) modified bear responses and then compared behaviors based on proximity to recreation sites. Male grizzly bears used trails to travel during crepuscular and nocturnal hours and exhibited more pronounced behavior in restricted areas compared with unrestricted areas, suggesting recreation in unrestricted areas influenced the behavior of male bears. In contrast, female bears varied their movement rate and selection of trails in restricted areas much more than in unrestricted areas, suggesting females may make security tradeoffs between male bears and people. Both sexes used trails, likely as energetically efficient travel corridors; however, our analyses did not indicate that bears spent time near backcountry campsites. The sex-based differences in selection and movement patterns associated with trails and campsites suggest a single management approach for recreation may not equally benefit all bears. Recreation impacts on wildlife are complex to characterize and predict, but simultaneously modeling movement and selection provides a more comprehensive assessment of strategies animals use to navigate perceived risk.

Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2023

Grizzly bear responses to restrictions of recreation in Yellowstone National Park

Avoiding humans will be more difficult and energetically costly for animals as outdoor recreation increases and people venture farther into wildland areas that provide high-quality habitat for wildlife. Restricting human access can be an attractive management tool to mitigate effects of human recreation activities on wildlife; however, the efficacy of such measures is rarely assessed. In 1982, Yellowstone National Park identified areas important to grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) to help protect critical grizzly bear habitat and reduce the likelihood of human injuries by bears. Referred to as bear management areas (BMAs), human access is restricted in these areas for 2–8 months each year, with timing and type of restrictions varying by area. We examined 2 datasets to evaluate grizzly bear selection of BMAs and differences of bear density in BMAs and non-BMAs. First, we used 17 years of recent global positioning system telemetry data for grizzly bears to assess their selection of BMAs during periods when human access was allowed, and when access was restricted. We used step-selection functions to test the hypothesis that bears spend time in places that allow them to avoid people and select quality food sources. There was support that grizzly bears differentially select for BMAs regardless of whether human access was restricted at the time, compared with areas outside BMAs, and that selection changed with sex and season. Only males during the summer and hyperphagic seasons changed their selection of BMAs based on whether access restrictions were in place, and overall, male bears preferred unrestricted BMAs (BMAs without restrictions in place). Females preferentially selected BMAs regardless of whether the area had access restrictions in place only during the mating season. Individuals varied widely in their preference for BMAs and access restrictions. Bears likely choose to spend time in BMAs based on available food resources rather than restrictions to human access. Supporting this interpretation, our analyses indicated that a greater proportion of BMA in an area was associated with higher densities of grizzly bear. Thus, restrictions to human access likely help reduce the potential for human–bear interactions, accomplishing one of the original objectives for establishing the BMAs.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2023

Spatial variation in density of American black bears in northern Yellowstone National Park

The quality and availability of resources are known to influence spatial patterns of animal density. In Yellowstone National Park, relationships between the availability of resources and the distribution of grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) have been explored but have yet to be examined in American black bears ( Ursus americanus ). We conducted non-invasive genetic sampling during 2017–2018 (mid-May to mid-July) and applied spatially explicit capture-recapture models to estimate density of black bears and examine associations with landscape features. In both years, density estimates were higher in forested vegetation communities, which provide food resources and thermal and security cover preferred by black bears, compared with non-forested areas. In 2017, density also varied by sex, with female densities being higher than males. Based on our estimates, the northern range of Yellowstone National Park supports one of the highest densities of black bears (20 black bears/100 km 2 ) in the northern Rocky Mountains (6–12 black bears/100 km 2 in other regions). Given these high densities, black bears could influence other wildlife populations more than previously thought, such as through displacement of sympatric predators from kills. Our study provides the first spatially explicit estimates of density for black bears within an ecosystem that contains the majority of North America's large mammal species. Our density estimates provide a baseline that can be used for future research and management decisions of black bears, including efforts to reduce human–bear conflicts.

Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2023

Evidence for density-dependent effects on body composition of a large omnivore in a changing Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Understanding the density-dependent processes that drive population demography in a changing world is critical in ecology, yet measuring performance–density relationships in long-lived mammalian species demands long-term data, limiting scientists' ability to observe such mechanisms. We tested performance–density relationships for an opportunistic omnivore, grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos , Linnaeus, 1758) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, with estimates of body composition (lean body mass and percent body fat) serving as indicators of individual performance over two decades (2000–2020) during which time pronounced environmental changes have occurred. Several high-calorie foods for grizzly bears have mostly declined in recent decades (e.g., whitebark pine [ Pinus albicaulis , Engelm, 1863]), while increasing human impacts from recreation, development, and long-term shifts in temperatures and precipitation are altering the ecosystem. We hypothesized that individual lean body mass declines as population density increases (H1), and that this effect would be more pronounced among growing individuals (H2). We also hypothesized that omnivory helps grizzly bears buffer energy intake from changing foods, with body fat levels being independent from population density and environmental changes (H3). Our analyses showed that individual lean body mass was negatively related to population density, particularly among growing-age females, supporting H1 and partially H2. In contrast, population density or sex had little effect on body fat levels and rate of accumulation, indicating that sufficient food resources were available on the landscape to accommodate successful use of shifting food sources, supporting H3. Our results offer important insights into ecological feedback mechanisms driving individual performances within a population undergoing demographic and ecosystem-level changes. However, synergistic effects of continued climate change and increased human impacts could lead to more extreme changes in food availability and affect observed population resilience mechanisms. Our findings underscore the importance of long-term studies in protected areas when investigating complex ecological relationships in an increasingly anthropogenic world.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2023

Enhancements to population monitoring of Yellowstone grizzly bears

In the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, counts of female grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) with cubs-of-the-year (females with cubs) from systematic aerial surveys and opportunistic ground sightings are combined with demographic data to derive annual population estimates. We addressed 2 limitations to the monitoring approach. As part of a rule set, a conservative distance of > 30 km currently is used as a threshold to assign sightings to unique females with cubs, resulting in underestimation bias. Using telemetry locations of females with cubs collected during 1997–2019, we created 1,000 data sets for each of 5 levels of simulated number of females with cubs, simulated sightings by selecting among these locations, and evaluated the classification performance of alternative distance criteria (12–30 km). Under all scenarios, 12–16-km criteria maximized classification performance and minimized estimation bias; the 16-km criterion was optimal for current conditions and sampling efforts. Our second objective was to test generalized additive models (GAMs) as a flexible trend analysis technique. We simulated 1,000 time series for each of 10 scenarios (10, 15, and 20% decline over periods of 5, 10, and 15 yrs, plus stability), applied GAMs, and assessed metrics associated with the posterior distribution of the instantaneous rate of change. We detected declines among > 99.6% of replicates under the 15 and 20% decline scenarios and in 84.7–94.7% of replicates under the 10% decline scenario. From decline onset to first detection, periods ranged from 3.7 (20% decline over 5 yrs) to 11.1 (10% decline over 15 yrs), with 3.9–8.8 years mean duration of detection events. The GAM approach allows detection of directional changes in population trend, including early warning metrics, and stabilization after such changes. Retrospective application of the 16-km distance criterion and GAMs resulted in higher population estimates and growth rates than are reported using current methods.

Wyoming↗
USGS2022

Rub tree use and selection by American black bears and grizzly bears in northern Yellowstone National Park

Several of the world's bear species exhibit tree-rubbing behavior, which is thought to be a form of scent-marking communication. Many aspects of this behavior remain unexplored, including differences in rub tree selection between sympatric bear species. We compiled rub tree data collected on Yellowstone National Park's Northern Range (USA) and compared rub tree selection of sympatric American black bears ( Ursus americanus ) and grizzly bears ( U. arctos ) at local and landscape scales. During 2017 and 2018, we identified 217 rub trees and detected black bears at 117 rub trees and grizzly bears at 18 rub trees, based on genetic analysis of collected hair samples. Rub trees generally were located in areas with gentle slopes and close to existing animal trails. Trees selected by black bears were typically in forested areas, whereas trees selected by grizzly bears were in forested and more open areas. Use of rub trees varied seasonally and between sexes for black bears, but seasonal data were inconclusive for grizzly bears. Black bears showed preferences for certain tree species for rubbing, but we did not find evidence that rub tree selection by grizzly bears differed among tree species. Both bear species selected trees that lacked branches on the lower portions of tree trunks and the maximum rub height was consistent with the body length of the bear species that used the tree. Although the sample size for grizzly bears was small, identifying the species and sex of bears based on genetic analysis enhanced interpretation of rub tree use and selection by bears. Scent-marking by black bears and grizzly bears on similar rub objects in well-traversed areas likely serves to enhance communication within and between the 2 species.

Wyoming↗
USGS2021

Responses of American black bears to spring resources

In temperate regions of the world, food resources are seasonally limited, which causes some wildlife species to seek out nutrient-rich resources to better meet their caloric needs. Animals that utilize high-quality resources may reap fitness benefits as they prepare for mating, migration, or hibernation. American black bears ( Ursus americanus ) are omnivores that consume both plant and animal food resources to meet macronutrient needs. Black bears capitalize on high-quality food resources, such as soft mast in summer and hard mast during autumn, but we know less about the importance of resource quality during spring. Therefore, we sought to understand the relationship between the spatiotemporal variation in the availability of food and resource selection of black bears during spring. We also aimed to infer potential changes in foraging tactics, from opportunistic foraging to more active selection. Although black bears are described as opportunistic omnivores, we hypothesized they select areas with high-quality forage when available. We instrumented 7 black bears with GPS collars in 2017 and 2018 and estimated fine-scale resource selection with integrated step-selection functions. We found evidence that black bear movements were influenced by forage quality of vegetative food resources. However, we failed to find evidence that black bears actively alter their movements to take advantage of seasonal neonate elk. Although black bears represent a substantial cause of mortality for neonate elk, we found that black bears likely feed on neonates encountered opportunistically while traveling between patches of high-quality forage. Few studies have shown evidence of an omnivorous species capitalizing on spatiotemporal variation in forage quality, yet our data suggest this may be an important strategy for species with diverse diets, particularly where resources are seasonally limited.

Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2021

A reassessment of Chao2 estimates for population monitoring of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

The Yellowstone Ecosystem Subcommittee (YES) asked the Interagency Grizzly Bear Study Team (IGBST) to re-assess a technique used in annual population estimation and trend monitoring of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE). This technique is referred to as the Chao2 approach and estimates the number of females with cubs-of-the-year (hereafter, females with cubs) and, in association with other demographic data, is used by the IGBST to produce annual population estimates. Females with cubs are an easily recognizable population segment, and trends for this reproductive segment of the population are assumed to be representative of trend for the entire population. The overarching objective of the analyses presented in this report was to provide a more accurate representation of the GYE grizzly bear population using the current methodologies in place. Specifically, we addressed two limitations of the current Chao2 approach: 1) underestimation bias associated with a distance criterion used to differentiate annual sightings of females with cubs into unique individuals and 2) limitations of the model-averaging approach to effectively distinguish among potential future population trajectories (decline, stability, and growth). The first issue addressed in this report is the underestimation bias associated with the rule set that Knight et al. (1995) developed to differentiate sightings of females with cubs into unique individuals (i.e., unique family groups). The rule set was originally designed to be conservative by reducing the risk of identifying more females with cubs than actually existed, primarily through use of a distance criterion of 30 km to separate sightings of unique females. This approach resulted in an underestimation bias, and previous research demonstrated that this bias increases with increasing number of females with cubs. Using location data from radio-marked females with cubs, we evaluated alternative distance criteria by simulating scenarios with varying numbers of true females with cubs and sightings. Findings from these analyses demonstrate that bias in estimates of females with cubs can be substantially reduced by changing the 30-km distance criterion in the rule set to 16 km, which produced relatively unbiased estimates. Findings also indicate, however, the importance of adaptability with regard to the distance criteria because of the complex relationships and biases among the various parameters involved in estimation of unique females with cubs. The total number of annual sightings and the true number of females with cubs play particularly important roles. Whereas these analyses remind us that there is no perfect approach to estimating the number of females with cubs from sightings under various scenarios, they provide us with new tools to determine when and how to adapt the monitoring program. The second issue we were tasked to investigate was the potential for improvement of the technique referred to as model-averaging, which serves to smooth relatively high variation in annual estimates. This technique was chosen by YES as the basis for monitoring the Yellowstone grizzly bear population, as described in the 2016 Conservation Strategy. This choice was made in part because the technique has been well documented and population estimates derived from counts of females with cubs are conservative. Using simulations of population trends, we demonstrate why the model-averaging technique currently used cannot distinguish between plausible future trend scenarios. As a suitable alternative to model averaging, we propose the use of generalized additive models (GAMs). Using a suite of simulated trend dynamics relevant to management, we demonstrate GAM performance for tracking trends in females with cubs within the context of the annual monitoring program. We demonstrate the ability to not only document directional changes in population trend but also patterns of stabilization or resiliency after such changes. Furthermore, the proposed monitoring framework provides objective measures useful for early detection of directional changes in trend. The new framework is flexible, allowing retrospective analysis of Chao2-based estimates and future applications to time series of other population metrics, such as vital rates. The aforementioned updates provide us with new tools to determine when and how to adapt the monitoring program. Within the context of current monitoring protocols and effort, and considering the full suite of simulations presented in this report and previous studies, the IGBST plans to incorporate the following changes to the population monitoring protocol: 1) modify the distance criterion, starting with 16 km under current sampling conditions and 2) revise the population monitoring framework using GAMs as the basis for smoothing of annual estimates and detecting trends and changes in trend. Implementation of the 16-km distance criterion combined with use of GAM techniques would affect some of the population metrics (e.g., annual population size and uncertainty, population trend, mortality rates) used to inform management responses. A primary consideration is that the 16-km distance criterion results in total population estimates derived from the Chao2 estimates that are greater than those we have reported in the past. This increase is due to a change in the implementation of the technique and more accurately represents the number of females with cubs in the GYE grizzly bear population. Additionally, interpretation of retrospective trend patterns may change due to the combination of a different distance criterion and enhanced trend monitoring based on the GAM approach we present here. Implementation will require relatively minor changes in the monitoring protocols described in Appendices B and C of the 2016 Conservation Strategy. Finally, we note that the IGBST has ongoing investigations into the merits of an Integrated Population Model (IPM), for which annual Chao2-based estimates are important input data. The IGBST plans to continue those investigations using the 16-km distance criterion to derive Chao2 estimates.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2020

Brown Bear (Ursus arctos; North America)

This chapter comprises the following sections: names, taxonomy, subspecies and distribution, descriptive notes, habitat, movements and home range, activity patterns, feeding ecology, reproduction and growth, behavior, parasites and diseases, status in the wild, and status in captivity.

Book chapter↗
USGS2020

Potential for recreational restrictions to reduce grizzly bear–caused human injuries

In 2011, 2 hikers were killed by grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) in separate incidents on backcountry trails in Hayden Valley, Yellowstone National Park, USA (YNP). Hayden Valley provides prime habitat for grizzly bears and is known to have high densities of bears. During 1970–2017, 23% (10 of 44) of all backcountry grizzly bear–inflicted human injuries and fatalities in YNP occurred in the valley even though it comprises only 1% of the park. In addition, 3 of the last 5 fatal bear attacks in the park occurred in the valley. We evaluated retrospectively whether restrictions and closures on visitor recreational activity would have prevented many of these injuries. We considered prohibitions on recreational activity during seasons when bears forage for specific high-quality foods; potential closures that coincided with the times of day and year bears were most active in the valley; and visitor use restrictions that would have prevented the most common human behaviors associated with grizzly bear–caused human injuries. The food-based closure that may have prevented the most human injuries occurred during middle to late summer when bears scavenge bison (Bison bison) carcasses that result from annual rutting behavior of bison in the valley. However, safety precautions such as hiking in groups of >=3, remaining on maintained trails, and carrying bear spray would likely reduce the frequency of bear-inflicted human injuries more than most food-based seasonal closures. Our analyses provide broadly applicable findings regarding use of visitor behavior restrictions and seasonal closures to reduce the risk of bear-inflicted human injuries.

Wyoming↗
USGS2016

Detecting grizzly bear use of ungulate carcasses using global positioning system telemetry and activity data

Global positioning system (GPS) wildlife collars have revolutionized wildlife research. Studies of predation by free-ranging carnivores have particularly benefited from the application of location clustering algorithms to determine when and where predation events occur. These studies have changed our understanding of large carnivore behavior, but the gains have concentrated on obligate carnivores. Facultative carnivores, such as grizzly/brown bears ( Ursus arctos ), exhibit a variety of behaviors that can lead to the formation of GPS clusters. We combined clustering techniques with field site investigations of grizzly bear GPS locations ( n = 732 site investigations; 2004–2011) to produce 174 GPS clusters where documented behavior was partitioned into five classes (large-biomass carcass, small-biomass carcass, old carcass, non-carcass activity, and resting). We used multinomial logistic regression to predict the probability of clusters belonging to each class. Two cross-validation methods—leaving out individual clusters, or leaving out individual bears—showed that correct prediction of bear visitation to large-biomass carcasses was 78–88%, whereas the false-positive rate was 18–24%. As a case study, we applied our predictive model to a GPS data set of 266 bear-years in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (2002–2011) and examined trends in carcass visitation during fall hyperphagia (September–October). We identified 1997 spatial GPS clusters, of which 347 were predicted to be large-biomass carcasses. We used the clustered data to develop a carcass visitation index, which varied annually, but more than doubled during the study period. Our study demonstrates the effectiveness and utility of identifying GPS clusters associated with carcass visitation by a facultative carnivore.

Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem↗
USGS2016

New challenges for grizzly bear management in Yellowstone National Park

A key factor contributing to the success of grizzly bear Ursus arctos conservation in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem has been the existence of a large protected area, Yellowstone National Park. We provide an overview of recovery efforts, how demographic parameters changed as the population increased, and how the bear management program in Yellowstone National Park has evolved to address new management challenges over time. Finally, using the management experiences in Yellowstone National Park, we present comparisons and perspectives regarding brown bear management in Shiretoko National Park.

Bulletin of the Shiretoko Museum↗
USGS2014

Influence of whitebark pine decline on fall habitat use and movements of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

When abundant, seeds of the high-elevation whitebark pine (WBP; Pinus albicaulis ) are an important fall food for grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem. Rates of bear mortality and bear/human conflicts have been inversely associated with WBP productivity. Recently, mountain pine beetles ( Dendroctonus ponderosae ) have killed many cone-producing WBP trees. We used fall (15 August–30 September) Global Positioning System locations from 89 bear years to investigate temporal changes in habitat use and movements during 2000–2011. We calculated Manly–Chesson (MC) indices for selectivity of WBP habitat and secure habitat (≥500 m from roads and human developments), determined dates of WBP use, and documented net daily movement distances and activity radii. To evaluate temporal trends, we used regression, model selection, and candidate model sets consisting of annual WBP production, sex, and year. One-third of sampled grizzly bears had fall ranges with little or no mapped WBP habitat. Most other bears (72%) had a MC index above 0.5, indicating selection for WBP habitats. From 2000 to 2011, mean MC index decreased and median date of WBP use shifted about 1 week later. We detected no trends in movement indices over time. Outside of national parks, there was no correlation between the MC indices for WBP habitat and secure habitat, and most bears (78%) selected for secure habitat. Nonetheless, mean MC index for secure habitat decreased over the study period during years of good WBP productivity. The wide diet breadth and foraging plasticity of grizzly bears likely allowed them to adjust to declining WBP. Bears reduced use of WBP stands without increasing movement rates, suggesting they obtained alternative fall foods within their local surroundings. However, the reduction in mortality risk historically associated with use of secure, high-elevation WBP habitat may be diminishing for bears residing in multiple-use areas.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2014

Contrasting past and current numbers of bears visiting Yellowstone cutthroat trout streams

Spawning cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarkii bouvieri ) were historically abundant within tributary streams of Yellowstone Lake within Yellowstone National Park and were a highly digestible source of energy and protein for Yellowstone’s grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) and black bears ( U. americanus ). The cutthroat trout population has subsequently declined since the introduction of non-native lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush), and in response to effects of drought and whirling disease ( Myxobolus cerebralis ). The trout population, duration of spawning runs, and indices of bear use of spawning streams had declined in some regions of the lake by 1997–2000. We initiated a 3-year study in 2007 to assess whether numbers of spawning fish, black bears, and grizzly bears within and alongside stream corridors had changed since 1997– 2000. We estimated numbers of grizzly bears and black bears by first compiling encounter histories of individual bears visiting 48 hair-snag sites along 35 historically fished streams.We analyzed DNA encounter histories with Pradel-recruitment and Jolly-Seber (POPAN) capture-mark-recapture models. When compared to 1997–2000, the current number of spawning cutthroat trout per stream and the number of streams with cutthroat trout has decreased. We estimated that 48 (95% CI¼42–56) male and 23 (95% CI¼21–27) female grizzly bears visited the historically fished tributary streams during our study. In any 1- year, 46 to 59 independent grizzly bears (8–10% of estimated Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem population) visited these streams. When compared with estimates from the 1997 to 2000 study and adjusted for equal effort, the number of grizzly bears using the stream corridors decreased by 63%. Additionally, the number of black bears decreased between 64% and 84%. We also document an increased proportion of bears of both species visiting front-country (i.e., near human development) streams. With the recovery of cutthroat trout, we suggest bears that still reside within the Lake basin will readily use this high-quality food resource.

Journal of Wildlife Management↗
USGS2014

Dietary breadth of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

Grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem (GYE) are opportunistic omnivores that eat a great diversity of plant and animal species. Changes in climate may affect regional vegetation, hydrology, insects, and fire regimes, likely influencing the abundance, range, and elevational distribution of the plants and animals consumed by GYE grizzly bears. Determining the dietary breadth of grizzly bears is important to document future changes in food resources and how those changes may affect the nutritional ecology of grizzlies. However, no synthesis exists of all foods consumed by grizzly bears in the GYE. We conducted a review of available literature and compiled a list of species consumed by grizzly bears in the GYE. We documented >266 species within 200 genera from 4 kingdoms, including 175 plant, 37 invertebrate, 34 mammal, 7 fungi, 7 bird, 4 fish, 1 amphibian, and 1 algae species as well as 1 soil type consumed by grizzly bears. The average energy values of the ungulates (6.8 kcal/g), trout (Oncorhynchus spp., 6.1 kcal/g), and small mammals (4.5 kcal/g) eaten by grizzlies were higher than those of the plants (3.0 kcal/g) and invertebrates (2.7 kcal/g) they consumed. The most frequently detected diet items were graminoids, ants (Formicidae), whitebark pine seeds (Pinus albicaulis), clover (Trifolium spp.), and dandelion (Taraxacum spp.). The most consistently used foods on a temporal basis were graminoids, ants, whitebark pine seeds, clover, elk (Cervus elaphus), thistle (Cirsium spp.), and horsetail (Equisetum spp.). Historically, garbage was a significant diet item for grizzlies until refuse dumps were closed. Use of forbs increased after garbage was no longer readily available. The list of foods we compiled will help managers of grizzly bears and their habitat document future changes in grizzly bear food habits and how bears respond to changing food resources.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗
USGS2013

Methods to estimate distribution and range extent of grizzly bears in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem

The distribution of the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem grizzly bear ( Ursus arctos ) population has expanded into areas unoccupied since the early 20th century. Up-to-date information on the area and extent of this distribution is crucial for federal, state, and tribal wildlife and land managers to make informed decisions regarding grizzly bear management. The most recent estimate of grizzly bear distribution (2004) utilized fixed-kernel density estimators to describe distribution. This method was complex and computationally time consuming and excluded observations of unmarked bears. Our objective was to develop a technique to estimate grizzly bear distribution that would allow for the use of all verified grizzly bear location data, as well as provide the simplicity to be updated more frequently. We placed all verified grizzly bear locations from all sources from 1990 to 2004 and 1990 to 2010 onto a 3-km × 3-km grid and used zonal analysis and ordinary kriging to develop a predicted surface of grizzly bear distribution. We compared the area and extent of the 2004 kriging surface with the previous 2004 effort and evaluated changes in grizzly bear distribution from 2004 to 2010. The 2004 kriging surface was 2.4% smaller than the previous fixed-kernel estimate, but more closely represented the data. Grizzly bear distribution increased 38.3% from 2004 to 2010, with most expansion in the northern and southern regions of the range. This technique can be used to provide a current estimate of grizzly bear distribution for management and conservation applications.

Wildlife Society Bulletin↗