CURRENTSTATUSANDCONSERVATION NEEDSOF BROWNBEARSINTHE POLISHCARPATHIANS ROMANGULA,Departmentof WildlifeResearch, JagiellonianUniversity,Ingardena6, 30-060 Krak6w,Poland,email: gula@ eko.uj.edu.pl WITOLDFRACKOWIAK, Departmentof WildlifeResearch, JagiellonianUniversity,Ingardena6, 30-060, Krak6w,Poland,email:
[email protected] KAJETAN PERZANOWSKI, Departmentof WildlifeResearch, JagiellonianUniversity,Ingardena6, 30-060 Krak6w,Polandemail:
[email protected] Abstract: The presentstatus and main threatsto the futureviability of brown bears (Ursus arctos) in Poland were evaluated. The remaining8090 individualsare found only in the CarpathianMountainsand feed on a variety naturalfoods, but occasionally kill livestock and cause damage to beehives. Several factors including poaching, local development,logging patterns,and increasingtourismmay contributeconsiderablyto the reduced viability of the population. Successful bear conservationwill requirecollection of basic ecological data, wider public education, and especially changes in logging patternsand long-term local development plans. The coordinationof bear researchand joint managementof the Carpathianpopulationin the region is urgent. Ursus 10:81-86 Key words: brown bears, conservation,management,Poland, Ursus arctos.
Polandhas a small brownbear population,whose distributionis limited to the Polish CarpathianMountains. Although bears are legally protected there, their small numbers(n < 100) andthe intensityof developmentmake their future uncertain. In this paper we summarizethe knowledge of brown bears in Poland based on field researchwe did between 1989-1994 and on dataroutinely collectedby ForestryDepartmentandNationalParkstaff. Fundingfor the field surveys was providedby the Departmentof Wildlife Research,JagiellonianUniversity. We thankthe manyforestersandstudentswho were helpful duringfieldwork. For revision of the manuscriptwe thankto B. Peyton and 2 anonymousreviewers.
METHODS
EstimatingPopulationSize Every year employees of forest districts and the national parksadministrationcount brownbears,including females with cubs, in the entireCarpathianrange. These estimatesbased on field observationsare closer to intuitive interpretationsthan the analysis of field data. We conducteda quantitativetrackingsurveyof the minimum size of the brown bear populationin a 737-km2part of the Carpathianrangein the Bieszczady Mountains(Gula 1992, Gula and Frackowiak1995). Trackingwas done in November1990 andMarch1990 and 1991, a timewhen trackswere most visible in the snow andbearswere looking for food and suitable den sites. We looked for bear trackson forestpaths and aroundbaits placed by hunters to attractwolves (Canislupus)andwild boars(Susscrofa). We recordedthe place, time, andwidthof a forefootprint
when possible. When track size, or location, and track age were mutually exclusive, tracks were attributedto differentbears. Minimumpopulationestimateswere obtainedby countingtracksthatwere mutuallyexclusive in 5 forest management districts, (e.g., Balingr6d, Stuposiany,Lutowiska,Wetlina, and Cisna). The time spent tracking within districts was either 1 week or 1 month. When 1 week of tracking was completed, the numberof mutuallyexclusive sets of tracksobserved in a districtwas multipliedby an index calculatedfrom districts where 1 month of trackingwas done. The index was calculated by dividing the numberof sets of individual beartracksobservedduring 1 monthby the numberof bearstrackedduringthe firstweek. Estimateswere then interpolatedto accountfor the largerarea occupied by bearsin the Bieszczady Mountains(1,340 km2or 60% of the Bieszczady Mountains; Gula and Frackowiak 1996).
HabitatSelectionand Diet The food habits and habitatselection of brown bears were studiedin the Bieszczady Mountainsbetween 1992 and 1994 using nontelemetrymethods. Evidence of bear presence(e.g., tracksandfeedingactivities)wererecorded and feces were collected along 34 transects(245 km total length) established in a 375-km2 study area in the Stuposiany and Lutowiska forest districts. Feces were also collected during field trackingperiods when snow or mud was present. The percentvolume of each different food item foundin scats was visuallyestimated(sensu Clevenger et al. 1992). Mean percent volume of each item was calculatedfor spring,(1 Mar-31 May), summer (1 Jun-31 Aug), and fall (1 Sep-30 Nov).
82
Ursus 10:1998
Habitatavailabilityfor the following 5 variableswere estimatedby a nonmappingtechnique(sensu Clevenger et al. 1992): forest cover type, elevation, and distanceto the nearest road, village, and place with bait for game animals. The relationshipsbetween use and availability of habitatfeaturesdefined by these variableswere tested using chi-squaretests (Clevengeret al. 1992). The null hypothesis of these tests was that bears were not using habitatsin proportionto their availability.
RESULTS PopulationSize In 1994 the bear populationin the Polish part of the Carpathianswas estimatedby the ForestryDepartment and NationalParksto be 80-90 individuals. According to our tracking surveys in Bieszczady in 1990-91, the populationin that partof the Carpathianswas estimated to be 68 bears (Gula 1992, Gula and Frackowiak1995). Preliminaryanalysisof both sets of dataindicatethatboth the minimumnumberof females with young and the average litter size are slowly decreasing (Gula and Frackowiak1996, Frackowiaket al. In Press).
Distribution The rangeof brownbearsin Polandis limitedto 7,400 km2 in the Polish Carpathians(Fig. 1). Althoughbrown bears are found along the CarpathianRange, there are 5 areaswhere they are most common. The Bieszczady Region, the easternpartof the Polish Carpathians,is the mainstay of Polish bear population. Here females with cubs are observedregularly(Fig. 1). This area of approximately2,000 km2, with elevations up to 1350 m, is inhabitedby about 50 bears (For. Dep. data, Krosno). The majorityof the area is covered by a naturalbeech-fir (Fagus silvatica-Abiesalba) forest, and formerfarmlandsare forestedmostly with spruce(Picea excelsia). Subalpinepasturescharacterizethe higher elevations above timberline(1100 m). The region is relatively sparsely populated with humans (approx. 10 inhabitants\km2), comparedto the restof the country(120 inhabitants\km2).The Bieszczady Mountainsregion is also a populartourist area, particularlyBieszczady National Park. BeskidNiski, the lowest rangein the PolishCarpathians (highest peaks are slightly over 900 m), is covered with mixed mountainbeech-fir forest. The region is mostly undevelopedandhas a low densityof humans. The local economyis basedon logging, small-scaleagriculture,and relativelyfew touristscomparedto the Bieszczady moun-
tains region. In 1995, a new national park (Magurski Natl. Park) was established on 20,000 ha. This range containsa small,mostlyresidentpopulationof bears(For. Dep. data,Krosnoand Nowy Sacz). The thirdareais the 3 neighboringmountainrangesto the west of Beskid Niski: Beskid Sadecki,Gorce Mountains, and Pieniny Mountains. The highest peaks there are>1300 m. Carpathianbeech forestdominatein Beskid Sadecki and sprucestandsdominatein Gorce. The density of the humanpopulationis higherthanin Bieszczady and Beskid Niski. Bear density is slightly higherthanin Beskid Niski, but much lower comparedto Bieszczady and the Tatras(For. Dep. data,Nowy Sacz). The TatrasMountains,the fourth area, has an extensive alpinezone andis the highestpartof the Carpathians, with peaks >2500 m. In the forest, sprucestandsprevail that were artificiallyintroducedat the end of 19th century. Most of the Tatras is protected by Polish and Slovakian nationalparks, but human disturbanceis excessive due to extremelyhigh numbersof tourists. Every year, 1 to 2 females with cubs have been observedon the Polish side of the range (Natl. Parkdata). The fifth areaof bearhabitatis in subalpineanddwarfpine zones of the Beskid Zywiecki andWysoki. Herethe highest peak exceeds 1700 m. Forests vary from artificially planted spruce stands to small patches of natural mountainbeech-fir forest. The density of bears is close to the average for the Polish Carpathians,and females with cubs were observed every year along the PolishSlovak border(For. Dep. data,Nowy Sacz).
Dietand HabitatUse The bears' diet in the Bieszczady Mountainsconsisted mostly of beechnuts(17%of scatvolume),grasses(14%), herbs (9%), and deer (Cervus elaphus; 16%) in spring; blueberries(40%), grasses (8%), and insects (18%) in summer;and pears (20%), apples (19%), and beechnuts (9%)in autumn.DuringJanuaryandFebruaryactivebears eat baits left by huntersto attractwild boars and wolves. Baits are usually carrionor offal, but they may contain corn and beets as well. Bait is also importantin early spring and late fall (scat volume = 30% in March and 13%in November,respectively;Fig. 2). Just afterleaving dens, bearsin the upperelevationscoveredby mature forests move to areasclose to bait stationsused by hunters. In early summerbearsfeed in meadowsat the higher elevationsabovethe forestzone. In Julymanybearsmove to blueberrypatchesfar fromroadsand villages. In SeptemberandOctoberthe mainforagingsites areabandoned orchardsin valleys. Bearsin these areas,especiallywhen nearvillages, cause the most agriculturaldamagein early
BROWN BEARSIN POLAND * Gula et al.
83
55' 54'
53'
Brown Bear Range
52'
51'
National Parks
50? 49'
BESKID SADECKI BESKID ZYWIECKI GORCE MTNS SADECKI yf:--:-
:-:;7-
PIENINY MTNS
NISKI
20 km
BIESZCZADY MTNS Fig. 1. The distribution of brown bears in Poland in 1994, including the presence of females with young observed between 1990-94, based on official data of the State Forest Administration and National Parks (after Frackowiak et al. In Press).
autumn.In late autumnbearstendto migratetowardbaiting places in higher elevations and maturebeech forests (Fig. 3). Spruce thickets are commonly used for bedding, especially in spring and autumn(Frackowiakand Gula 1996).
Legal Status and Management Brownbearsbecamelegally protectedin Polandin 1952 (Dziennik Ustaw 1952). The species is categorized as rare with a high chance of extinction in the Polish Red Data Book of Animals (Glowaciniski1992). The Department of Forestry,a partof the Ministryof Environment Protection,Forestryand NaturalResources (MEPFNR), is responsiblefor the managementof protectedspecies andmay issue licenses to kill nuisancebears. Since World WarII, 4 such individualswere shot (For. Dep. data). A nuisance female with 3 cubs was trappedin 1990 and moved from Tatra National Park to the Wroclaw Zoo. She subsequentlydied, probablydue to improperhandling procedures. The MEPFNR is legally responsible for all damages done by bears to humanproperty(e.g., livestock, crops,
beehives, etc.). Damages are estimatedby a committee consisting of representativesof the local administration and Departmentof Forestry. Bear-relateddamages and annualfluctuationsby category for the last 5 years are listed in Table 1. These damages have an annual estimatedvalue of US $6,400 (Bobek et al. 1993). Damage compensationis the only managementpracticefor bears in Poland.
FactorsThreateningBear Populations and Their Habitat Poaching.-After Word War II, at least 10 cases of bear poaching were documentedin Poland (Podobinski 1962, Parusel 1985, Jakubiec and Buchalczyk 1987, Jakubiec 1990, Kiersnowski 1990, Frackowiaket al. In Press.). Recentlywildlife poachinghas become morefrequent, especially poaching deer for meat. Neck snares, the most common poaching device, are quite dangerous for bears. The most recent case of bear poaching was documentedin November 1994 in Bieszczady. A male, about6 years old, was capturedin a neck snareprobably set for deer (For. Dep. Staff, pers. commun., 1994). In a
/
84
Ursus 10:1998
summer
spring
autumn
[//. ?r;,.
I!v: /
wild fruits
crops
I
berries
5
grasses
*
nuts
,
other plants
deer
111
other wild
Ill
animals
livestock *
insects
Fig. 2. Food habits of brown bears, by % scat volume, in the Bieszczady Mountains, Poland 1992-94.
Sprin
Spring
S u m mer
Summer
I Meadows above 700 m a.s.l. * Meadows below 700 m a.s.l. * Alder stands O Remaining spruce stands Fig. 3. Seasonal changes
Av Fall ailai
Fall
i
t
Availability
D Spruce thickets E Maturebeech stands * Immaturebeech stands
in brown bear habitat use versus availability in the BiPe7r7ady
Mountains, Poland 1992-94.
BROWN BEARSINPOLAND * Gula et al.
Table 1. The numbers of beehives destroyed and livestock killed by brown bears in Poland, 1987-91 (after Frackowiak et al., In Press). Category
1987
1988
1989
1990
Beehives Sheep Cattle Pigs Goats Horses
49 41 27 2 2 2
42 101 15 0 1 0
98 115 21 3 0 0
140 32 16 0 1 1
85
range;(3) determinepotentialcorridorsbetweenthe main bearrefuges;and(4) assess habitatrequirementsandpreferences based on radiomarkedbears.
1991
Total
Public Education
56 77 4 0 5 0
385 366 80 5 9 2
Educationshould be directedtowardthe special interest groups,includinghunters,foresters,tourists,farmers, and the general public. Huntersand foresters can help monitor bear populations because they have higher chances of encounteringbears in the wild relative to the rest of the humanpopulation. With properinstruction, they could collect valuabledata. Huntereducationis urgent becauseof unofficialreportsof bearsbeing mistaken for wild boars. Touristsshouldbe taughthow to behave in bear countryto avoid unnecessarydisturbanceof animals and to minimize the risk of a bear attack. Farmers should be given informationabout their legal rights to claim damages, and they should be taught appropriate measures to protect crops and livestock from bears. Through school education and the media, the general public shouldbe informedaboutthe statusof the species, potentialthreatsandpossibilitiesfor bearprotection,and necessary measures for the future survival of bears in Poland. Data on biological and habitatneeds could be used to develop guidelines for local land developers and industry. These guidelinesshouldbe basedon models of population trends, habitat changes, and habitat and food requirementsof brown bears. The first sites to test such guidelines should be in nationalparksand biospherereserves, with furtherextension considered for landscape parks,State ForestDistricts,and huntingdistricts. Bears found in Poland belong to the much larger Carpathianpopulation. The existence of the species in Poland depends directly on conservation of bears in Slovakia,Ukraine,andRomania. Currently,researchand managementamong countries along the Carpathiansis not coordinated. Populationviability of brown bears in the Carpathianscannotbe assuredwhile one state intensively huntsthe species andthe borderingstateconsiders it a rarespecies worthyof full protection. Therefore,it is absolutely essential to establish a routine international monitoringprogramfollowed by consistentmanagement measures. Due to the umbrellastatusof the brownbear, a successful programto ensure the survival of this rare species wouldprovideappropriateconservationmeasures for the whole ecosystem.
few cases, illegal bearhuntingwas organizedfor various officials before 1989 (For. Dep. Staff, Lutowiska, pers.commun., 1991-1994). Local Development.-Rapid growthof local economies may significantly change areas of small-scale farming. Bieszczady and Beskid Niski, which are undeveloped, may be threatenedin this way. Along these ranges, vast areasarebeing auctionedthatformerlybelongedto bankruptedstatefarms. The landwill probablybe split among many owners, which would increase habitatfragmentation. Habitatneeds of large predatorsare not taken into considerationby local developmentplans. Therefore,the futureof these areas and their ability to supportbears is uncertain. Tourism.-Large partsof the Carpathiansare popular recreationareasfor most of the year. Rapiddevelopment associatedwiththe touristbusinessbringsincreasingnumbers of visitors with related disturbanceand infrastructure, including hotels, mountain shelters, and skiing stations.Area surroundingnationalparksareparticularly threatened(Fig. 1). Logging.-Logging is intensivein the Carpathiansand only partiallylimited in nationalparks. Clear cutting is not permittedin the entire area. However the selective logging that takes place directly contributesto altered structureof tree stands, lowered age of the forest, and decreased biodiversity. New forest roads increase human access to remote forest areas,and logging activities contributeto disturbance.
MANAGEMENT IMPLICATIONS BiologicalData on Bears Knowledge of brown bear status is limited to data on distribution,preliminaryestimatesof populationsize, bear diet, and habitat preferences. More specific data and actions are needed to conserve bear populationsin Poland: (1) monitor populationsby more efficient methods; (2) evaluate available habitat within brown bear
LITERATURE CITED Z. KWIATKOWSKI, BOBEK,B., K. PERZANOWSKI, A. LESNIAK, AND
86
Ursus 10:1998
B. SEREMET. 1993. Economic aspects of brown bear and wolf predationin southeasternPoland. Pages 373-375 in J.A. Bissonette and P.R. Krausman,eds. Integratingpeople and wildlife for a sustainablenature. Proc. FirstIntl. Wildl. Manage. Congr.The Wildlife Society, Bethesda,Md. ANDM.R. PELTON. 1992. Brown CLEVENGER,A.P., F.J. PURROY,
bear (Ursus arctos L.) habitat use in the Cantabrian mountains,Spain. Mammalia56:203-214. FRACKOWIAK, W., ANDR. GULA. 1996. The preliminary surveys
of pre- and post-hibernationdenninghabits of brownbears in the Bieszczady Mountains. J.Wildl. Res. 1(2):190-192. ,
,
ANDK. PERZANOWSKI.In Press. Bear specialist
group conservation action plan, Poland. In S. Herrero, C. Servheen,and B. Peyton eds. Bear ConservationAction Plan. Int. Union Conserv. Nat. Nat. Resour., Gland, Switzerland. 1992. Polskie Wydawnictwa Rolnicze Z., EDITOR. GLOWACINSKI,
I Lesne, Warszawa.351pp. (In Polish.) R. 1992. The densityandage structureof the population GULA, of brown bear Ursus arctos in the Bieszczady Mountains,
Poland. Int. Conf. Bear Res. and Manage.9(1):119-127. 1995. Size and age structure of , ANDW. FRACKOWIAK.
the brownbear (Ursusarctos) populationin the Bieszczady Mountains. J. Wildl. Res. 1:65-69. ,AND
. 1996. Status and management of brown
bears in Poland. J. Wildl. Res. 2:221 Z. 1990. Distributionof the brown bear in Poland JAKUBIEC, and problemsconcerningits protection. Aquilo Ser. Zool. 27:51-57. , ANDT. BUCHALCZYK.1987. The brown bear in Poland:
its history and presentnumbers.Acta Theriol. 32(17):289306. KIERSNOWSKI,R.
1990. Niedzwiedzie I ludzie w dawnych I
nowszych czasach.Polski InstytutWydawniczy.471pp. (In Polish.) J.B. 1985. The occurrenceof brownbearUrsusarctos PARUSEL, L., in Babia Gora,Jalowiec and Polica ranges(High Beskid Mts.). Acta Zool. Cracov. 29:53-68. PODOBINSKI,L. 1962. Zwierzeta TPN w 1961 I wiosna 1962.
Wierchy 31:250-260. (In Polish.)
