RESUMO
Wildlife must increasingly balance trade-offs between the need to access important foods and the mortality risks associated with human-dominated landscapes. Human disturbance can profoundly influence wildlife behavior, but managers know little about the relationship between disturbance-behavior dynamics and associated consequences for foraging. We address this gap by empirically investigating the consequences of human activity on a keystone predator-prey interaction in a region with limited but varied industrial disturbance. Using stable isotope data from 226 hair samples of grizzly bears (Ursus arctos horribilis) collected from 1995 to 2014 across 22 salmon-bearing watersheds (88,000 km2) in British Columbia, Canada, we examined how human activity influenced their consumption of spawning salmon (Oncorhynchus spp.), a fitness-related food. Accounting for the abundance of salmon and other foods, salmon consumption strongly decreased (up to 59% for females) with increasing human disturbance (as measured by the human footprint index) in riparian zones of salmon-bearing rivers. Declines in salmon consumption occurred with disturbance even in watersheds with low footprints. In a region currently among the least influenced by industrial activity, intensification of disturbance in river valleys is predicted to increasingly decouple bears from salmon, possibly driving associated reductions in population productivity and provisioning of salmon nutrients to terrestrial ecosystems. Accordingly, we draw on our results to make landscape-scale and access-related management recommendations beyond current streamside protection buffers. This work illustrates the interaction between habitat modification and food security for wildlife, highlighting the potential for unacknowledged interactions and cumulative effects in increasingly modified landscapes.
RESUMO
Humans are perceived as predators by many species and may generate landscapes of fear, influencing spatiotemporal activity of wildlife. Additionally, wildlife might seek out human activity when faced with predation risks (human shield hypothesis). We used the anthropause, a decrease in human activity resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, to test ecology of fear and human shield hypotheses and quantify the effects of bear-viewing ecotourism on grizzly bear (Ursus arctos) activity. We deployed camera traps in the Khutze watershed in Kitasoo Xai'xais Territory in the absence of humans in 2020 and with experimental treatments of variable human activity when ecotourism resumed in 2021. Daily bear detection rates decreased with more people present and increased with days since people were present. Human activity was also associated with more bear detections at forested sheltered sites and less at exposed sites, likely due to the influence of habitat on bear perception of safety. The number of people negatively influenced adult male detection rates, but we found no influence on female with young detections, providing no evidence that females responded behaviorally to a human shield effect from reduced male activity. We also observed apparent trade-offs of risk avoidance and foraging. When salmon levels were moderate to high, detected bears were more likely to be females with young than adult males on days with more people present. Should managers want to minimize human impacts on bear activity and maintain baseline age-sex class composition at ecotourism sites, multiday closures and daily occupancy limits may be effective. More broadly, this work revealed that antipredator responses can vary with intensity of risk cues, habitat structure, and forage trade-offs and manifest as altered age-sex class composition of individuals using human-influenced areas, highlighting that wildlife avoid people across multiple spatiotemporal scales.