The intervention with a yearling bear captured near Teleśnica in January this year sparked a vivid discussion. Researchers from the Institute of Nature Conservation of the Polish Academy of Sciences and other experts collaborating under the Carpathian Brown Bear Project initiative emphasize that the history and course of interventions with bears so far require a critical revision and establishment of a protocol, which will define all steps and possible actions.
A yearling brown bear captured near Teleśnica – a case report
On 10.01.2022, a yearling brown bear was observed in the vicinity of Teleśnica village. The animal was weak and had visible problems with walking. The bear was captured by the staff of the Ustrzyki Dolne Forestry District with approval from the Director of Regional Directorate for Environmental Protection (RDOŚ) in Rzeszów. The Regional Chief Veterinarian in Ustrzyki Dolne was also notified about this fact. The bear was transported to the Rehabilitation Centre for Protected Animals in Przemyśl. This facility has the status of a rehabilitation centre, and that means it can treat and rehabilitate wild animals requiring short-term human care to be returned to the wild (Art. 5.13 of the Nature Conservation Act of 16 April 2004, with amendments). The bear was less than 15 kilograms of body mass, and its condition was very serious from the beginning. Subsequent diagnostic tests revealed anaplasmosis, a disease caused by bacteria transmitted by ticks. The course of the bear’s stay at the Centre and its treatment progress was reported on social media, press, and television.
The staff and volunteers of the Association Protection Park of the Bieszczady Fauna in cooperation with the scientists from the Institute of Nature Conservation Polish Academy of Sciences (IOP PAN) in Cracow conducted the field inspection of the area around the trapping site. The same was done by the staff of the Ustrzyki Dolne Forestry District. The inspection revealed numerous tracks of adult and juvenile bears, an active bear dean and abundant biological material from bears. This material was secured for further research. The findings were reported to the Regional Directorate for Environmental Protection in Rzeszów and the Ustrzyki Dolne Forestry District. A temporary protection zone has been set up around the bear den (there will be no disruptive work or activities in the area until the end of April). The Institute of Nature Conservation also asked the Rehabilitation Centre for Protected Animals in Przemyśl to collect and secure the samples from the bear kept in the Centre. The Centre was also provided with appropriate protocols for the sample collection. A detailed study of all these samples will be carried out to get a complete picture and clarify all the circumstances of the case. There will also be an examination and comparison of the biological material from and around the capturing area with the samples from the captured bear.
The bear was euthanized in the night from 19th to 20th January, with the permission of the General Directorate for Environmental Protection and the condition that the biological material was made available for further studies. The Institute of Nature Conservation asked the Centre to secure the collected material and the body of the bear. Due to a suspicion of rabies, the head with the brain was sent to the Department of Veterinary Hygiene on 20th January for further examination. Following the procedure, the material was destroyed. Rabies was excluded and the remaining biological material and the body is waiting at the Rehabilitation Centre for Protected Animals in Przemyśl to be collected by IOP PAN staff.
Brown bear conservation
The brown bear (Ursus arctos) is strictly protected in Poland. It has been classified as a priority species, listed in Annexes II and IV of the Habitats Directive, and within the European Community, it is the species for which the Community has a special responsibility. One of its many obligations under the Habitats Directive, ratified by Poland in 2004, is to maintain its population in favourable conservation status.
Numerous activities and commitments, such as assessing population number and distribution, studying it and collecting available scientific data, are involved in maintaining the population of a species in favourable conservation status. Decisions for effective species conservation actions are based on these data. At the basis of conservation lays also the recognition that the protected species is an essential part of a properly functioning ecosystem and all the natural processes within. Thus, the conservation of a species also involves the protection of the natural processes to which the species is subjected. Such protection is likewise required by, the Nature Conservation Act of 16 April 2004 (with amendments), among others. The Nature Conservation Act defines the ways to achieve conservation goals, e.g., by developing and implementing conservation programs for species, habitats and migration routes. In addition, bears are covered by the Animal Welfare Act of 21 August 1997 (with amendments) and several other regulations referring to the species monitoring, damages caused by protected animals and compensation paid for such damages.
The brown bear is a Category I species in the Regulation of the Minister of Environment of 3 August 2011 on animal species that are dangerous to human life and health. This category includes the most dangerous animal species or groups of species that, due to their natural aggressiveness or biological properties, may pose a serious threat to human life and health. Therefore, either short-term or lifetime keeping of bears requires additional conditions, including proper security measures.
Interventions
Interventions so far performed, involving capturing for initially only temporary keeping of bears in captivity, have been unsuccessful. However, interventions do not only deal with the survival of the bear, its treatment or proper housing (often in the absence of facilities capable to meet the needs of a species and legal requirements), but also with the prospects for its future under different scenarios and degrees of success. A key aspect in such cases is also to consider the potential impact of the actions taken on the entire population of the species, as well as on human safety.
The history and track record of bear interventions indicate the need to critically review and establish a management protocol that outlines all steps and possible actions and decisions. Possible actions include also an option to euthanize the animal to ease its suffering. If there is any chance of helping the animal and supporting its survival without moving to captivity, the option of helping on-site or relocating to a safer place should always be considered first. Intervention should be kept to a minimum. In any case, the decision to intervene should be made after considering all the possibilities and consequences for the individual, the population and the people living in the area, taking into account all available knowledge and experience, and following the procedures and legal requirements.
We are sure that similar situations will continue to occur, therefore, it is more than urgent to evaluate previous actions, identify gaps in legal regulations, conclude on and implement proper procedures. The decision on any intervention concerning protected species, especially one that would involve capture, treatment, prolonged contact with humans, and the high likelihood of lifetime in captivity, should be made with consideration of all the aspects as mentioned. The process should be quick and smooth in emergency and risk situations, with no room for improvisation. We support initiatives to implement instructions and protocols for handling situations where intervention is required.
A project of the management plan for the brown bear in Poland, with guidelines for interventions, classification of threats and standard protocols, was prepared already in 2011. Unfortunately, it has not been implemented yet. Despite that, the Institute of Nature Conservation and cooperating institutions and organizations, e.g., Tatra National Park, apply its approach and support its use in practice on handling problem bears, capture, sample collection, monitoring the presence of the species and its mortality in Poland. Since 2010, the Institute has been managing also the Bear Data Bank, an archive of biological samples, where i.e., biological evidence of bear-related events is stored. It is essential to secure such samples and it should be implemented as a mandatory part of interventions. The analyses of such biological material provide very important information (on genotype, relatedness, repeated occurrence, or even cause of death, poisoning, diseases, and also abundance and distribution data, etc.). Similar should be also required for cases where dead individuals are found. Knowledge of diseases, mortality and their causes are very important for effective species conservation.
Conservation of species is a joint effort of responsible institutions, species ecology and ethology specialists, conservation biologists, population management experts, veterinary medicine specialists and all those who happen to be on its way or just follow its fate. This effort should include agreement on all levels and aspects, not just on the health or chances of survival of the given individual. The lack of mutual understanding between institutions and disciplines concerning knowledge and experience in solving conservation problems, and the conviction that one side is ultimately right, are detrimental. Emotions alone, while important, usually prove to be an even worse advisor. As a result, the decision to interfere with a protected species will be one-sided and short-sighted, with harmful consequences also for the welfare of the animal. No one has all the knowledge and all the skills to independently solve the conservation problems, which are complex and should be treated a common responsibility. In the case of brown bears, however, we are in the privileged position of dealing with a species that is systematically studied, and national and international experience, as well as data and observations, have been gathered over decades. When making decisions, we can and should use this knowledge, combining the experience of specialists from various fields.