Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska

Anchorage, Alaska, has 301,000 human residents and hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. Anchorage also supports a viable population of brown bears (Ursus arctos). As a result, human–bear encounters are common. We used camera traps to monitor recreational trails near salmon spawning streams a...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Jessica A. Coltrane, Rick Sinnott
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Utah State University 2017-02-01
Series:Human-Wildlife Interactions
Subjects:
Online Access:https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi/vol9/iss1/13
id doaj-1dba80e15b4f4062bc877dc1d1ff3d80
record_format Article
spelling doaj-1dba80e15b4f4062bc877dc1d1ff3d802020-11-25T03:57:24ZengUtah State UniversityHuman-Wildlife Interactions2155-38742155-38742017-02-019110.26077/wzyf-zz97Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, AlaskaJessica A. Coltrane0Rick Sinnott1Alaska Department of Fish and GameAlaska Department of Fish and GameAnchorage, Alaska, has 301,000 human residents and hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. Anchorage also supports a viable population of brown bears (Ursus arctos). As a result, human–bear encounters are common. We used camera traps to monitor recreational trails near salmon spawning streams at 3 study sites during the summers of 2009 to 2012 to better understand daily and seasonal activity patterns of bears and humans on these trails. The more remote study sites had the least human activity and the most bear activity. Human–bear encounters were most likely to occur from July through early September due to a higher degree of overlap between human and bear activity during this timeframe. Most brown bears at our study sites appeared to have adopted a crepuscular and nocturnal activity pattern, which was more pronounced at the site with the most human use. More people used trails Friday through Sunday, while there was no difference in bear activity among other days of week. Recreational activities and user groups differed among sites. Based on our data, areas should be assessed individually to mitigate adverse human–bear encounters. However, a potential solution for avoiding dangerous bear encounters is to restrict human access or types of recreational activity. When human access is controlled in bear habitat, distribution of visitors becomes spatially and temporally more predictable, allowing bears an opportunity to adjust activity patterns to avoid people while still using the resource. https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi/vol9/iss1/13brown bearshuman–bear conflictsrecreational activityremote camerasursus arctos
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Jessica A. Coltrane
Rick Sinnott
spellingShingle Jessica A. Coltrane
Rick Sinnott
Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska
Human-Wildlife Interactions
brown bears
human–bear conflicts
recreational activity
remote cameras
ursus arctos
author_facet Jessica A. Coltrane
Rick Sinnott
author_sort Jessica A. Coltrane
title Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska
title_short Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska
title_full Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska
title_fullStr Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska
title_full_unstemmed Brown Bear and Human Recreational Use of Trails in Anchorage, Alaska
title_sort brown bear and human recreational use of trails in anchorage, alaska
publisher Utah State University
series Human-Wildlife Interactions
issn 2155-3874
2155-3874
publishDate 2017-02-01
description Anchorage, Alaska, has 301,000 human residents and hundreds of thousands of visitors each year. Anchorage also supports a viable population of brown bears (Ursus arctos). As a result, human–bear encounters are common. We used camera traps to monitor recreational trails near salmon spawning streams at 3 study sites during the summers of 2009 to 2012 to better understand daily and seasonal activity patterns of bears and humans on these trails. The more remote study sites had the least human activity and the most bear activity. Human–bear encounters were most likely to occur from July through early September due to a higher degree of overlap between human and bear activity during this timeframe. Most brown bears at our study sites appeared to have adopted a crepuscular and nocturnal activity pattern, which was more pronounced at the site with the most human use. More people used trails Friday through Sunday, while there was no difference in bear activity among other days of week. Recreational activities and user groups differed among sites. Based on our data, areas should be assessed individually to mitigate adverse human–bear encounters. However, a potential solution for avoiding dangerous bear encounters is to restrict human access or types of recreational activity. When human access is controlled in bear habitat, distribution of visitors becomes spatially and temporally more predictable, allowing bears an opportunity to adjust activity patterns to avoid people while still using the resource.
topic brown bears
human–bear conflicts
recreational activity
remote cameras
ursus arctos
url https://digitalcommons.usu.edu/hwi/vol9/iss1/13
work_keys_str_mv AT jessicaacoltrane brownbearandhumanrecreationaluseoftrailsinanchoragealaska
AT ricksinnott brownbearandhumanrecreationaluseoftrailsinanchoragealaska
_version_ 1724461090050408448