Walking The Bears.pdf

More documents

Recommendations

Info

AshrafNVK/WTI Sloth bear cubs and Asiatic black bear cubs busy doing what they do in the wild: Digging the soil looking for invertebrates (left) and feeding on shoots and fruits (right). (At the rehab projects in Bihar and Arunachal Pradesh, India) This is what has been followed strictly at OBRP, Bubonitsy, Russia. While fear of humans, including the caretaker, is essential before hard-releasing bears, this criterion will not hold true for bears released after gradual acclimatizationtothereleasesitebywalkingthem. In walk the bear programs, the bears get imprinted to one or two individuals in the beginning which helps in making them follow the caretaker to designated locations in the forest. The animals get habituated to follow the caretakers but this soon transforms into mere tolerance to the presence of the caretaker. Later they have been found to avoid even the caretaker when contact with released bears was discontinued after their release (Tamo Dadda, CBRC, pers.com.). It is pertinent to mention here Joe Hamr’s study monitoring the movements, denning behavior and survival of 60 orphaned American black bear cubs, raised with different levels of contact, released in Ontario. No clear correlation could be found in the rehab success of these bears with minimum and significant level of habituation to the caretakers (Beecham, 2006). On the contrary, bears released in Indonesia and Ecuador failed to establish in the wild as they moved towards human habitats and in the process got killed. Three factors could be identified for the difference in success rates between these releases. While the release with American black bears was using yearlings aged about 1½ years of age, most of the bears released in Indonesia and Ecuador were above 2½ years of age. Secondly, while bears were hard-released in these tropical countries, the American black bears were released in winter during denning season, thus restricting their movements after release. And lastly, though there is no information available on the density of human settlements at these release sites, it is possible that there were very few human habitations, if any, at the release site in Ontario. Though there is every possibility that bears with stereotypic behaviors will be disadvantaged to adapt themselves to the wild (Beecham, 2006), soft release programs like ‘walking the bears’ provide an ideal platform to monitor the behavioral changes that happen over a period of time. Since abnormal behavioral persistence in bears is associated with prolonged restriction in less complex environments with limited opportunities to exhibit natural behaviour, prolonged access to a free ranging situation during such gradual acclimatization can be a remedy to rectify behavioural inadequacies. 6.3.5. Disease considerations: The threats of transmission of pathogens along with the translocation of host species are being increasingly recognized (Cunningham, 1996). Though there was not much discussion on this issue, disease was considered an important factor tobetakenintoconsiderationbeforerelease.Bears are generally hardy animals and since there are no taxonomic equivalents to bears in the world of domestic animals (apart from dogs and cats which are distantly related), there are not many diseases thatcanbeconsideredtransmissiblefromdomestic animals to bears. There are some basic guidelines available to us on the quarantine and health screening protocols of mammals prior to release (e.g. Woodford, 2002), but they are often prepared in the context of wild Whilefearofhumans,includingthe caretaker,isessentialbeforehardreleasingbears,thiscriterionwill notholdtrueforbearsreleased aftergradualacclimatizationtothe releasesitebywalkingthem TamoDadda/WTI
to wild translocations. Among zoonotic diseases, tuberculosis is the most important disease to be considered while planning release operations involving captive reared animals. Though the possibility of five months old cubs getting the disease is remote, they still have to be screened for this disease. All bears while young are prone to ecto and endoparasitism. Bears in general are prone to mange, especially when kept in cramped up enclosures in groups for a long period of time. Frequent fecal examination and deworming using appropriate anthelmintic are crucial till they are a year old. As mentioned earlier, in the case of disease considerations, bears meant for hard release have tobewithheldfromrelease,whileinthecaseasoft releaseprogramlike‘walkthebear’,thecandidates have to be withdrawn from the wild to captivity. Thiswouldmeanthatbearshavetobescreenedfor disease even after subjecting them to in-situ acclimatization. 6.3.6. Genetic pollution The issue of bears of different genetic make-up getting mixed up due to indiscriminate release programs (see Agoramoorthy, and Hsu, 2007; Soorae, 2005) was also touched upon during the workshop. The IUCN guidelines on the placement of confiscated animals reiterate that the animal’s genetic make-up is important to minimize risks of hybridization with animals at the site of release (IUCN, 2002). According to the IUCN reintroduction guidelines, the source population should ideally be closely related genetically to the original native stock and show similar ecological characteristics to the original sub-population (IUCN, 1998). The inadvertent mixing of genetic material from locally adapted population may also lead to outbreeding depression (Marshall and Spalton, 2000; Templeton, 1986). Even within subspecies level, the genetic constitution of certain population of animals has been shown to be unique when compared to conspecifics living in other areas (Paetkau et al, 1998; Flagstad et al, 2000). Therefore, it is not enough to assume that it is safe to release bears as long as bears meant for release are the same species or subspecies of the wild bears at release site. Geographical separation by natural barriers like mountain ranges and rivers have to be taken into consideration before release. It has been shown in the case of American brown bears that the genetic distance between areas is a function of the distance and nature of intervening landscape (Paetkau et al, 1998). In situations where the cub’s provenance is unknown, genetic testing of the cub and the recipient bear population is the only safe, ethical approach for releasing the bears (Beecham, 2006). If this is not practicable, lifetime care is the only option for such bears of unknown genetic origin. 6.4. Release and monitoring 6.4.1. Site selection One of the important considerations before release istheselectionofanappropriatereleasesite.There was no special session or presentation assigned for discussing this topic, but was touched upon intermittently during the various presentations. At CBRC, India, a specific site selection protocol is being used which takes into consideration the following factors: 1. If thesiteis withinthedistributionrangeof the species/subspecies/population 2. If there is adequate cover, food and water available 3. If the vegetation type of the area is descriptive of the habitat type of the animal 4. Ifthealtitude&terrainconformstothespecies’ distribution limit and habitat 5. To what extent is human settlements and trespassing reported 6. Ifthesiteisaccessibleforpost-releasemonitoring 7. Whether the density of resident bears in the area is high or low 8. If there are any reports of hunting of wildlife in the area 9. If there are any reports of wildlife diseases of relevance to the bears 10.The level of threat from predators like tigers & leopards to released bears 11.The level of awareness created amongst the locals about the release plans Ofallthesementionedabove,threefactorsseemto be crucial from the point of successful establishment of released bears in the wild: Absence of human settlements or trespassing, low density of wild bears and the availability of abundant food. Bear rehabilitators have emphasized that the bears be released in areas where they do not encounter humans for at least a month after release, and where wild bear densities are low so that they are not challenged by them (see Maughan, 2004; Fredriksson, 2005; Beecham, 2006). A remote location with least human disturbance can solve many of the problems that could be anticipated after release. Rehabilitators at the Andean Bear Project solved the problem of their released bears becoming nuisance bears by simply choosing a site which practically had no human settlements. 6.4.2. Site fidelity and release type Hard releases of subadult American black bears and brown bears have been reportedly more successful than hard releases of adults (Rogers, 1988;MillerandBallard,1982).Subadultandadult
Page 2 and 3:
WALKING THE BEARS RehabilitationofA
Page 4 and 5:
CONTENTS PREFACE 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
Page 6 and 7:
PREFACE Bears have been rehabilitat
Page 8 and 9:
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Rapid population
Page 10 and 11:
initiative of the Deputy Chief Wild
Page 12 and 13:
Fig 1.2. CBRC being inaugurated by
Page 14 and 15:
Fig1.5 The solar fencing around the
Page 16 and 17:
Curt Clumpner, founder and former d
Page 18 and 19:
prevent the bears from digging thei
Page 20 and 21:
CHAPTER 2 Getting the science right
Page 22 and 23:
Fig 2.2 One of the bears during in-
Page 24 and 25:
Fig 2.3 Asiatic black bear cub, few
Page 26 and 27:
situ acclimatization site along wit
Page 28 and 29:
3.1 Age at arrival CHAPTER 3 The Be
Page 30 and 31:
Fig 3.3. A bear cub at CBRC with al
Page 32 and 33:
Table 3.2 Oftedal’s classificatio
Page 34 and 35:
Proportion Fig 3.8 Dietary composit
Page 36 and 37:
abilities and predator avoidance. T
Page 38 and 39:
Ofallthesementionedabove,threefacto
Page 40 and 41:
Fig 4.4 Sergey Pazhetnov during his
Page 42 and 43:
PicturesTamoDadda/WTI Fig 4.5 Monoc
Page 44 and 45:
Table 4.3 Abundance of wild food it
Page 46 and 47:
Fig 5.2 Bear cubs being carried to
Page 49 and 50:
gradually. Their return to shelter
Page 51 and 52:
consideration while preparing the p
Page 53 and 54:
IUCN, 2002. IUCN Guidelines for the
Page 55 and 56:
Schematic architectural layout of t
Page 57 and 58:
Centre for Bear Rehabilitation and
Page 59 and 60:
PROFORMA 2. REHABILITATION, BIOLOGI
Page 61 and 62:
Appendix IV Bear Essentials EN ROUT
Page 63 and 64: 1. Introduction As I peck away on a
Page 65 and 66: Cub characteristics at birth: (Brow
Page 67 and 68: Dutiesofthetrainees 1. Preparefeeda
Page 69 and 70: Fig 2. Age at release in months (N=
Page 71 and 72: The three bears, Vierra(Faith) Nadi
Page 73 and 74: Annexure 1 Feed Formulation at OBRC
Page 79 and 80: Appendix V Report on the Internatio
Page 81 and 82: Acknowledgements Theworkshopbrought
Page 83: 2. Aims and objectives The aim of t
Page 86 and 87: therefore not comprehensive on any
Page 88 and 89: 2. Bear rehabilitation in Hargita C
Page 91 and 92: AshrafNVK/WTI AshrafNVK/WTI AshrafN
Page 93 and 94: 4. Kilham rehabilitation center, NH
Page 95 and 96: NLRC,Canada
Page 98 and 99: 7. Wildlife Rehabilitation "Outes',
Page 100 and 101: 9. Centre for Bear Rehabilitation &
Page 102 and 103: ABP,Ecuador ABP,Ecuador 1½
Page 104 and 105: 6.2. Care and rehabilitation: Criti
Page 106 and 107: ABP,Ecuador Post-weaning diet of co
Page 108 and 109: The cubs are released at seven or e
Page 110 and 111: Ifhabituatedadultorsubadult bearsar
Page 112 and 113: Table: Release age of different spe
Page 116 and 117: Asiatic black bear being taken for
Page 118 and 119: (ii)Brown bear: In Romania, with ra
Page 120 and 121: Peyton, B. and Plenge, H. 2005. Cap
Page 122 and 123: 34.Kati LOEFFLER Director of Veteri
Page 124: Deadly Tracks: A scientific approac
show all

Walking The Bears.pdf

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?