SEARCH · USGS Science

Results for “Ursus”

Search indexed USGS publications on groundwater, aquifers, geologic maps, mineral resources and earthquakes. Explore source records by subject and place.

SourceResearch connectionFrom yearThrough year

Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.

At least 433 records · Page 24Linked to original sources

USGS1990

Predatory behavior of grizzly bears feeding on elk calves in Yellowstone National Park

Grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos horribilis ) were observed preying on elk calves ( Cervus elaphus ) on 60 occasions in Yellowstone National Park, with 29 confirmed kills. Some bears were deliberate predators and effectively preyed on elk calves for short periods each spring, killing up to 1 calf daily. Primary hunting techniques were searching and chasing although some bears used a variety of techniques during a single hunt. They hunted both day and night and preyed on calves in the open and in the woods. Excess killing occurred when circumstances permitted. One bear caught 5 calves in a 15-minute interval. Elk used a variety of antipredator defenses and occasionally attacked predacious bears. The current level of this feeding behavior appears to be greater than previously reported. This is probably related to the increased availability of calves providing a greater opportunity for learning, and the adaptation of a more predatory behavior by some grizzly bears in Yellowstone.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗

USGS1990

Bear use of cutthroat trout spawning streams in Yellowstone National Park

Grizzly bears ( Ursus arctos ) and black bears ( U. americanus ) prey on spawning cutthroat trout ( Oncorhynchus clarki , formerly known as Salmo clarki ) in tributary streams of Yellowstone Lake. These tributary streams were surveyed from 1985 to 1987 to determine the presence and level of trout spawning activity and bear use. Indices were developed to enumerate spawner density and levels of bear use. Of 124 known tributaries of Yellowstone Lake, 48% had a spawning run. Of these spawning streams, 93% had associated bear activity, and 61% had associated evidence of bear fishing. Bears were apparently using more spawning streams and fish compared to 10 years earlier. Bear use of cutthroat trout spawning streams appeared to be largely a positive function of volumetric spawner density. We hypothesize that abundance and quality of stream-side vegetation relative to other foraging options influenced bear use. Intra- and interspecific avoidance among bears was suggested by patterns of spawning stream use. Less bear use of spawning streams than expected occurred within 1 km of park developments.

Idaho, Montana, Wyoming↗

USGS2020

Resource use by American black bear in suburbia: A landholder step selection approach

Range expansion of American black bear ( Ursus americanus ; bear) and residential development has resulted in a growing presence of bear in suburbia. Suburban landscapes exhibiting patchworks of variable-sized parcels and habitats and owned by landowners with diverse values, can create large areas of suitable habitats with limited public access. These landscapes thereby may limit the effectiveness of hunting as a traditional bear population management tool. Managers require better information regarding suburban landowner attitudes regarding hunting before implementing changes intended to increase bear harvest to management populations. To address this need, in 2013, we surveyed landowners to identify properties that allowed bear hunting in three suburban areas of Pennsylvania where bear sightings have increased. We then used location data obtained for 29 bears equipped with global positioning system (GPS) transmitters from 2010 to 2012 to model their resource selection in the study area. We assessed the influence of hunting access, housing density, land cover, and topographic variables on radio-marked black bear monitored 10 days before, during, and after the bear hunting season. We found that resource selection of radio-marked bear was similar for all three periods and bears selected for forested land in all three seasons and herbaceous cover in the pre- and hunting periods. Resource selection by bears was not influenced by whether land was open or closed to hunting in the pre-hunting and hunting periods, but in the post-hunting period lands not open to hunting had support as the second-best model. All radio-marked bears in our study were vulnerable to harvest. However, they did not change resource selection during the hunting season nor did they avoid areas open to hunting. Integrating human dimension data with bear habitat use studies, especially in suburban landscapes, has the potential to address bear space use and population management needs often overlooked in traditional research designs.

Pennsylvania↗

USGS2023

Sea-ice conditions predict polar bear land use around military installations in Alaska

Polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ) are threatened by sea-ice loss due to climate change, which is concurrently opening the Arctic to natural resource extraction and a broader scope of national security responsibilities. Mitigating the risk of human–bear conflicts is an emerging challenge as many polar bears spend longer ice-free summers on land where they have limited access to food and come into more frequent contact with people. We investigated a suite of physical and ecological variables that influence the timing of polar bear arrival on, and departure from, land using remote-sensing data on sea-ice extent and satellite telemetry data from 72 radio-collared adult female polar bears from 1986 to 2015. Analyses encompassed the coastline of the Southern Beaufort Sea north of Alaska, USA, and focused on zones within a 35-km radius (mean daily travel distance of a polar bear) of 5 military installations. Sea ice in the Southern Beaufort Sea retreated approximately 1 month earlier in spring, and reformed 1 month later in fall, in 2015 compared to 1979. In generalized linear mixed models, the most important predictors of polar bear arrival and departure were the dates of sea-ice breakup and formation, respectively, in localized marine areas surrounding each military zone. Region-wide sea-ice conditions also influenced land use, although to a lesser extent. We found that polar bears spent longer periods on land in the military zones compared to outside the zones, which may reflect increased land use in areas with human activity and potential attractants (noting that some military installations were in proximity to other human settlements). Our results demonstrate that the timing of polar bear land use in northern Alaska is influenced by sea-ice conditions on multiple spatial scales. This information can be used to predict and manage the presence of polar bears around military installations and other places of interest.

Alaska↗

USGS2014

Demography and behavior of polar bears summering on land in Alaska

Polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the southern Beaufort Sea population (SB) are spending increased time on the coastal North Slope of Alaska between July and October (Gleason and Rode 2010). The duration spent on land by polar bears, satellite collared on the sea-ice in the spring, during the summer and fall has also increased (USGS, unpublished data; Figure 1). This change in polar bear ecology has relevance for human-bear interactions, subsistence harvest, prevalence of defense kills, and disturbance associated with existing land-based development [e.g., National Petroleum Reserve of Alaska (NPRA), Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR)], Native Alaskan communities, recreation (ANWR) and tourism (e.g., bear viewing in Kaktovik, AK). These activities have the potential to impact, in new ways, the status of the entire SB population. Concomitantly, the change in polar bear ecology will impact these human activities, and a base-line characterization of this phenomenon can better inform mitigation (e.g., industry permitting under the Endangered Species Act and Marine Mammal Protection Act). In this study we aim to characterize the demography, habitat-use, and aspects of foraging ecology and health of polar bears spending fall on land. The SB population is characterized by a divergent-sea ice ecology, where polar bears typically spend most of the year on the sea-ice, even as the pack ice retreats northward, away from the coast, to its minimal extent in September (Amstrup et al. 2008; Durner et al. 2009). From 2000 – 2005, using coastal aerial surveys, Schliebe et al. (2008) observed between 3.7 and 8% of polar bears from SB (~ 60 – 120 of 1526, Regher et al. 2006) on land during the autumn. Sighting probability was not estimated in these surveys, and therefore the numbers represent minimum numbers of bears on land. Our analysis of USGS data suggest an annual average of 15% (± 3%, SE) of polar bears satellite-tagged on the spring-time sea ice (total n = 18 of 124 satellite tags, 2003 – 2009) come to land during July – October. Based on these data, and an assumption that bears satellite-tagged on the spring time sea ice are representative of the entire SB population of independent bears, there would be an average of 230 bears on land each fall. In contrast to the SB population, in five of the world’s 19 polar bear populations (Obbard et al. 2010), polar bears spend significant periods of time on land (1 – 5 months) when ice completely melts. In these seasonal-ice populations (Amstrup et al. 2008), polar bears are largely in a hypophagic condition (e.g., Hobson et al. 2009), relying on fat stores from the spring hyperphagic season, when ringed seals (Phoca hispida) pup. In general, these seasonal-ice populations are demographically productive (Taylor et al. 2005), although recently an increase in the ice-free season has resulted in a population decline in western Hudson Bay (Stirling et al. 1999; Regehr et al. 2007). There have been measured declines in the body condition and productivity of polar bears in SB, and changes in these parameters have been linked to declining optimal ice habitat (e.g., Durner et al. 2009; Regehr et al. 2010). We do not understand the relationship between land-use and the overall status of the population. Individual polar bears that use land may have increased or decreased fitness, in comparison to polar bears that remain on ice in the autumn. This project, which focuses on the biology of animals that spend time on-shore, will help address this question. This project is funded by the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM) under Agreement No. M09PG00025 and the USGS Outer Continental Shelf Program (OCS) for FY 2009-2014. Parts of this study are also funded by US Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Marine Mammals Management; the Bureau of Land Management; and the North Slope Borough, Department of Wildlife Management. This report is comprehensive, describing results for achieving the overlap

Beaufort Sea, Chukchi Sea↗

USGS2006

Estimating Potential Effects of Hypothetical Oil Spills on Polar Bears

Much is known about the transport and fate of oil spilled into the sea and its toxicity to exposed wildlife. Previously, however, there has been no way to quantify the probability that wildlife dispersed over the seascape would be exposed to spilled oil. Polar bears, the apical predator of the arctic, are widely dispersed near the continental shelves of the Arctic Ocean, an area also undergoing considerable hydrocarbon exploration and development. We used 15,308 satellite locations from 194 radiocollared polar bears to estimate the probability that polar bears could be exposed to hypothetical oil spills. We used a true 2 dimensional Gausian kernel density estimator, to estimate the number of bears likely to occur in each 1.00 km2 cell of a grid superimposed over near shore areas surrounding 2 oil production facilities: the existing Northstar oil production facility, and the proposed offshore site for the Liberty production facility. We estimated the standard errors of bear numbers per cell with bootstrapping. Simulated oil spill footprints for September and October, the times during which we hypothesized effects of an oil-spill would be worst, were estimated using real wind and current data collected between 1980 and 1996. We used ARC/Info software to calculate overlap (numbers of bears oiled) between simulated oil-spill footprints and polar bear grid-cell values. Numbers of bears potentially oiled by a hypothetical 5912 barrel spill (the largest spill thought probable from a pipeline breach) ranged from 0 to 27 polar bears for September open water conditions, and from 0 to 74 polar bears in October mixed ice conditions. Median numbers oiled by the 5912 barrel hypothetical spill from the Liberty simulation in September and October were 1 and 3 bears, equivalent values for the Northstar simulation were 3 and 11 bears. In October, 75% of trajectories from the 5912 barrel simulated spill at Liberty oiled 9 or fewer bears while 75% of the trajectories affected 20 or fewer polar bears when we simulated an October spill at the Northstar site. Northstar Island is nearer the active ice flaw zone than Liberty. Simulations suggested that oil spilled at Northstar would spread more effectively and more consistently into surrounding areas. Also, polar bear densities are consistently higher near Northstar. Oil spills simulated for the Liberty site were more erratic in the areas they covered and the numbers of bears impacted, and numbers of bears hypothetically exposed were usually smaller. Methods described here are broadly applicable to other dispersed marine wildlife. Key words: Arctic, Beaufort Sea, clustering, kernel, management, oil spill, polar bears, population delineation, radiotelemetry, satellite, smoothing, Ursus maritimus

Report↗

USGS2007

Supplemental materials for the analysis of capture-recapture data for polar bears in Western Hudson Bay, Canada, 1984-2004

Regehr and others (2007, Survival and population size of polar bears in western Hudson Bay in relation to earlier sea ice breakup: Journal of Wildlife Management, v. 71, no. 8) evaluated survival in relation to climatic conditions and estimated population size for polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in western Hudson Bay, Canada. Here, we provide supplemental materials for the analyses in Regehr and others (2007). We demonstrate how tag-return data from harvested polar bears were used to adjust estimates of total survival for human-caused mortality. We describe the sex and age composition of the capture and harvest samples and provide results for goodness-of-fit tests applied to capture-recapture models. We also describe the capture-recapture model selection procedure and the structure of the most supported model, which was used to estimate survival and population size.

Data Series↗

USGS2012

Polar bear and walrus response to the rapid decline in Arctic sea ice

The Arctic is warming faster than other regions of the world due to positive climate feedbacks associated with loss of snow and ice. One highly visible consequence has been a rapid decline in Arctic sea ice over the past 3 decades - a decline projected to continue and result in ice-free summers likely as soon as 2030. The polar bear ( Ursus maritimus ) and the Pacific walrus ( Odobenus rosmarus divergens ) are dependent on sea ice over the continental shelves of the Arctic Ocean's marginal seas. The continental shelves are shallow regions with high biological productivity, supporting abundant marine life within the water column and on the sea floor. Polar bears use sea ice as a platform for hunting ice seals; walruses use sea ice as a resting platform between dives to forage for clams and other bottom-dwelling invertebrates. How have sea ice changes affected polar bears and walruses? How will anticipated changes affect them in the future?

Alaska↗

USGS2015

Changing Arctic Ecosystems: Updated forecast: Reducing carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions required to improve polar bear outlook

The Arctic is warming faster than other regions of the world due to the loss of snow and ice, which increases the amount of solar energy absorbed by the region. The most visible consequence has been the rapid decline in sea ice over the last 3 decades-a decline projected to bring long ice-free summers if greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions are not significantly reduced. The polar bear ( Ursus maritimus ) depends on sea ice over the biologically productive continental shelves of the Arctic Ocean as a platform for hunting seals. In 2008, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service listed the polar bear as threatened under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) due to the threat posed by sea ice loss. The polar bear was the first species to be listed due to forecasted population declines from climate change.

Arctic↗

USGS2022

South Carolina and Landsat

South Carolina, the eighth State admitted to the union, transcends its size with its deep, rich history; striking beauty; vast natural resources; and extensive cultural diversity. Home to part of the Blue Ridge Mountains of the Central Appalachians, the Upstate is graced with more than 100 waterfalls, while the Lowcountry borders the Atlantic Ocean with 187 miles of coastline and 35 barrier islands. Forests cover two-thirds of the State, and forestry and agriculture together, as agribusiness, make up South Carolina’s leading industry. Two historic crops—cotton and tobacco—still rank in the top 10 commodities, though corn and soybeans now rank higher. Poultry, cattle, peanuts, and flowers also make the list. South Carolina’s population totals more than five million. Other residents include a variety of wildlife, bird, reptile, and fish species, including Ursus americanus (black bears), Alligator mississippiensis (American alligators), and Tursiops truncatus (bottlenose dolphins). More than 100 tree species also reside in South Carolina, which pays homage to one with its “The Palmetto State” nickname. South Carolina’s subtropical climate, long coastline, and lower elevations make it highly susceptible to tornado and hurricane activity and coastal flooding. Projected sea-level rise is a growing concern. A view from space can help monitor and manage natural resources on the land and in rivers, marshes, and the coast. Landsat reveals not just what an area looks like now, but also insights from decades ago.

South Carolina↗

USGS2022

Wyoming and Landsat

Wyoming has the smallest population of any State—fewer than 600,000 people—but an abundance of wildlife. The largest number of pronghorn ( Antilocapra americana ), often called antelope, and the biggest public bison ( Bison bison ) herd in the United States live in Wyoming, which also hosts elk ( Cervus elaphus ), moose ( Alces americanus ), bighorn sheep ( Ovis canadensis ), black bears ( Ursus americanus ), and grizzly bears ( U. arctos ). The terrain of the Nation’s 10th largest State varies from the Black Hills to the Rocky Mountains, and from Great Plains grassland to Wyoming Basin desert sagebrush. Natural resources attract millions of visitors annually, especially to the country’s first national park, Yellowstone, and the ski slopes in Grand Teton National Park and elsewhere. Natural resources account for much of the employment in the Cowboy State, from tourism and ranching to coal, natural gas, and oil mining. To help monitor these natural resources, researchers and land managers have relied on USGS Landsat imagery and data. The scale of images from the first Landsat satellites helped geologists detect previously unknown uranium deposits in Wyoming, which is the leading State for uranium production. Today, land managers and researchers take advantage of Landsat and its 50-year archive to explore landscape change over time—and continue to make new discoveries.

Wyoming↗

USGS2022

New Hampshire and Landsat

At its widest point, a mere 80 miles separate the eastern and western borders of New Hampshire. Its northern and southern borders are just 175 miles apart. Even so, few States can boast as much rugged natural beauty per mile as the Nation’s fifth smallest. Nestled within New Hampshire are 93 State parks teeming with moose, Ursus americanus (Pallas, 1780; black bears), coyotes, beavers, river otters, and foxes. The largest section of White Mountain National Forest cuts across north-central New Hampshire, drawing visitors to its lakes, streams, mountain peaks, and hardwood forests. New Hampshire also is home to Lake Winnipesaukee, the State’s largest lake, notable for its floating post offices, the annual “ice-out” contest that sees residents vying to guess the date its surface ice dissipates, and its supporting role in films such as “On Golden Pond” and “What About Bob?” However, the scenic forests of New Hampshire face challenges in the form of invasive species such as Lymantria dispar (Linnaeus, 1758; spongy moth), Adelges piceae (balsam woolly adelgid), and Agrilus planipennis (emerald ash borer). In recent years, New Hampshire’s lakes and streams have seen more cyanobacterial blooms as well. The U.S. Geological Survey Landsat Program offers a consistent, reliable, and historically unmatched source of Earth observations that can aid in the mapping, monitoring, and management of New Hampshire’s land and water resources. Here are a few ways Landsat data have been used in the Granite State.

New Hampshire↗

USGS2009

Black and Brown Bear Activity at Selected Coastal Sites in Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve, Alaska: A Preliminary Assessment Using Noninvasive Procedures

A number of efforts in recent years have sought to predict bear activity in various habitats to minimize human disturbance and bear/human conflicts. Alaskan coastal areas provide important foraging areas for bears (Ursus americanus and U. arctos), particularly following den emergence when there may be no snow-free foraging alternatives. Additionally, coastal areas provide important food items for bears throughout the year. Glacier Bay National Park and Preserve (GLBA) in southeastern Alaska has extensive coastal habitats, and the National Park Service (NPS) has been long interested in learning more about the use of these coastal habitats by bears because these same habitats receive extensive human use by park visitors, especially kayaking recreationists. This study provides insight regarding the nature and intensity of bear activity at selected coastal sites within GLBA. We achieved a clearer understanding of bear/habitat relationships within GLBA by analyzing bear activity data collected with remote cameras, bear sign mapping, scat collections, and genetic analysis of bear hair. Although we could not quantify actual levels of bear activity at study sites, agreement among measures of activity (for example, sign counts, DNA analysis, and video record) lends support to our qualitative site assessments. This work suggests that habitat evaluation, bear sign mapping, and periodic scat counts can provide a useful index of bear activity for sites of interest.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2015

Evaluating and ranking threats to the long-term persistence of polar bears

The polar bear ( Ursus maritimus ) was listed as a globally threatened species under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA) in 2008, mostly due to the significant threat to their future population viability from rapidly declining Arctic sea ice. A core mandate of the ESA is the development of a recovery plan that identifies steps to maintain viable populations of a listed species. A substantive evaluation of the relative influence of putative threats to population persistence is helpful to recovery planning. Because management actions must often be taken in the face of substantial information gaps, a formalized evaluation hypothesizing potential stressors and their relationships with population persistence can improve identification of relevant conservation actions. To this end, we updated a Bayesian network model previously used to forecast the future status of polar bears worldwide. We used new information on actual and predicted sea ice loss and polar bear responses to evaluate the relative influence of plausible threats and their mitigation through management actions on the persistence of polar bears in four ecoregions. We found that polar bear outcomes worsened over time through the end of the century under both stabilized and unabated greenhouse gas (GHG) emission pathways. Under the unabated pathway (i.e., RCP 8.5), the time it took for polar bear populations in two of four ecoregions to reach a dominant probability of greatly decreased was hastened by about 25 years. Under the stabilized GHG emission pathway (i.e., RCP 4.5), where GHG emissions peak around the year 2040, the polar bear population in the Archipelago Ecoregion of High Arctic Canada never reached a dominant probability of greatly decreased, reinforcing earlier suggestions of this ecoregion’s potential to serve as a long-term refugium. The most influential drivers of adverse polar bear outcomes were declines to overall sea ice conditions and to the marine prey base. Improved sea ice conditions substantively lowered the probability of a decreased or greatly decreased outcome, while an elevated marine prey base was slightly less influential in lowering the probability of a decreased or greatly decreased outcome. Stressors associated with in situ human activities exerted considerably less influence on population outcomes. Reduced mortality from hunting and defense of life and property interactions resulted inmodest declines in the probability of a decreased or greatly decreased population outcome. Minimizing other stressors such as trans-Arctic shipping, oil and gas exploration, and point-source pollution had negligible effects on polar bear outcomes, but that could be attributed to uncertainties in the ecological relevance of those specific stressors. Our findings suggest adverse consequences of loss of sea ice habitat become more pronounced as the summer ice-free period lengthens beyond 4 months, which could occur in portions of the Arctic by the middle of this century under the unabated pathway. The long-term persistence of polar bears may be achieved through ameliorating the loss of sea ice habitat, which will likely require stabilizing CO 2 emissions at or below the ceiling represented by RCP 4.5. Management of other stressors may serve to slow the transition of polar bear populations to progressively worsened outcomes, and improve the prospects of persistence, pending GHG mitigation.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2015

Resilience and risk: a demographic model to inform conservation planning for polar bears

Climate change is having widespread ecological effects, including loss of Arctic sea ice. This has led to listing of the polar bear ( Ursus maritimus ) and other ice-dependent marine mammals under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). Methods are needed to evaluate the effects of climate change on population persistence to inform recovery planning for listed species. For polar bears, this includes understanding interactions between climate and secondary factors, such as subsistence harvest, which provide economic, nutritional, or cultural value to humans. We developed a matrix-based demographic model for polar bears that can be used for population viability analysis and to evaluate the effects of human-caused removals. This model includes density-dependence (the potential for a declining environmental carrying capacity), density-independent limitation, and sex- and age-specific harvest vulnerabilities. We estimated values of adult female survival (0.93–0.96), recruitment (number of yearling cubs per adult female; 0.1–0.3), and carrying capacity (>250 animals) that must be maintained for a hypothetical population to achieve a 90-percent probability of persistence over 100 years. We also developed a state-dependent management framework, based on harvest theory and the potential biological removal method, by linking the demographic model to simulated population assessments. This framework can be used to estimate the maximum sustainable rate of human-caused removals, including subsistence harvest, which maintains a population at its maximum net productivity level. The framework also can be used to calculate a recommended sustainable harvest rate, which generally is lower than the maximum sustainable rate and depends on management objectives, the precision and frequency of population data, and risk tolerance. The historical standard 4.5-percent harvest rate for polar bears, at a 2:1 male-to-female ratio, is reasonable under many biological and management conditions, although lower or higher rates may be appropriate in some cases. Our modeling results suggest that harvest of polar bears is unlikely to accelerate population declines that result from declining carrying capacity caused by sea-ice loss, provided that several conditions are met: (1) the sustainable harvest rate reflects the population’s intrinsic growth rate, and the corresponding harvest level is obtained by applying this rate to an estimate of population size; (2) the sustainable harvest rate reflects the quality of population data (e.g., lower harvest when data are poor); and (3) the level of human-caused removals can be adjusted. Finally, our results suggest that stopgap measures (e.g., further reduction or cessation of harvest when the population size is less than a critical threshold) may be necessary to minimize the incremental risk associated with harvest, if environmental conditions are deteriorating rapidly. We suggest that the demographic model and approaches presented here can serve as a template for conservation planning for polar bears and other species facing similar challenges.

Open-File Report↗

USGS2018

Summary of wildlife-related research on the coastal plain of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska, 2002–17

We summarize recent (2002–17) publicly available information from studies within the 1002 Area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge as well as terrestrial and coastal ecosystems elsewhere on the Arctic Coastal Plain that are relevant to the 1002 Area. This report provides an update on earlier research summaries on caribou (Rangifer tarandus), forage quality and quantity, polar bears (Ursus maritimus), muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus), and snow geese (Chen caerulescens). We also provide information on new research related to climate, migratory birds, permafrost, coastal erosion, coastal lagoons, fish, water resources, and potential effects of industrial disturbance on wildlife. From this literature review, we noted evidence for change in the status of some wildlife and their habitats, and the lack of change for others. In the 1002 Area, muskox numbers have decreased and the Porcupine Caribou Herd has exhibited variation in use of the area during the calving season. Polar bears are now more common on shore in summer and fall because of declines in sea ice in the Beaufort Sea. In a study spanning 25 years, there were no significant changes in vegetation quality and quantity, soil conditions, or permafrost thaw in the coastal plain of the 1002 Area. Based on studies from the central Arctic Coastal Plain, there are persistent and emerging uncertainties about the long-term effects of energy development for caribou. In contrast, recent studies that examined direct and indirect effects of industrial activities and infrastructure on birds in the central Arctic Coastal Plain found little effect for the species and disturbances examined, except for the possibility of increased predator activity near human developments.

Alaska↗

USGS2018

A comparison of photograph-interpreted and IfSAR-derived maps of polar bear denning habitat for the 1002 Area of the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska

Polar bears ( Ursus maritimus ) in Alaska use the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) for maternal denning. Pregnant bears den in snow banks for more than 3 months in winter during which they give birth to and nurture young. Denning is one of the most vulnerable times in polar bear life history as the family group cannot simply walk away from a disturbance without jeopardizing survival of newly born cubs. The ANWR includes the “1002 Area”, a region recently opened for oil and gas exploration by the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI). As a part of its mission, the DOI “… protects and manages the Nation's natural resources …” and is therefore responsible for conserving polar bears and encouraging development of energy potential. Because future industrial activities could overlap habitats used by denning polar bears, identifying these habitats can inform the decisions of resource managers tasked to develop resources and protect polar bears. To help inform these efforts, we qualitatively compared the distribution of denning habitat identified by two different methods: previously published habitat from manual interpretation of aerial photographs, and habitat derived by computer interrogation of interferometric synthetic aperture radar (IfSAR) digital terrain models (DTM). Because photograph-interpreted methods depicted denning habitat as a line and IfSAR-derived methods depicted habitat as a polygon, we assessed agreement between the two methods with distance measurements. We found that 77.5 percent of IfSAR-derived denning habitat (79.6 km2 ; 1.2 percent of the 6,837.0 km2 1002 Area) was within 600 m of photograph-interpreted habitat (3,026.9 km), including 53.9 percent within 200 m. This distribution differed from that of randomly distributed points, as only 49.4 percent of these occurred within 600 m of photograph-interpreted habitat, including 18.3 percent within 200 m. Both methods appear to identify the major physiographic features that polar bears might select for denning. IfSAR-derived methods identified habitat at greater frequency beyond major landscape features such as coastal bluffs, river banks and lakeshores, were more likely to identify isolated pockets of putative denning habitat, and were easier to implement than deriving habitat from photograph-interpretive efforts. However, previous research suggests that photograph-interpretation methods may identify denning habitat more correctly than computer interrogation of IfSAR DTMs. Future work should quantify the distribution of IfSAR-derived denning habitat relative to actual landscape features and polar bear maternal dens in the 1002 Area, and investigate the feasibility of habitat identification from finer grained DTMs.

Alaska↗

USGS2025

Exposure of wild mammals inhabiting Alaska to influenza A(H5N1) virus

Serum samples from wild mammals inhabiting Alaska, USA, showed that 4 species, including Ursus arctos bears and Vulpes vulpes foxes, were exposed to influenza A(H5N1) viruses. Results indicated some mammals in Alaska survived H5N1 virus infection. Surveillance efforts may be improved by incorporating information on susceptibility and detectable immune responses among wild mammals.

Alaska↗