144

Chapter 8

American Black Bear Conservation Action Plan

Michael R. Pelton, Alex B. Coley, Thomas H. Eason, Diana L. Doan Martinez,

Joel A. Pederson, Frank T. van Manen, and Keith M. Weaver

IUCN Category: Lower Risk, least concern CITES Listing: Appendix II

Scientific Name: Ursus americanus

Common Names: American black bear, oso negro americano, ours noir americain

Introduction

Physical description: Black bears are plantigrade,
pentadactyl, and have short (2–3cm), curved, nonretractable
claws. Average weights range from 40 to 70kg for adult
females and from 60 to 140kg for adult males; an occasional
adult male will exceed 250–300kg. Full skeletal growth is
reached at four to five years for females and six to seven
years for males, although weights for both sexes may
continue to increase for an additional two to three years.
Fur is normally uniform in color except for a brown muzzle
and an occasional white blaze on the chest. A black color
phase predominates in the eastern portion of the range and
brown, cinnamon, or blond phases tend to be more prevalent
in the western portion of the range. Unique white-bluish
phases occur on the Pacific coast in northwestern North

America. The dental formula is 3/3, 1/1, 4/4, 2/3 = 42. The
first three premolars of each jaw are usually rudimentary.
Dentition is bunodont not flattened. Black bears have a
relatively straight facial profile. Ears are small, rounded,
and erect. Eyes of young are blue but turn rich brown with
maturation. The tail is short and inconspicuous.

Reproduction: Black bears breed in summer. Females have
been detected in estrus as early as mid-May and as late as
mid-August. Black bears are promiscuous breeders, and
males often have brief fights over a receptive female.
Females are induced ovulators and exhibit delayed
implantation. The gestation period is seven to eight months;
the blastocyst implants in late November to early December
with a six to eight week period of fetal development before
birth from mid-January to mid-February. Females have

Milo Burcham

Marked American black bear
(Ursus americanus) in Banff
National Park, Alberta,
Canada.

145

North America, preferred habitats consistently have thick,
sometimes almost impenetrable, understory vegetation
encompassing part of their habitat. This understory ranges
from impenetrable pocosin or Ti-Ti swamps, to thick laurel
“hells”, to white cedar bogs, to steep, dry chaparral ridges,
to young or stunted spruce-fir “thickets”. As the pressures
of human activities increase, the importance of these sites
in providing both refuge cover and food also increases.

Historic range, current distribution
and status

The American black bear historically occupied most
forested regions of North America (Hall 1981) (Figure
8.1). The present distribution of the species is primarily
restricted to less settled, forested regions (Pelton 1982)
(Figure 8.1). Based on 1993 survey responses from each
province in Canada, black bears inhabit much of their
original range, however they are absent from the southern
farmlands of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. The
black bear was extirpated from Prince Edward Island in
1937, and consequently, will not be considered in this
report. Based on 1993 survey responses from seven
provinces, the total black bear population is 327,200 to
341,200 (Table 8.1). This estimate does not include bear
populations in New Brunswick, Northwest Territories,
Nova Scotia, and Saskatchewan whose population sizes
are unknown. All provinces indicated stable populations
of black bears over the last decade.

In the eastern United States, the current range of the

black bear is continuous throughout most of New England,
but exhibits increasing levels of fragmentation southward
through the middle Atlantic and southeastern states.
Nevertheless, this distribution seems to have expanded
during the last decade (Maehr 1984). Based on the 1993

six functional mammae. The normal litter size is two, but
litters of three or four young are not uncommon. Young
stay with their mother 16 to 17 months before dispersing,
thus females typically breed every other year. Age at
sexual maturity, breeding interval, and litter size are all
related to food quality. Poor nutrition causes a delay in
sexual maturity from three years to six or seven years of
age, and decreased litter sizes from 3–4 to 1–2 cubs, and in
some instances, a total lack of reproduction.

Social behavior: Black bears are normally solitary animals
except for female groups (female and young), breeding
pairs in summer, and congregations at feeding sites. Adult
females establish territories during summer. Temporal
spacing is exhibited by individuals at other times of the
year and is likely maintained through a dominance
hierarchy system. Larger bears dominate smaller bears
with threatening gestures (huffing sounds, chopping jaws,
stamping feet, or charging). Actual fights are uncommon
except among males competing for females and a female
protecting her young. Family groups communicate using
a variety of sounds such as the “purring” of young when
nursing, squalling of young when threatened or
uncomfortable, and a low grunting sound by the female to
assemble her young. Tree marking is another form of
communication that peaks during the summer. The
ritualistic nature of this biting, clawing, and rubbing
behavior, its intensity, and its defined location suggest
that it is associated with some important aspect of the
social structure of a black bear population. Why black
bears mark objects is still open to question. Black bears are
normally crepuscular but breeding and feeding activities
may alter this pattern seasonally.

Habitat preferences: Prime black bear habitat is
characterized by relatively inaccessible terrain, thick
understory vegetation, and abundant sources of food in
the form of shrub or tree-borne soft or hard mast. Black
bears are very adaptable and have maintained populations
surprisingly well in the presence of humans where their
numbers are not overharvested. If quality habitats
consisting of some form of refuge are not available, local
populations succumb to the intolerance of humans. In the
southwestern portion of the range, characteristic habitats
consist of chaparral and pinyon-juniper woodland sites.
In the southeastern portion of the range, habitat is
characterized by oak-hickory and mixed-mesophytic
forests in mountainous areas and on low, coastal sites with
a mixture of flatwoods, bays, and swampy hardwoods. In
the northeastern portion of the range, black bears inhabit
beech-birch-coniferous forests and swampy areas of white
cedar. The spruce-fir forest dominates much of the habitats
of this species in the Rocky Mountains. Along the Pacific
coast, redwood, sitka spruce, and hemlock predominate
as overstory cover. Throughout the range of this species in

Table 8.1. Population estimates and trends of
American black bears in Canada, based on 1993
survey responses.

Province

Population estimate

Trend

Alberta

39,600

Stable

British Columbia

121,600

Stable

Manitoba

25,000

Stable

New Brunswick

Unknown

Stable/declining

Newfoundland

6,000–10,000

Stable

Northwest Territories

Unknown

Stable

Nova Scotia

Unknown

Stable

Ontario

65,000–75,000

Stable to increasing

Québec

60,000

Stable

Saskatchewan

Unknown

Stable

Yukon

10,000

Stable

Total

327,200–341,200

East and Northeast – stable; West and Central – declining.

146

survey responses from 35 states, black bear populations
are stable or increasing with the exception of Idaho and
New Mexico. The total population estimate of black bears
in the United States is between 186,881 and 206,751. This
estimate does not include data from Alaska, Idaho, South
Dakota, Texas, and Wyoming, whose population sizes are
unknown.

Leopold (1959; Figure 8.1) believed that the range of

the black bear in Mexico included the mountainous regions
of the northern states of Sonora, Chihuahua, Coahuila,
Tamaulipas, Nuevo Leon, and Durango, extending as far
south as Zacatecas. He noted that the range may have
previously extended further south, but may have been

reduced due to hunting and habitat loss. Baker and Greer
(1962) mentioned the possibility of a population in northern
Nayarit, and Hall (1981) also included the additional
southern states of San Luis Potosi and Aguascalientes. No
recent attempt has been made to qualify the present
distribution of the black bear in Mexico. As of 1993,
known populations of black bears in Mexico exist in four
areas. Distributions of other populations, as previously
marked on Leopold’s map (1959), have not been updated.
Some isolated populations are increasing due to protection
by private landowners. In general, however, the black bear
is threatened due to an increasing human population,
poaching, and extensive habitat loss.

Atlantic

Ocean

Pacific

Ocean

1000 km

1000 miles

Historic Distribution

Present Distribution

Figure 8.1.

Historic and present distribution of black bears (

Ursus americanus

) in North America.

147

Status and management of the
black bear in Canada

Surveys were sent to bear biologists in all 12 Canadian
provinces to request information on distribution and
population status, legal status, population and habitat
threats, population and habitat management, human-
bear interactions, educational programs, and management
recommendations. All provinces responsed.

Legal status

The black bear is considered both a big game and furbearer
species in all provinces except New Brunswick and
Northwest Territories, where they are designated as a big
game species only. Black bears are regarded as a pest
species in agricultural areas of Manitoba.

Population and habitat threats

There are no major threats to black bears in Canada. The
general remoteness and lack of human settlement in
much of Canada leaves vast expanses of undisturbed
habitat for black bears. Some provinces, nevertheless,

reported limited threats to the species on a local scale.
Forest clearing for agriculture along the St. Lawrence
river between Montreal and Québec City has caused loss
of black bear habitat in Québec. Similarly, in New
Brunswick, forest clearing and human development is
responsible for some loss of black bear habitat.
Saskatchewan and Yukon Territories also reported limited
threats to black bears due to poaching and depredation
kills. All other provinces reported minimal or no threat to
black bear populations.

Population management

Hunting levels: All provinces hold both spring and fall
hunting seasons, with a bear hunting license required.
The estimated annual number of hunters varies greatly
by province, and totals 80,822 across all of Canada
(Table 8.2).

Harvest limitations: In all provinces, both sexes may be
legally harvested using several methods (Table 8.3).
However, there are some constraints regarding cubs-of-
the-year (COY) and females with young. With the exception
of Saskatchewan, COY are not legal for harvest. Females
with COY are not legal for harvest except in Nova Scotia

Table 8.2. Bag limits, number of hunters, and annual harvest of American black bears in Canada, based on
1993 survey responses.

Hunting,
trapping,
and mortality

Annual bag limit

1, 2, 6

1, 2

Hunters (No.)

Resident

11,286

17,544

2,000

1,184

245

7,673

18,977

Non-resident

1,445

2,265

950

2,406

10,347

4,486

Total

12,731

19,809

2,950

3,590

259

18,020

23,463

Country total = 80,822

Harvest (no. killed)

Resident hunters

1,458

3,270

600

195

100

1,565

2,424

1,300

Non-resident hunters

925

795

700

768

5,198

Shot by trappers

* 200–400

656

250

Trapped

Damage and nuisance

280

409 200–400

20–25

>25

<100

Illegal/unreported

>1,000

Highway mortality

Total

3,742

4,474

1,900

1,060

175

162

6777

3,113

1,650

105

Country total = 23,198

Based on most recent data available.

? = unknown; - = not applicable; * = “insignificant”.

Bag limit of 1 or 2 depends on management unit; trappers on registered traplines may harvest 6 bears.

Bag limit of 1 or 2 depends on management unit.

On registered traplines annual harvest limit varies from >1 to unlimited.

Sport harvest figure includes resident and non-resident harvest. Native harvest termed “small”.

Sport harvest figure includes resident and non-resident harvest.

Total harvest including resident hunters, non-resident hunters, and trappers.

Trapper harvest figure includes those shot and trapped by licensed trappers.

Alberta

British

Columbia

Manitoba

New Brunswick

Newfoundland

Northwest

Territories

Nova Scotia

Ontario

Québec

Saskatchewan

Yukon

148

American black bears (Ursus
americanus) eating at a
garbage dump, British
Columbia, Canada.

WWF/Terry Domico

Table 8.3. Legal harvest methods of American black bears in Canada, based on 1993 survey responses.

Hunting
method

Firearms

Archery

Bait

Dogs

Traps

X = Legal harvest method.

Designated management units only.

Hunting permitted only over registered bait sites.

Separate snaring license required.

Alberta

British

Columbia

Manitoba

New Brunswick

Newfoundland

Northwest

Territories

Nova Scotia

Ontario

Québec

Saskatchewan

Yukon

and Saskatchewan. In Alberta, females with COY are
protected on public lands, whereas in New Brunswick and
Ontario they are protected only during the spring hunt. In
Northwest Territories, females with yearlings are also
protected. British Columbia and Yukon Territory protect
bears less than two years of age and bears accompanied by
bears less than two years. All other provinces allow harvest
of females with yearlings.

Annual mortality: Annual black bear mortality in Canada
exceeds 23,189 bears. Causes of mortality include hunting,
trapping, road kills, and depredation kills.

Habitat management

Alberta is the only province currently managing habitat
for black bears. Their management program consists of

habitat inventory, protection, retention (integration of
bear management goals with those of other resources),
and enhancement (increase forest diversity through habitat
manipulation).

Human-bear interactions

Encounters with black bears are inevitable where humans
and black bears share the same territory. There have been
16 recorded nonfatal assaults by black bears and 14
human fatalities in Canada over the past few decades
(Table 8.4).

Black bear damage and nuisance complaints commonly

involve crop and livestock depredation, apiary damage,
and garbage nuisance. Five provinces reported some level
of damage and nuisance bear translocation. Alberta, British
Columbia, and Saskatchewan reported fewer than 100

149

translocations annually. New Brunswick estimated
translocation of 50–60 bears annually whereas Nova Scotia
estimated fewer than 15. Only Alberta allows for financial
compensation to the landowner affected by damage and
nuisance bears.

Educational programs and needs

Most black bear education programs in Canada center on
camper safety. Five provinces publish brochures and other
information to help reduce the risk of bear encounters in
the backcountry. Additionally, Newfoundland is currently
implementing a bear safety program for backcountry
users. Educational videos and television programs about
bears are available from Northwest Territories.

Provincial agencies want to expand existing educational

programs about black bears. School and public
presentations by wildlife officers are desired in New
Brunswick, Newfoundland, Northwest Territories, and
Saskatchewan. Also, the promotion of non-consumptive
uses is desired in British Columbia, and strategies to help
minimize black bear crop depredation are needed in New
Brunswick. Finally, all provinces need readily available
bear fact sheets and camper safety guidelines.

Management recommendations

Recommended management activities for the Canadian
black bear vary widely based on the priorities of individual
provinces (Table 8.5). The handling of nuisance bears and
increase of nonconsumptive uses seem to be the most needed
management actions.

Table 8.4. Non-fatal and fatal attacks by American
black bears on humans in Canada, based on 1993
survey responses.

Province

No. non-fatal attacks

No. fatal attacks

Alberta

British Columbia

Manitoba

Unknown

New Brunswick

Newfoundland

Northwest Territories

“Rare”

Nova Scotia

Ontario

Québec

Unknown

Saskatchewan

“Exceedingly rare”

Yukon

Unknown

Data collected since 1974.

Data collected from 1980–1986.

Data collected since 1922.

No data on black bear attacks collected by province personnel.

Table 8.5. Future management activities recommended for American black bears in Canada, based on 1993
survey responses.

Recommended
management

Develop accurate, inexpensive
censusing techniques

Management of
nuisance bears

Research impacts of
consumptive and

nonconsumptive use

Research habitat selection
on landscape basis

Research population dynamics

Continue/expand
public education

Eliminate trade of bear parts

Improve human
waste management

Collect better baseline data

Protect den sites

X = Need indicated by province personnel.

Alberta

British

Columbia

Manitoba

New Brunswick

Newfoundland

Northwest

Territories

Nova Scotia

Ontario

Québec

Saskatchewan

Yukon

150

Table 8.6. American black bear harvest seasons and regulations in the United States of America (1992),
based on 1993 survey results.

State

Season(s)

Notes

Alaska

1 Sept.–30 June

Units 1, 2, 3, 5, 6

OPEN

Units 7, 9, 11–13, 15–26

1 Sept.–25 May

Unit 14A
Dogs and baits require permits, harvesting females with cubs is prohibited,
Bears may be killed in defense of life or property, bag limit for non-residents is
1 bear, residents 2 bears, only 1 of which can be glacier bear color phase

Arizona

1 Sept.–7 Sept.

Management units with small populations; hunting with baits prohibited

1 Sept.–1 Dec.

Management units with large populations; hunting with baits prohibited

1 April–16 April

3 management units; hunting with baits or dogs prohibited

California

15 August–6 Sept.

Archery only; no dogs or bait

10 Oct.–27 Dec.

Archery, rifle, pistol, and dogs allowed; no baiting
Harvesting bears

≤

50 pounds and females with cubs prohibited

Colorado

2 Sept.–30 Sept.

Still hunting with weapon of choice

≈

10 Oct.–10 Nov.

Concurrent with deer and elk season

Florida

30 Nov.–11 Dec.

Apalachicola National Forest

27 Nov.–24 Jan.

Baker and Columbia Counties

Georgia

14 Nov.–6 Dec.

9 counties N. Georgia; hunting with dogs or baits prohibited

Last weekend Sept. and

5 counties S. Georgia; Dogs allowed; hunting with baits prohibited

1st 2 weekends Oct.
15 Dec.

Ocmulgee Wildlife Management Area; hunting with dogs or baits prohibited

19 Sept.–23 Oct.

Archery hunting allowed on 9 wildlife management areas; additional bear
hunting allowed with firearms on 9 N. Georgia wildlife management areas during
2, 4-day deer hunts

Idaho

15 April

≈

15 May

Hounds, baiting, stalking, and still hunting allowed in all seasons

15 April

≈

7 June

15 Sept.–30 Sept.
15 Oct.–31 Oct.
15 Sept.

≈

15 Oct.

Maine

30 August–25 Sept.

Baiting, stalking, and still hunting allowed

13 Sept.–29 Oct.

Hunting with dogs allowed

30 Oct.–22 Nov.

Still hunting and stalking allowed

Massachusetts

2nd week Sept. (6 days)

Still hunting; dogs allowed

3rd week Nov. (6 days)

Still hunting only

Michigan

10 Sept.–21 Oct.

Firearms, archery, dogs, and baiting allowed

Minnesota

1 Sept.–17 Oct.

Hunting with dogs prohibited; baiting can begin 2 weeks prior to the season

Montana

15 April–31 May

No hounds or baiting allowed in either season; archery and firearms allowed

7 Sept.–1 Dec.

with no limitations on caliber

New Hampshire

1 Sept.–9 Nov.

Still hunting and stalking allowed

1 Sept.–19 Sept.

Hunting with bait allowed

20 Sept.–9 Nov.

Hunting with dogs allowed

16 Nov.–5 Dec.

Still hunting and stalking allowed

New Mexico

1 Sept.–30 Oct.

No baiting or trapping

New York

18 Sept.–15 Oct.

Northern New York; all legal hunting implements

23 Oct.–5 Dec.

Northern New York; archery season

27 Sept.–22 Oct.

Northern New York; all legal hunting implements

16 Oct.–22 Oct.

Northern New York; muzzleloading season

27 Nov.–14 Dec.

Southern New York; all legal hunting implements

15 Oct.–21 Nov.

Southern New York; archery season

15 Dec.–19 Dec.

Southern New York; archery season
Still hunting, stalking, and driving allowed; hunting with dogs or bait prohibited
in all seasons

North Carolina

9 Nov.–1 Jan.

5 seasons in different parts of the state that range in length from 6 days to the
entire interval; firearms (including handguns), archery, dogs, and still hunting
allowed; Dogs prohibited

151

Table 8.6 ... continued. American black bear harvest seasons and regulations in the United States of America
(1992), based on 1993 survey results.

State

Season(s)

Notes

Oregon

1 Sept.–30 Nov.

Firearms, archery, dogs, and baiting allowed

15 May–30 June OR

Controlled spring seasons; firearms, archery, dogs, and baiting allowed 1
April–15 May

South Carolina

3rd week Oct. (6 days)

Still hunting

4th week Oct. (6 days)

Dogs allowed

Tennessee

12 Oct.–16 Oct.

Dogs allowed

2 Dec.–15 Dec.

Dogs allowed

Utah

28 August–12 Oct.

Bait, dogs, and stalking allowed

6 Nov.–30 Nov.

Bait, dogs, and stalking allowed

Vermont

1 Sept.

≈

17 Nov.

Season closes 5th day of regular deer season; baiting and trapping are not
allowed

Virginia

9 Oct.–6 Nov.

Archery

29 Nov.–1 Jan.

Archery

22 Nov.–1 Jan.

Gun season without dogs

29 Nov.–1 Jan.

Gun season with dogs

Washington

1 August–31 Oct.

Western Washington; any legal big game weapon, bait, and hounds allowed

1 Sept.–25 Oct.

Eastern Washington; any legal big game weapon, bait, and hounds allowed

1 August–31 August

Northeast Washington; pursuit only, no harvest

West Virginia

6 Oct.–20 Nov.

Bow hunting (no dogs)

6 Dec.–31 Dec.

Gun hunting (dogs permitted in 11 counties, but prohibited in 5 others)

Wisconsin

11 Sept.–8 Oct.

Zone C (baiting allowed, but no dogs)

11 Sept.–1 Oct.

Zones A and B, dogs allowed

18 Sept.–8 Oct.

Zones A and B, bait/other
The opportunity to hunt first in zones A and B flip-flops annually between dog
hunters and bait/other hunters

Wyoming

1 Sept.–15 Nov.

Hunt Areas 3–27, 29–31

1 May–1 June

Hunt Areas 3, 5, 6

1 May–7 June

Hunt Areas 4, 7–12, 14–22, 24, 30, 31

1 May–15 June

Hunt Areas 13, 23, 29

1 May–30 June

Hunt Areas 25–27
Harvesting cubs and females with cubs is prohibited; baiting is allowed

Status and management of the
black bear in the United States

Surveys were sent to bear biologists in 40 states. We
requested information on distribution and population
status, legal status, population and habitat threats,
population and habitat management, human-bear
interactions, educational programs, and management
recommendations. We received responses from 39 states.

Legal status

Black bears are classified as a game species in 33 states,
although five of these states have no open hunting season
(Alabama, Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, and
Oklahoma). Bears in Louisiana, eastern Texas, and
southern Mississippi (Ursus a. luteolus) are federally listed
as a threatened subspecies under the Endangered Species

Act of 1973. Seven states classify black bears as rare,
threatened, or endangered. Florida has a dual designation,
with two northern populations classified as game and all
other populations classified as threatened.

Population and habitat threats

A majority of states regarded habitat loss (n = 35) and
fragmentation (n = 32) as threats to the species. Thirteen
states considered political constraints on proper
management of black bears a threat. Relatively few states
considered poaching (n = 11), depredation kills (n = 8),
roadkills (n = 6), or overharvest (n = 4) as threats to black
bear populations. Kentucky, Missouri, and North Carolina
reported limited public knowledge of bear biology and
management as a potential threat to black bears. Montana
considered the shortage of finances to adequately address
species needs a potential threat.

152

Population management

Hunting levels: Twenty-eight states have black bear
hunting seasons. Nineteen states have a bear hunting
license, with some also requiring a big game license.
In eight states, only a big game license is required
to hunt black bears. Nationally, more than 481,500
licenses which allow black bears to be hunted are sold
annually.

Harvest limitations: Hunting methods and seasons vary
considerably among states and may be complex (Table
8.6). Bear hunting seasons include fall only, spring and
fall, or year-round. Spring and year-round seasons are
primarily held in western states, where black bear
populations are relatively large.

Annual mortality: From 1988–1992, harvests averaged
18,845 bears per year for the entire USA (Table 8.7). Mean

Table 8.7. Population and mortality statistics of American black bears in the United States of America, based
on 1993 survey responses.

State

Estimated Population Status

No. of

No. of big

Annual black bear harvest

1988–1992

Mean

population size

trend

bear

game

mean

no. road

licenses

1988

1989

1990

1991

1992

kills/year

Alabama

<50

Game

Alaska

Unknown

Game

1,300

84,000

1,705

1,516

1,724

1,751

N/A

1,674

Arizona

2,500

Game

4,500

159

293

165

104

124

169

Arkansas

2,200

Game

4000

102

California

20,000

Game

12,000

1,359

1,211

1,493

1,266

1,332

Colorado

8,000–12,000

Unknown

Game

3,750

673

592

401

430

475

514

<10

Connecticut

15–30

Unclass.

Florida

1,000–2,000

Threat./Game

200

700

Georgia

1,700

Game

12,500

103

116

100

101

103

Idaho

Unknown

Game

20,000

1,139

1,415

1,567

1,475

N/A

1,399

Kentucky

<200

Protected

Louisiana

200–400

Threatened

Maine

19,500–20,500

Game

10,133

2,673

2,690

2,088

1,665

2,042

2,232

Maryland

175–200

Game

Massachusettes

700–750

Game

1,345

Michigan

7,000–10,000

Game

5,000

1,700

1,200

740

1,100

1,200

1,188

Minnesota

15,000

Game

8,300

1,509

1,930

2,381

2,143

3,175

2,228

Mississippi

<50

Endangered

Missouri

50–130

Rare

Montana

15,000–20,000

Game

13,564

1,241

1,664

1,350

1,153

N/A

1,352

Nevada

300

Game

New Hampshire

3,500

Game

9,786

198

241

291

123

230

217

New Jersey

275–325

Game

New Mexico

3,000

Game

2,430

258

230

297

292

228

261

New York

4,000–5,000

Game

200,000

755

880

660

763

827

777

North Carolina

6,100

Game

12,000

536

575

764

714

1,059

730

Oklahoma

116

Game

Oregon

25,000

Game

20,000

16,000

926

779

1,053

1,363

960

1,016

Pennsylvania

7,500

Game

1,560

South Carolina

200

Game

225

South Dakota

Unknown

Threatened

Tennessee

750–1,500

Game

3,500

124

Texas

Unknown

Threatened

Utah

800–1,000

Game

162

Vermont

2,300

Game

368

311

163

237

337

283

Virginia

3,000–3,500

Game

480

Washington

27,000–30,000

Game

13,000

864

1,426

1,379

1,400

1,267

West Virginia

3,500

Game

8,000

9,000

400

510

235

426

455

405

Wisconsin

6,200

Game

2,110

1,123

985

1,247

1,219

1,469

1,209

Wyoming

Unknown

Game

4,094

226

216

222

238

220

224

<10

Total

106,110

375,489 18,156 17,854 16,910 18,461 15,821

Decreasing: <<; slightly decreasing: <; stable: =; slightly increasing: >; increasing: >>.
Data taken from Servheen (1990); mean annual harvest data from 1983–1987.

153

annual harvests ranged from six bears in South Carolina
to 2,232 in Maine over this same five year period. Annual
reported mortality due to vehicle collisions ranged from
zero (Oklahoma and Texas) to approximately 70
(Minnesota) per state, averaging over 400 bears for the
entire USA (Table 8.7).

Habitat management

Ten states conduct habitat management specifically for
black bears (Table 8.8). Activities range in scale from
protection of den trees (Georgia) to land acquisition
(Florida and Louisiana) and involve state and federal
agencies and private organizations.

Human-bear interactions

Many states reported black bear damage and nuisance
problems related to garbage (n = 27), apiaries (n = 27), and
property (n = 21). Additionally, bear damage involving
animal depredation and commercial interests (i.e.,
agricultural crops and timber resources) were reported by
several states (n = 14 and n = 12, respectively). Nuisance
complaints related to human injury were least common
(n = 5).

Educational programs and needs

Twenty-one states provide educational programs related
to black bears (Table 8.9). The primary focus of many of
these programs involves general life history and
management of bears, hunter safety and techniques,
prevention of human-bear interactions, bear depredation,
and habitat protection. These education programs
utilize brochures, slide shows, exhibits, and seminars.
Several states indicate needs for public education topics
that include black bear biology and co-existing with
bears. Additionally, many states considered educating the
non-hunting public about black bear management
important.

Management recommendations

To better address management of black bears in the
future, many states considered population dynamics (n =
18), management of nuisance bear (n = 16), management
of fragmented population (n = 14), and habitat
management (n = 13) important issues. Several states also
reported integrated regional management (n = 8), reliable
mortality data (n = 10), and the general lack of data (n =
5) as important issues. Relatively few states reported
timber harvest (n = 7) and the role of dispersal (n = 6) as

Table 8.8. Habitat management actions conducted specifically for American black bears in the United States
of America, based on 1993 survey responses.

State

Habitat management action

Responsible agencies

Florida

Land Purchase

Florida Dept. of Natural Resources, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
US Forest Service, Florida Water Management Districts

Georgia

Den Tree Preservation and

US Forest Service

Habitat Protection

Louisiana

Land Acquisition

Louisiana Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries, US Fish and Wildlife Service

Reforestation and Beneficial

Louisiana Dept. of Wildlife and Fisheries, Soil Conservation

Forestry Practices

Service, US Army Corps of Engineers, US Fish and Wildlife Service,
Black Bear Conservation Committee

Maine

Management of Beech Stands

Maine Dept. of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife – Cooperative
agreements with private landowners

Montana

Protection of Riparian Habitat

Montana Dept. of Fish, Wildlife, and Parks

and Travel Corridors

New Hampshire

Forestry Practice Modification

US Forest Service

North Carolina

Timber Management

US Forest Service, North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

Food Plots, Fruit Trees and Shrubs

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

Permit Review

North Carolina Wildlife Resources Commission

Tennessee

Timber Harvest Prescriptions

US Forest Service, Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency

Vermont

Protection of Beech Stands

US Forest Service, Vermont Dept. of Fish and Wildlife, Vermont
Dept. of Forests, Parks, and Recreation, Timber Companies

Virginia

Land Management Plan

US Forest Service

154

Table 8.9. Black bear education programs in the United States, based on 1993 survey responses.

State

Education focus

Method of delivery

Colorado

Human safety in bear habitat.

Connecticut

Population increases, nuisance activities, and management problems.

Florida

Project Wild.

Idaho

Differentiating between grizzly and black bears.

Kentucky

Black bear habits and warning not to feed.

Brochure

Louisiana

Hunter awareness of protected status.

Landowner awareness of habitat needs.

Maine

Population monitoring and harvest management.

Video

Ecology, research, and management.

Slide programs

Maryland

Habits, biology, and management.

Massachusetts

Alleviating depredations on farms.

Brochure

Alleviating depredations and nuisance activities.

Posters for campgrounds

Project Wild.

Allow educators to participate in den work.

Michigan

Education strategy is being developed, will focus on coexisting with

bears and bear management.

Minnesota

Hunting techniques.

Avoiding bear-human conflicts.

Brochure

Mississippi

Explanation of endangered species status.

Museum of natural science

Missouri

Bear habits, foods.

In developmental stages

Minimizing nuisance/damage.

Montana

Bear biology and habitat needs.

Living with bears.

Nevada

Prevention of nuisance complaints.

New Hampshire

Natural history and management.

Slide presentations

New Jersey

Behavior and nuisance prevention techniques.

New York

Natural history and management.

North Carolina

Natural history and management.

Oklahoma

Minimizing bear-human interactions.

Natural history and information on immigration.

Tennessee

Avoiding bear-human conflicts.

Bear restoration in Big South Fork National River and Recreation Area.

Utah

Project Wild.

Public education.

Vermont

Habitat maps.

Management, critical habitat protection, fragmentation, and habitat loss.

Seminars and articles

Wisconsin

Management and coexisting with bears.

Slide presentations

(no organized program)

Wyoming

Avoiding bear-human conflicts.

Identification and size estimation.

Public attitude surveys.

155

important management issues. Sixteen states report other
management needs such as education, mapping and
protection of critical bear habitats, and management of
human growth.

Status and management of the
black bear in Mexico

Legal status

The legal status of the Mexican black bear is “endangered,”
as considered by the Mexican wildlife agencies, Secretaria
de Desarrollo Social, and Secretaria de Agricultura y
Recursos Hidraulicos.

Population and habitat threats

An increasing human population and a poor economy are
contributing to extensive habitat loss and poaching of
unprotected populations of black bears. A weak economy
and demands upon government agencies to attend to
social problems place wildlife management low on the list
of priorities. Enforcement of wildlife laws remains
essentially non-existent.

Public lands do not offer protection for wildlife;

therefore, most healthy wildlife populations exist on
private, isolated ranches. Ranchers are now beginning to
manage wildlife for hunting and tourism to supplement
decreasing income from cattle ranching.

Habitat is being lost due to overgrazing, land-clearing,

and woodcutting. Most of these activities are conducted
by “campesinos” (country dwellers or peasants) who have
moved from the cities where unemployment is high.
Previous governmental policies contributed to land erosion
with the expropriation of large land holdings, subdivision,
and distribution of these lands to campesinos for food
production. Sound land management training, however,
was not provided. Campesinos ran cattle or planted crops,
and when the land was no longer productive, turned the
land back over to the government and petitioned for new
lands. A recent ruling by the Mexican president, however,
amended the Constitution, giving title to the campesinos,
and prohibiting the expropriation of new lands for this
purpose.

Management

Black bear hunting seasons have been closed since 1985.
Due to minimal law enforcement, however, poaching is
uncontrolled and no data are available to indicate the level
of poaching. The Mexican government became a signatory
to CITES in 1990.

No governmental efforts have been made to manage

habitat for black bear conservation. Many ranchers,
however, establish watering areas for bears, and sometimes
feed bears (syrup and oats) at remote locations during
times of low bear food production. Ranchers state that
they experience less cattle predation when bears are fed.
There is no evidence of habituated bears, as feeding
locations are remote and the area is essentially unpopulated
by humans. In the Serranias del Burro, there is no indication
of poaching by ranchers.

Human-bear interactions

Popular literature has reported cases of human-bear
encounters, with most relating to cattle predation. Most
problem bears are reported to governmental agencies
(n=3; 1993; for the Mexican states of Coahuila and Nuevo
Leon) or are tolerated.

Educational programs and needs

Programs need to be developed to educate the public
about black bears. Emphasis should be given to the
education of children, ranchers, and wildlife managers.

Management recommendations

Managers are not adequately trained for handling bear-
related problems, such as cattle predation or habituated
bears. Workshops to educate managers can be taught in
one to two days, and various agencies could participate.
Managers would learn problem-solving for human-
bear conflicts, capture techniques with culvert traps,
and basic bear biology and ecology. The cost is
estimated at US$700 per workshop (travel and lodging for
instructor).

Many ranchers are interested in bear conservation, but

are unaware of how to co-exist with the species. A guide for
ranchers on how to co-exist with the black bear is important.
Such a guide would include sections on bear biology, food
habits, and ecology, to familiarize the rancher with bears.
Problem-solving sections would include how to determine
bear predation sign from other species, how to avoid
human-bear conflicts, and what to do in the event of
human-bear interactions. Water catchment designs will be
included to help ranchers avoid cub drownings, and to
protect equipment from being destroyed by bears.
Suggestions for maintaining healthy bear habitat will also
be provided. The guide would include color photographs,
stories, and cartoons to motivate readership. The cost of
this program is estimated at US$20,800 (includes salary
for eight months and printing costs).

156

Little information is known regarding the present

status of the black bear in Mexico, but such information
is essential for the establishment of management plans. An
updated version of Leopold’s (1959) distribution map of
the black bear in Mexico could be constructed through
information gathered from agency biologists, game
wardens, researchers, and ranchers. Although the
information would be subjective, assumptions could be
made regarding the general health of black bear populations
in areas previously observed by Leopold. Such a study
should take about four months with an estimated cost of
US$15,000.

Acknowledgments

We gratefully acknowledge all biologists who responded
to our surveys: K. Guyse (AL), H. Reynolds (AL), B.

Markham (Alta.), A. Lecount (AZ), M. Pledger (AK), R.
Forbes (B.C.), T. Burton (CA), T. Beck (CO), P. Rego
(CT), D. Maehr (FL), J. Wooding (FL), D. Carlock (GA),
J. Beecham (ID), T. Edwards (KY), H. Bateman (LA), D.
Pastuck (Manit.), J. Cardoza (MA), E. Golden (MD), C.
McLaughlin (ME), T. Reis (Mich.), D. Garshelis (MN),
C. Shropshire (MS), D. Hamilton (MO), G. Olson (MO),
K. Craig (N.B.), G. Warburton (N.C.), S. Stiever (NB), T.
Joyce (Newf.), E. Orff (NH), P. McConnell (NJ), J.
Gonzales (NM), T. Nette (N.S.), P. Latour (N.W.T.), L.
Berchielli (NY), J. Hoagland (OK), M. de Almeida (Ont.),
W. van Dyke (OR), T. Lash (P.E.I.), H. Jolicoeur (Qué.),
R. Seguin (Sask.), S. Stokes (SC), Ron Fowler (SD), G.
Wathen (TN), N. Garner (TX), J. Pederson (UT), D.
Martin (VA), C. Willey (VT), J. Rieck (WA), M. Gappa
(WI), J. Rieffenberger (WV), C. Gillin (WY), and C. Smits
(Yukon). We thank D. Brandenburg, B. Maddrey, and M.
Studer for help with the survey.

Document Outline

Contents Page