Evolutionary and ecological traps for brown bears Ursus arctos in human‐modified landscapes

Abstract

1.Evolutionary traps, and their derivative, ecological traps, occur when animals make maladaptive decisions based on seemingly reliable environmental cues, and are important mechanistic explanations for declines in animal populations. 2. Despite the interest in large carnivore conservation in human-modified landscapes, the emergence of traps and their potential effects on the conservation of large carnivore populations has frequently been overlooked. 3. The brown bear Ursus arctos typifies the challenges facing large carnivore conservation and recent research has reported that this species can show maladaptive behaviours in human-modified landscapes. Here we review, describe and discuss scenarios recognised as evolutionary or ecological traps for brown bears, and propose possible trap scenarios and mechanisms that have the potential to affect the dynamics and viability of brown bear populations. 4. Six potential trap scenarios have been detected for brown bears in humanmodified landscapes: 1) food resources close to human settlements; 2) agricultural landscapes; 3) roads; 4) artificial feeding sites; 5) hunting by humans; and 6) other human activities. Because these traps are likely to be of contrasting relevance for different demographic segments of bear populations, we highlight the importance of evaluations of the relative demographic consequences of different trap types for wildlife management. We also suggest that traps may be behind the decreases in brown bear and other large carnivore populations in human-modified landscapes. Mammal Review ISSN 0305-1838 bs_bs_banner Brown bears and evolutionary and ecological traps V. Penteriani et al. Mammal Review 48 (2018) 180-193

Not exodus, but population increase and gene flow restoration in Cantabrian brown bear (Ursus arctos) subpopulations. Comment on Gregório et al. 2020

“…Despite some female bears successfully reproducing in areas with a high human caused mortality (the sink areas), bear persistence was reliant on a supply of immigrants from areas with minimal human influence (the source areas). This source-sink dynamics (migration from low to high human-caused mortality areas) had previously been reported by other important works on brown/grizzly bears, both in North America [ 21 – 24 ] and in Europe [ 25 – 28 ].…”

Denning in brown bears

“…It is important to highlight here the potential effect of anthropogenic food, and especially supplementary feeding, on the chronology of hibernation. Supplementary feeding of bears has several purposes including hunting, eco-tourism, and the mitigation of human-bear conflicts (Penteriani et al, 2017(Penteriani et al, , 2018. In areas where brown bears have access to anthropogenic food, shorter denning periods (over 50% reduction in denning period) or greater winter den abandonments than in populations located at a similar latitude where these food sources do not exist have been reported (Bojarska et al, 2019;Krofel et al, 2017;Špacapan, 2012).…”

Testing the influence of habitat experienced during the natal phase on habitat selection later in life in Scandinavian wolves

“…Movements close to human infrastructure increases mortality risk for large carnivores 69 , potentially generating ecological traps where survival and therefore fitness are lower close to human settlements and roads than in remoter areas (e.g., Penteriani et al . 70 ). Indeed, this might be a plausible reason why we found some support for our hypothesis 1 (Fig.…”