Abstract

Human-bear (Ursus spp.) conflict (HBC) is an important issue facing wildlife managers across North America. It is essential that we understand the factors associated with HBCs in North America so that wildlife managers can make appropriate, science-based recommendations about how to avoid, and if necessary, survive such incidents. To that end, we present this comprehensive analysis of > 2,100 HBCs in the United States and Canada, ranging from 1880 to the present. This analysis includes the three native North American bear species: black bears (Ursus americanus), grizzly bears (U. arctos), and polar bears (U. maritimus) and assesses the role that twelve key variables played in human-bear conflict. We collected data from various sources, including newspapers, official government reports, and verified personal accounts. In the first chapter, we summarized data, looked for patterns and conducted statistical analysis (AIC weighted linear regression modeling and chi square analysis) to determine significance of variables in relation to human injury during HBC encounters. Our results found that human-bear conflict incidents in North America are rare but are increasing at a steady rate. HBCs involving grizzly bears were far more numerous and more likely to result in an injury, but black and polar bear HBCs were more likely to be fatal. Most incidents were classified as surprise encounters followed by bears being curious. The most common activity people were engaged in when an incident began was hiking or walking, followed by hunting and camping. Single bears were involved more than all other cohorts combined. There was a clear negative correlation between the use of a bear deterrent (firearms and/or bear spray) and the occurrence of human injury. Similarly, as group size increased, odds of human injury steeply decreased. In the second chapter, we present an analysis of human actions and associated bear reactions that occurred during each encounter. Each action-reaction pair was analyzed at four levels, increasing from the least detailed (e.g., "aggressive" or "defensive" actions) to the most detailed (e.g., person used a firearm, or person played dead). These summaries provide insights regarding the outcomes (i.e., how bears responded) of specific actions people have taken towards bears. For both black and grizzly bears, "aggressive" actions by humans resulted in the lowest rates of bear attack responses, while "neutral" human actions produced the highest attack rates. Third level analysis provided a more specific insight into these results, indicating that the success of "aggressive" actions is generally driven by the use of a deterrent, while the high attack rates of "neutral" actions are most often a result of people being taken by surprise with "no time to react".

Degree

MS

College and Department

Life Sciences; Plant and Wildlife Sciences

Rights

https://lib.byu.edu/about/copyright/

Date Submitted

2024-11-28

Document Type

Thesis

Handle

http://hdl.lib.byu.edu/1877/etd13431

Keywords

Bear attacks, bear deterrents, bear spray, firearms, black bears, Canis lupus familiaris, dogs, grizzly bears, human-bear conflict, human injury, North America, polar bears, Ursus americanus, U. arctos, U. maritimus

Language

english

Download

Included in

Life Sciences Commons

Share

COinS