Presented by :

YURIY SHEVCHUK
2nd Year’s FWR Student

David J. Mattson
Introduction
Outline:

Purpose of the study
1. What? Why?

Location and features of interest
1. Geographical location and landscape
2. General Characteristics

Inventory
1. Data collection techniques
2. Structure of study
3. How were things done

Discovery
1. Findings
2. Determinations

Conclusion
The Purpose:

The primary purpose of the study was to estimate
variance of ungulate use by grizzly bears, as well as, to
determine how grizzlies use ungulates throughout
time.
The Purpose (ctd.):

To determine relationships between the grizzly bears
and ungulates that are found within the YNP;

To collect enough data to analyze and evaluate key
points from ungulate management perspective.

To understand grizzly’s overall consumption of
ungulates;
Purpose (ctd):

To determine whether annual consumption of
ungulates and relative frequency of predation on elk
calf were greater in 1984-1992, or 1977-1983; and

Whether use of ungulates was associated with use of

white-bark pine (Pinus albicaulis) seeds.

David J. Matson
Other work done

Closing large garbage
Use of ungulates by
dumps with grizzly bears in Alaska
Yellowstone areas and Canada as described
and in areas within by (Boertje et al. 1988,
close proximity;
Larsen et al. 1989; Ballard
et al. 1991; Gasaway et al.
1992).

Putting out large

fires, especially large
fire of 1988 that
burned 36% of
Yellowstone National
Park’s area.
Use of ungulates and use of refuse

Where dumps
were accessible,
bears got used to
feeding on
garbage, and lost
their natural
instincts of
hunting.

Even scavenging
decreased because
of available
garbage
1988 fire affects on Yellowstone
grizzly bears

in greater Yellowstone,
1988 fire directly killed
345 elk, 12 moose, 36
deer, 9 bison, and 6 black
bears

Many grizzlies were
found scavenging on
carcasses of animals that
suffered death from fire
Alaska and Canada study

In parts of Alaska and Canada

ungulate were kept at low by heavy
predation on ungulate calves by
grizzly bears .
White-bark pine seeds vs.
ungulates

White-
bark pine ungulates
seeds

Grizzly
bears
Location:
Yellowstone National
Park (entire park area),
including six national
forests in states of
1. Wyoming;
2. Idaho; and
3. Montana.
Area = 23,300 km²
During 1977 -1992
(15 years)
Location (ctd.):

>75% Coniferous forests
>2100 m plateaus among higher
mountains

Cold winters vs. warm summers
Mean annual temperature ≥0° C

!
1:1,505,936
0 35 70 140 210 280
Kilometers
Methods:

Hypothesizing

Capturing

Taking body
measurements

Air relocating

Radio tagging

Sub sampling

Investigating

Identifying

Comparing
Knight and Eberhardt (1985) & Blanchard and Knight (1991)

Bear Capturing

Measurements taking
and identifying

Relocating

Radio tagging and
applying other
tagging methods
for easier
identification and
to facilitate future
data collection

Releasing

Tracking and investigating
predating/scavenging scene
Yellowstone grizzly bear investigations were
focused on ungulates, rather than bears
More

Ungulates
FOCUS

Less Bears
Types of data recorded
• Age class • Sex
• Established time since death • Marrow condition

Cervidae Bovidae

teeth eruption
Horn annuli

wear

During 1980-1981 animals were aged by analysis of cementum annuli

from jaws that were collected from carcasses

Tracking
What was inferred about bear numbers and identities was based on
correspondence of radio-tagged bears to bear signs found around carcasses.
• track sizing • droppings/feces
• diggings • beds
Predation indicators were signs of struggling, such as:

• broken branches • broken gouges • internal hemorrhaging

• broken vertebra • diagnostic claw marks
on hide
• hide manipulation • bone fracturing
• disarticulation
• relative locations of
hair, rumen and skeletal
remains

Mattson & Knight (1982).


Calculations
• total energy expenditures

• total energetic cost per bear (EC, in KJ day^-1, whee 1 KJ = 0.239 kcal)
were estimated as: EC=AC(287 BM^0.712), where AC=2.7 for males
and 1.4 for females

• basal metabolic rate

• total energy derived from meat =0.88(22.8MT), where 0.88 is

metabolized energy as a proportion from gross energy, 22.8=KJ gross
energy available from 1 g. of meat, and MT=gram of meat estimated to
have been used by an average bear. EA/(ED×EC) gave total active
activity cost giving by meat, where AC is number of days between last
and first ratio-relocations at den sites (224 days for adult males and
188 days for adult females)

• Unbalanced ANOVA test was used to address hypotheses employing

parametric techniques where data were normal or could be
normalized by transformations
 Results

Total and monthly consumption

53%

24%

18%

4%
1%

Elk Bison Moose Domestic stock. Mule deer


Elk calf and domestic livestock
• Scavenged elk <24 months old, and killed and scavenged adult female elk were
primary food source of grizzly bears

• Elk calf predation provided 4% of total ungulate meat

• Ungulates that died from human intervention accounted for 8% of
observations and 16% of total annual consumption
Use of ungulates throughout seasons of
the year
September-
April-May
October

Ungulate consumption

June-July

Predation contributed relatively little
(9%) of total meat consumed in April-May

July-October (32%)

October (58% of total ungulate meat)

Other two seasons (2% and 5%, April-May, and June)

Both scavenging and predation on adult male ungulates
increased from April-June (11%) to July and after (47%).

Predation on elk calves were most common in June, calving
season (71%), followed by July-October (24%), and April-
May (3%)
Using ungulates

adult female elk were used less than expected and elk
calves were used more than expected by relative
availability during all seasons.

Bison yearlings were underused during Jun-October

Edibles consumed from moose (46%) and elk
(43%)were obtained by predation

Relative frequency of predation

Highest Lowest
Adult moose Elk >6 months old
Elk <6 months Bison of all sex-age classes
old

Year differences
Consumption:
Greatest: Smallest:
1980 1981
1989 1986
1990
1991
Relative Frequency of Total Consumption:
Early years: Late years:
40% 27%
Elk calf predation:
23% 17%
Pine seeds vs. ungulates
Annual consumption of white-bark pine seeds was either
high, or low because of the abrupt inflection in
relationship between bear use and seed crop size (Matson
and Reinhart, 1994).

Years were also classified as use, or non use based on a cut

point of 20% frequency of pine seeds in grizzly bear feces
(Mattson at al. 1992).

If years wee also classified by frequency of ungulate use

during June-October, with a cut point 8, then high level of
ungulate and white-bark pine seed are mutually exclusive.

Similarly, frequency of ungulate use was 2.1x greater

during years when grizzlies didn’t use pine seeds
compared to years when they did.
Conclusion:

Most of meat diet came from elk, and bison

Moose were frequently killed because of their solitary
appearances

Use of ungulates were mutually exclusive in relation to
use of white-bark pine seeds

Ungulate use varied throughout locations, seasons,
and study years

Variation of frequency predation by bears between
ungulate species, geographical location, seasons of the
year, and availability of alternate food was not
estblished
References sited:

Chapman. D. G.. and D. S. Robson. 1960. The analysis of
a catch curve. Biometrics 16:354-368.

Craighead. J. J.. F. C. Craighead. Jr.. and J. Summner. 1976.
Reproductive cycles and rates in the grizzly bear. I'rsirs
arctos horribilis, of the Yellowstone ecosystem. Pages 337-
356 in M. R. Pelton. J. W. Lentfer. and G. E. Folk. Jr..
editors. Bears-their biology and management. International
Union for Conservation of Natural Resources Publication
New Series 40.

Craighead, J. J., J. R. Varney, and F. C. Craighead, Jr. 1974.
A population analysis ofthe Yellowstone grizzly bears. Bulletin
40. Montana Forest and Conservation Experiment
Station. University of Montana, Missoula. Montana. USA.

Eberhardt, L. L. 1977. Optimal policies for conservation of
large mammals. with special reference to marine ecosystems.
Environmental Conservation 4(3):205-2 12.

Eberhardt, L. L.. and D. B. Siniff. 1977. Population dynamics
and marine mammal management. Journal of the Fisheries
Research Board of Canada 34: 183-1 90.