State and provincial estimates of American black bear numbers versus assessments of population trend
Wildlife management agencies in US states and Canadian provinces and territories routinely assess population trends of American black bears (Ursus americanus) and estimate population size. State or province-wide population estimates are often extrapolated from small, short-term studies or are based...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management) 2006-04, Vol.17 (1), p.1-7 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , |
Format: | Artikel |
Sprache: | eng |
Schlagworte: | |
Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
container_end_page | 7 |
---|---|
container_issue | 1 |
container_start_page | 1 |
container_title | Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management) |
container_volume | 17 |
creator | Garshelis, David L Hristienko, Hank |
description | Wildlife management agencies in US states and Canadian provinces and territories routinely assess population trends of American black bears (Ursus americanus) and estimate population size. State or province-wide population estimates are often extrapolated from small, short-term studies or are based on other expert opinions. We compiled black bear population estimates provided by 51 states and provinces for the period 1988–2001. Only 57% of trends ascertained from these serial population estimates (or less, depending on the method for determining trend and what was considered a match) agreed with corresponding agency assessments of trend for the same period. That is, nearly half the management agencies felt that the trend in their bear population was different than indicated by the estimates they produced. Most mismatches were cases where agencies perceived their populations as increasing but their estimates showed no discernible trend. Pooling all population estimates for North America suggested that continent-wide black bear numbers had increased by about 2%/year, but this growth cannot be statistically corroborated because of the subjective nature of the individual estimates (guesstimates). State or province-wide black bear population estimates may aid in managing bear harvests, but for the most part, they are not precise or rigorous enough to provide useful information on population trend. |
doi_str_mv | 10.2192/1537-6176(2006)17[1:SAPEOA]2.0.CO;2 |
format | Article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>jstor_proqu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_19437806</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><jstor_id>3873042</jstor_id><sourcerecordid>3873042</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-b391t-e619eb8b3fd2e76e0c1cbda7131afe37424fbb12cff38fde29482e45fb203fbf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqdkNtq3DAQhk1oIem2b5ALXYWU4I1Gsi07vTJmc4CFLWx7FYKQ7BF4Y0tbyV7o29eOmz5Ab2aGOfzD_0XRDdA1g4LdQspFnIHIrhml2VcQz3C3L79vduULW9N1tfvGzqILKHgepwkvPkz1-8V59CmEA6UsTQW9iJr9oAYkyjbk6N2ptXWrOoJhaPupH4gzpOzRt7WyRHeqfiUalSd27DX6QE5TGANRIWAIPdrh7eLojmOnhtZZMni0zefoo1FdwC9_8yr6eb_5UT3G293DU1VuY80LGGLMoECda24ahiJDWkOtGyWAgzLIRcISozWw2hiemwZZkeQMk9RoRrnRhq-iq0V3svJrnEzIvg01dp2y6MYgoUi4yGk2LVbLYu1dCB6NPPrJsP8tgcqZsJx5yZmXnAlLEBLkQlgySWW1k2xSuVxUDmFw_p8EzwWnyTwul7FunbP4Xy_-AJ2Nkhk</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>19437806</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>State and provincial estimates of American black bear numbers versus assessments of population trend</title><source>Jstor Complete Legacy</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>BioOne Complete</source><creator>Garshelis, David L ; Hristienko, Hank</creator><creatorcontrib>Garshelis, David L ; Hristienko, Hank</creatorcontrib><description>Wildlife management agencies in US states and Canadian provinces and territories routinely assess population trends of American black bears (Ursus americanus) and estimate population size. State or province-wide population estimates are often extrapolated from small, short-term studies or are based on other expert opinions. We compiled black bear population estimates provided by 51 states and provinces for the period 1988–2001. Only 57% of trends ascertained from these serial population estimates (or less, depending on the method for determining trend and what was considered a match) agreed with corresponding agency assessments of trend for the same period. That is, nearly half the management agencies felt that the trend in their bear population was different than indicated by the estimates they produced. Most mismatches were cases where agencies perceived their populations as increasing but their estimates showed no discernible trend. Pooling all population estimates for North America suggested that continent-wide black bear numbers had increased by about 2%/year, but this growth cannot be statistically corroborated because of the subjective nature of the individual estimates (guesstimates). State or province-wide black bear population estimates may aid in managing bear harvests, but for the most part, they are not precise or rigorous enough to provide useful information on population trend.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1537-6176</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1938-5439</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.2192/1537-6176(2006)17[1:SAPEOA]2.0.CO;2</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>International Association for Bear Research and Management</publisher><subject>Administrative agencies ; American black bear ; Black bears ; Grizzly bears ; Jurisdiction ; management ; North America ; PERSPECTIVES, ESSAYS, AND REVIEWS ; Polar bears ; population estimate ; Population estimates ; Population growth ; population trend ; Population trends ; Ursus ; Ursus americanus ; Wildlife conservation ; Wildlife management</subject><ispartof>Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management), 2006-04, Vol.17 (1), p.1-7</ispartof><rights>International Association for Bear Research and Management</rights><rights>Copyright 2006 International Association for Bear Research and Management</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-b391t-e619eb8b3fd2e76e0c1cbda7131afe37424fbb12cff38fde29482e45fb203fbf3</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-b391t-e619eb8b3fd2e76e0c1cbda7131afe37424fbb12cff38fde29482e45fb203fbf3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://bioone.org/doi/pdf/10.2192/1537-6176(2006)17[1:SAPEOA]2.0.CO;2$$EPDF$$P50$$Gbioone$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.jstor.org/stable/3873042$$EHTML$$P50$$Gjstor$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,799,26955,27901,27902,52338,57992,58225</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Garshelis, David L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hristienko, Hank</creatorcontrib><title>State and provincial estimates of American black bear numbers versus assessments of population trend</title><title>Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management)</title><description>Wildlife management agencies in US states and Canadian provinces and territories routinely assess population trends of American black bears (Ursus americanus) and estimate population size. State or province-wide population estimates are often extrapolated from small, short-term studies or are based on other expert opinions. We compiled black bear population estimates provided by 51 states and provinces for the period 1988–2001. Only 57% of trends ascertained from these serial population estimates (or less, depending on the method for determining trend and what was considered a match) agreed with corresponding agency assessments of trend for the same period. That is, nearly half the management agencies felt that the trend in their bear population was different than indicated by the estimates they produced. Most mismatches were cases where agencies perceived their populations as increasing but their estimates showed no discernible trend. Pooling all population estimates for North America suggested that continent-wide black bear numbers had increased by about 2%/year, but this growth cannot be statistically corroborated because of the subjective nature of the individual estimates (guesstimates). State or province-wide black bear population estimates may aid in managing bear harvests, but for the most part, they are not precise or rigorous enough to provide useful information on population trend.</description><subject>Administrative agencies</subject><subject>American black bear</subject><subject>Black bears</subject><subject>Grizzly bears</subject><subject>Jurisdiction</subject><subject>management</subject><subject>North America</subject><subject>PERSPECTIVES, ESSAYS, AND REVIEWS</subject><subject>Polar bears</subject><subject>population estimate</subject><subject>Population estimates</subject><subject>Population growth</subject><subject>population trend</subject><subject>Population trends</subject><subject>Ursus</subject><subject>Ursus americanus</subject><subject>Wildlife conservation</subject><subject>Wildlife management</subject><issn>1537-6176</issn><issn>1938-5439</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2006</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqdkNtq3DAQhk1oIem2b5ALXYWU4I1Gsi07vTJmc4CFLWx7FYKQ7BF4Y0tbyV7o29eOmz5Ab2aGOfzD_0XRDdA1g4LdQspFnIHIrhml2VcQz3C3L79vduULW9N1tfvGzqILKHgepwkvPkz1-8V59CmEA6UsTQW9iJr9oAYkyjbk6N2ptXWrOoJhaPupH4gzpOzRt7WyRHeqfiUalSd27DX6QE5TGANRIWAIPdrh7eLojmOnhtZZMni0zefoo1FdwC9_8yr6eb_5UT3G293DU1VuY80LGGLMoECda24ahiJDWkOtGyWAgzLIRcISozWw2hiemwZZkeQMk9RoRrnRhq-iq0V3svJrnEzIvg01dp2y6MYgoUi4yGk2LVbLYu1dCB6NPPrJsP8tgcqZsJx5yZmXnAlLEBLkQlgySWW1k2xSuVxUDmFw_p8EzwWnyTwul7FunbP4Xy_-AJ2Nkhk</recordid><startdate>20060401</startdate><enddate>20060401</enddate><creator>Garshelis, David L</creator><creator>Hristienko, Hank</creator><general>International Association for Bear Research and Management</general><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7QG</scope><scope>7SN</scope><scope>C1K</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20060401</creationdate><title>State and provincial estimates of American black bear numbers versus assessments of population trend</title><author>Garshelis, David L ; Hristienko, Hank</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-b391t-e619eb8b3fd2e76e0c1cbda7131afe37424fbb12cff38fde29482e45fb203fbf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2006</creationdate><topic>Administrative agencies</topic><topic>American black bear</topic><topic>Black bears</topic><topic>Grizzly bears</topic><topic>Jurisdiction</topic><topic>management</topic><topic>North America</topic><topic>PERSPECTIVES, ESSAYS, AND REVIEWS</topic><topic>Polar bears</topic><topic>population estimate</topic><topic>Population estimates</topic><topic>Population growth</topic><topic>population trend</topic><topic>Population trends</topic><topic>Ursus</topic><topic>Ursus americanus</topic><topic>Wildlife conservation</topic><topic>Wildlife management</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Garshelis, David L</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hristienko, Hank</creatorcontrib><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>Animal Behavior Abstracts</collection><collection>Ecology Abstracts</collection><collection>Environmental Sciences and Pollution Management</collection><jtitle>Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Garshelis, David L</au><au>Hristienko, Hank</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>State and provincial estimates of American black bear numbers versus assessments of population trend</atitle><jtitle>Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management)</jtitle><date>2006-04-01</date><risdate>2006</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>1</issue><spage>1</spage><epage>7</epage><pages>1-7</pages><issn>1537-6176</issn><eissn>1938-5439</eissn><abstract>Wildlife management agencies in US states and Canadian provinces and territories routinely assess population trends of American black bears (Ursus americanus) and estimate population size. State or province-wide population estimates are often extrapolated from small, short-term studies or are based on other expert opinions. We compiled black bear population estimates provided by 51 states and provinces for the period 1988–2001. Only 57% of trends ascertained from these serial population estimates (or less, depending on the method for determining trend and what was considered a match) agreed with corresponding agency assessments of trend for the same period. That is, nearly half the management agencies felt that the trend in their bear population was different than indicated by the estimates they produced. Most mismatches were cases where agencies perceived their populations as increasing but their estimates showed no discernible trend. Pooling all population estimates for North America suggested that continent-wide black bear numbers had increased by about 2%/year, but this growth cannot be statistically corroborated because of the subjective nature of the individual estimates (guesstimates). State or province-wide black bear population estimates may aid in managing bear harvests, but for the most part, they are not precise or rigorous enough to provide useful information on population trend.</abstract><pub>International Association for Bear Research and Management</pub><doi>10.2192/1537-6176(2006)17[1:SAPEOA]2.0.CO;2</doi><tpages>7</tpages></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 1537-6176 |
ispartof | Ursus (International Association for Bear Research and Management), 2006-04, Vol.17 (1), p.1-7 |
issn | 1537-6176 1938-5439 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_19437806 |
source | Jstor Complete Legacy; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; BioOne Complete |
subjects | Administrative agencies American black bear Black bears Grizzly bears Jurisdiction management North America PERSPECTIVES, ESSAYS, AND REVIEWS Polar bears population estimate Population estimates Population growth population trend Population trends Ursus Ursus americanus Wildlife conservation Wildlife management |
title | State and provincial estimates of American black bear numbers versus assessments of population trend |
url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-01T05%3A56%3A27IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-jstor_proqu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=State%20and%20provincial%20estimates%20of%20American%20black%20bear%20numbers%20versus%20assessments%20of%20population%20trend&rft.jtitle=Ursus%20(International%20Association%20for%20Bear%20Research%20and%20Management)&rft.au=Garshelis,%20David%20L&rft.date=2006-04-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=1&rft.spage=1&rft.epage=7&rft.pages=1-7&rft.issn=1537-6176&rft.eissn=1938-5439&rft_id=info:doi/10.2192/1537-6176(2006)17%5B1:SAPEOA%5D2.0.CO;2&rft_dat=%3Cjstor_proqu%3E3873042%3C/jstor_proqu%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=19437806&rft_id=info:pmid/&rft_jstor_id=3873042&rfr_iscdi=true |