Vitaly Nikolaenko, a famous animal photographer, died 7 years ago. He spent 33 years traveling around the world and walked thousands of kilometers. His passion was brown bears. He met them 800 times and had 12 thousand shots of these animals.
He devoted his life to the brown bears. Unfortunately one of these animals took the Vitaly Nikolaenko’s life in 2003
His great work is a photo album called “Kamchatka Brown Bear”
Making great pictures Vitaly never took arms with himself and in 2003 he was attacked by one of the brown bears.He took a risk and came too closely to the predator.A furious bear hit Vitaly with his paw and ran away.The hit was mortal… The bear has never been found. The scientists say the brown bear took Vitaly as a rival and attacked him to defend his territory The monument to Vitaly Nikolaenko stands on the bank of the river Tihaya
Sloth Bear Attacks: causes and consequences Thomas Sharp Wildlife SOS / SWCA Environmental Consultants Salt Lake City UT 84105 USA Member: Sloth Bear Expert Team Email: firstname.lastname@example.org Dr. Swapnil D. Sonone Youth for Nature Conservation Organization Amravati, Maharaashtra, India Email: email@example.com Throughout the Indian subcontinent, sloth bears are known for their potential to become aggressive toward humans (Higgins 1932, Norris 1969, Seshadri 1969, Laurie and Seidensticker 1977, Phillips 1984, Krishna Raju et al. 1987, Gopal 1991, Rajpurohit and Krausman 2000, Bargali et al 2005, Akhtar 2006, Ratnayeke et al. 2007a). They are secretive animals that appear to avoid human contact whenever possible and seem to have a low tolerance toward people when they do inadvertently meet (Garshelis et al. 1999). Unfortunately, they often encounter humans in agricultural fields or when people enter the forest to gather food or wood. The potential danger this bear poses to humans often makes it difficult to garner local support for conservation efforts (Bargali et al 2005, Akhtar 2006, Dharaiya and Ratnayeke 2009). Sloth bear–human conflicts appear to be on the rise in many parts of India, and seem correlated with increased human encroachment and disturbance as well as habitat degradation (Bargali et al 2005, Akhtar 2006, Dharaiya and Ratnayeke 2009). The widespread nature of the attacks reflects the fact that sloth bears are still relatively widespread in India. The sloth bear has thus far been able to persevere in areas that have become either degraded or small isolated pockets of habitat. Most other large mammals have simply not been able to hang on in these areas. The reasons for the sloth bears perseverance in these areas are largely wrapped in its ecology, notably: 1) the sloth bear is a very secretive animal; 2) it is largely nocturnal; 3) it has a very small home range for a bear (Joshi et al 1995, Ratnayeke et al. 2007b); 4) it is largely myrmecophagous (ant and termite eater), and studies have suggested that myrmecophagous mammals are better able to deal with habitat fragmentation than other similar-sized mammals (Abensperg-Traun 1991); 5) it is found in many habitat types; and 6) it is socially tolerant of other sloth bears as long as food is plentiful (Laurie and Seidensticker 1977, Joshi et al. 1999). These factors are all beneficial to the bear’s survival in increasingly fragmented habitats. However, when faced with a fight or flight situation the sloth bear has also evolved an extremely violent aggressive tendency. This aggressive behavior most likely evolved due to sharing habitat with and encountering other large mammals, such as elephants and rhinoceroses, and predators, most notably tigers, leopards, and dholes (Garshelis et al. 1999). The same behavior is often directed toward humans, inevitably with bad outcomes for both the human and the bear. These encounters now form a different sort of threat to the sloth bear, which results from the attitudes and actions of the people who live in proximity. So the question remains whether the human element will tolerate this animal in increasingly close quarters. Here we document a particularly severe attack that occurred near a tiger reserve in central India. The documentation of these events add to the growing body of knowledge of sloth bear attacks, with the hope that further understanding may lead to future mitigation efforts and more effective conservation. On 4 August 2010, in a small village located in the multiple use area of the Melghat Tiger Reserve, a lone bear wandered into Jarida village and before the night was over four people were killed and another two injured. The bear was first spotted around the village that morning, between 0700–0800 and again around 1200. Each time it was sighted the villagers threw rocks at the bear. At roughly 2030, Mr. Vairale, a daily wages labor worker for forest department, mistakenly thought the bear was a buffalo, as it was dark and there is no electricity in the village. When he approached, the bear growled and gave a minor charge. Mr. Vairale threw a blanket at the bear and ran to the nearest house. The bear did not chase the man but dispatched the blanket and ran in the opposite direction trying to get away. Mr. Wakode, a forest guard, and Mr. Tumre heard a scream and went to investigate. They flashed a light at the bear, and just as they did a dog approached and started barking at it. The bear, agitated by the light and the barking dog, chased after the dog. The guard pointed his torch at the bear at which point it turned toward the light and attacked Mr. Wakode, who died of severe injuries on the way to the hospital. After that incident the bear tried to hide in a vacant house. By 2100, villagers had formed a mob with torches and were looking for the bear. Though details are not clear as to exactly what happened next, since nobody witnessed the whole incident, the bear became agitated by the mob and charged a group of villagers following behind the mob. Mr. Parte was killed on the spot. The mob continued to throw rocks and distract the bear. The bear, in a panic, turned and ran at another man, Mr. Jagdev, who was just outside his front door. The bear grabbed him by the hand, and although injured, Mr. Jagdevwas eventually able to get inside his house and close the door. The bear hid in the house next door for 10–15 minutes until the owner drove it away by shouting and throwing burning papers at it. The bear then ran a short distance and hid in a lantana bush where it stayed until four teachers came walking over to see what the disturbance was about. Unknowingly, one of the teachers pointed his flashlight at the bear, which caused it to charge the men and attack Mr. Dhakate, who was on his cell phone. Mr. Dhakate was badly injured and eventually died. The bear was chased off by a man on a motorcycle by 22 00. Soon after a group of students approached, and hearing the shouts they all ran. One student, Satish Mowaskar, ran a different direction from the other students and the bear chased him down and fatally injured him. After this attack the bear found another building to hide in until about 0300 the next morning when it was chased from this building and eventually made its way out of the village and back to the forest. This bear purportedly involved in these incidents was killed two days later (7 August). It was tracked and found 2 km from Jarida Village. It was positively identified by the markings on its chest and some singed fur. The necropsy of the dead bear found that it was an adult male, estimated to be 6 years old. The virology report states that the bear’s brain was normal. By all accounts this was a normal, healthy adult male bear. It is apparent that from the time the bear entered the village it had been harassed by the local villagers (i.e. throwing stones and other objects, and chasing the bear). As the incidents escalated the bear was caught in a continuing fight or flight situation. When its escape was continually cut off, it reacted by attacking violently, which is an important survival behavior in this species. In this case the bear probably felt its life was in danger. There is no evidence to suggest that the bear was rabid or otherwise sick. The continual harassment and chaos throughout the day may have put the animal on edge. Is it possible that the limiting factor for some sloth bear populations, at least for some small, isolated populations, is retribution killings? There are reasons to believe this could be the case: 1) there are multiple documented incidents of retribution killings of sloth bears (Akhtar 2006, Dharaiya and Ratnayeke 2009); 2) it seems likely that only a very small fraction of sloth bears killed by humans, as retribution or otherwise, are documented; 3) sloth bear attacks on humans appear to be on the rise; and 4) it is difficult to gain momentum for sloth bear conservation in parts of India where bear attacks are relatively common (Akhtar 2006, Dharaiya and Ratnayeke 2009). Though villagers in parts of India still possess, at least the remnants of, a conservation ethic (Bargali et al. 2005), bear attacks (and the fear of attacks) may be severely testing this ethic. Literature Cited Abensperg-Traun, M. 1991. A study of home-range movements and shelter use in adult and juvenile echidnas, Tachyglossus aculeatus (Monotrema: Taychglossidae) in Western Australian wheatbelt reserves. Australian Mammalogy 14:13–21. Akhtar, N. 2006. Human-sloth bear conflict: a threat to sloth bear conservation. International Bear News 15(4):15–17. Bargali, H. S., N. Akhtar, and N. P. S. Chauhan. 2005. Characteristics of sloth bear attacks and human casualties in North Bilaspur forest division, Chhattisgarh, India. Ursus 16:263–267. Dharaiya, N. and S. Ratnayeke. 2009. Escalating human–sloth bear conflicts in North Gujarat: a tough time to encourage support for bear conservation. International Bear News 18(3):12-14. Garshelis, D. L., A. R. Joshi, J. L. D. Smith, and C. G. Rice. 1999. Sloth bear conservation action plan. Pages 22 5–240 in C. Servheen, S. Herrero, and B. Peyton, compilers. Bears: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups. Gopal, R. 1991. Ethological observations on the sloth bear (Melursus ursinus). Indian Forester 117:915–920. Higgins, J. C. 1932. The Malay bear. Journal of the Bombay Natural History Society 35:673–674. Joshi, A. R., D. L. Garshelis, and J. L. D. Smith. 1995. Home ranges of sloth bears in Nepal: Implications for conservation. Journal of Wildlife Management 59:204–213.
Human-SlothBear Conflict:a threat to sloth bearconservation In another incident, during the month of June 2000, cattle were grazing in the forests adjacent to the village of Barbasan. At approximately 11 a.m., a man named Rampal was watching over his cattle when one of his buffalo was suddenly attacked by a female bear. The bear knocked the buffalo over by hitting the body of the buffalo with its forelimbs and head. Once on the ground the bear ripped flesh from the body of the buffalo. Seeing the bear attacking his buffalo, Mr. Rampal began to shout loudly. The bear continued its attack, and Rampal rushed to the village for help. Once Rampal and the other villagers returned, they found that the bear had killed and eaten a portion of the buffalo. They tried to drive the bear away without success, so they notified the Forest Department. Forest Department officials arrived, but when they attempted to drive the bear off, they were chased and nearly attacked themselves. They avoided injury by hiding behind their motorcycles. Police from the town of Gaurela were also called, but the bear had retreated into the cover of the forest before they reached the site. Due to its aggressive behavior, villagers were on high alert. Elders of the village and Forest Department officials planned to push the bear further into the forest in an attempt to avoid further problems. When villagers, police, and forest officials entered the forest to chase the bear off, they discovered a dead adult female bear. She may have been mating with another bear previously reported to be in the area when she was disturbed by the presence of the grazing buffalo. Those on the scene deduced that the bear may have died as a result of consuming buffalo meat and the stress of human presence... www.bearbiology.com/fileadmin/tpl/Downloads/IBN_Newsletters/IBN_2006_November_for_web.pdf
Bear a rare sight in winter, when most are hibernating Last Updated: Friday, November 23, 2007 | 10:03 AM CT CBC News
A man shot a grizzly bear dead outside his house near Inuvik, N.W.T., on Wednesday, after it mauled two of his dogs to death.
Willie Simon told CBC News he heard some noise outside his home that afternoon, then noticed one of his dogs lying on his driveway bleeding. By the time he grabbed his gun, he said the bear had attacked two more dogs in his backyard.
"I didn't want to shoot the dog so I kind of shot a little high," Simon said Thursday. "He let go of the dog, and then he stand up a little more … I got a good shot at him then."
Simon shot the bear dead, but not before it had killed two dogs and seriously wounded a third.
"Yeah, it's kind of like, I still feel it. You could see I'm emotional a little bit," he said, adding that he'd had the dogs for several years.
"I mean, they are pet dogs, you know? They're good dogs, really nice dogs, just like a nice human being, you know? It's kind of sad to see them all mauled up like that."
Grizzly bears are rarely seen in the winter, since most are hibernating.
Human-wildlife conﬂicts inﬂuence attitudes but not necessarily behaviors: Factors driving the poaching of bears in China Human-wildlife conﬂicts often spur retaliatory killing, which may be a major threat to some wildlife species. Asiatic black bears depredate crops and livestock and also attack humans. We investigated whether human–bear conﬂicts in Sichuan Province, southwestern China, resulted in increased bear poaching. We conducted semi-structured interviews within 429 15 15-km cells across the province, asking villagers about bear occurrence, population trends, attitudes toward bears, human–bear conﬂicts, responses to bear damage, and bear poaching. Bears raided crops (n = 174 cells), killed livestock (n = 114 cells), and attacked people (n = 49 cells). Fifty percent and 43% of villagers held negative and neutral attitudes toward bears, respectively; attitudes were more negative among people who had previous interactions with bears or lived where bear encounters were more likely. Although killing bears was illegal, villagers in 117 cells (38%) indicated that bear poaching occurred around their villages. However, killing bears was not signiﬁcantly linked to damage: indeed, killing was more common in areas without human–bear con- ﬂicts. Poachers killed bears mainly for trade of their valuable parts (gall bladder and paws, 78.5%). Tibetan people experienced bear damage and also had negative attitudes toward bears, but reported less poaching than Han or Yi people, due to their religious beliefs. Our study indicated that human-wildlife conﬂicts shaped people’s attitudes toward bears, but strong economic incentives, not attitudes, prompted illegal killing. Whereas mitigation of human–bear conﬂicts could help foster more positive attitudes toward bears and the nature reserves that protect bears, this strategy will not remove the primary threat against this species.
Black bears were implicated by villagers in all three damage categories: raiding crops, depredation of livestock, and attacks on people (Table 1). Local people reported bear damage to crops in 174 cells (55.9% of cells occupied by bears), and damage to livestock in 114 cells (36.7%; Fig. 2). Bears were reported to forage on crops, such as corn (Zea mays), wheat (Triticum aestivum), beans (Glycine max), potatoes (Solanum tuberosum), and some planted trees [mainly ﬁr (Cunninghamia spp.), apple (Malus pumila), and chestnut (Castanea mollissima)]. Bears killed goats (Capra hircus), sheep (Ovis aries), cattle (Bos taurus), yak (Bos grunniens), pigs (Sus scrofa domestica), and horses (Equus caballus). Corn was the most commonly damaged crop, and goats or sheep the most commonly depredated livestock (Table 1). Bear damage to beehives was reported in 10 cells. Respondents reported black bear attacks on humans in 49 cells (Fig. 2), resulting in 72 human injuries, including two fatalities. A disproportionately high number of reported attacks (31 of 72 = 43%) occurred during 2002–2007 (within 5 years of the interview date), suggesting either an increasing trend or just better memory of more recent attacks. www1.geochemist.cn/science?_ob=MImg&_imagekey=B6V5X-51BWXVD-2-9&_cdi=5798&_user=4861547&_pii=S0006320710004428&_origin=browse&_zone=rslt_list_item&_coverDate=01%2F31%2F2011&_sk=998559998&wchp=dGLbVlW-zSkWb&_valck=1&md5=4708c67632e8e844c5c2228139b13d4d&ie=/sdarticle.pdf
Four other people were injured in the attack, which happened as a party travelling on a BSES expedition were camped on the Von Postbreen glacier near Longyearbyen on Svalbard, north of the Norwegian mainland.
Related articles More Europe News Search the news archive for more stories A BSES spokesman said Horatio was a "fine young man" who had planned to read medicine at university.
BSES chairman Edward Watson said: "Having spoken to the family, we are now able to advise that the young explorer who died on our expedition this morning is Horatio Chapple.
"Horatio was a fine young man who wanted to go on to read medicine after school. By all accounts he would have made an excellent doctor.
"We and the Norwegian authorities are currently establishing the full circumstances of his tragic death and will not be releasing this until we have discussed this fully with the family."
Horatio's family from near Salisbury, Wiltshire, said they were too upset to speak.
The party managed to get through to Svalbard Governor's office to call for assistance after the attack early today.
Eventually, the injured were taken by helicopter to hospital in Longyearbyen and then on to University Hospital in Tromso, Norway.
Brown Bear Kills Two Tourists in Russia’s Far East, RIA Reports A brown bear killed two tourists in the Kamchatka region of Russia’s Far East, the RIA Novosti newswire reported today, citing a local wildlife organization.
Police are investigating at the site near the Paratunka river as hunters seek to find and kill the aggressive animal, the newswire said. It didn’t specify the victims’ nationality.
About 18,000 brown bears live in the remote and mountainous Kamchatka Peninsula, which is becoming increasingly popular with tourists eager to enjoy its abundant wildlife, RIA reported. Bears killed one person last year and three in 2009, it said.
A polar bear killed a British teenager and mauled several others in an attack on a school-party campsite in the Norwegian Svalbard Islands on Aug. 5.
The bear was eventually shot by an expedition leader who yesterday underwent reconstructive surgery on injuries suffered in the attack, the London based Guardian newspaper said today.
Grizzly killed Yellowstone hiker found dead in park
(Reuters) - A hiker found dead on a backcountry trail in Yellowstone National Park last week was killed by a grizzly bear in the park's second fatal bear mauling this summer, park officials said on Monday.
The two fatal attacks occurred within several miles of one another, and park officials were examining whether the same bear was involved in both incidents, a Yellowstone spokesman said.
The body of John Wallace, 59, who was hiking alone and visiting from Chassell, Michigan, was discovered on Friday morning by two other hikers along the Mary Mountain Trail amid signs of grizzly activity at the scene, including bear tracks.
But it had not been clear until an autopsy was performed whether Wallace was the victim of a bear attack or if his body had been scavenged after he had died by other means.
"Results from an autopsy conducted Sunday afternoon concluded that Wallace died as a result of traumatic injuries from a bear attack," a U.S. Park Service statement said.
The exact circumstances of the attack remained a mystery as there were no witnesses, but park Superintendent Dan Wenk told Reuters that once the grizzly involved was positively identified "that bear will be removed from the population."
"The bear caused significant injuries to the hiker," Wenk said. "That's enough to know without a description of exact circumstances."
Wallace had pitched a tent in a park campground sometime on Wednesday and was believed to have been killed later that day or on Thursday, park officials said.
His death comes a month after a female grizzly attacked and killed another man who inadvertently surprised the bear and her two cubs as he and his wife were on a hike, marking the first fatal bear mauling in Yellowstone since 1986.
Bear managers opted not to capture or kill that grizzly because they concluded it had been acting in a purely defensive -- as opposed to predatory -- manner to protect its young and had no previous history of conflicts with humans.
COULD BE SAME BEAR
But park spokesman Al Nash said it was possible the same bear also was behind the latest attack, and that DNA from hair samples collected at both scenes would be compared to make that determination.
"We will be able to definitively answer that question once DNA tests on the hair samples have been completed," Nash said.
The July mauling occurred near the start of the Wapiti Lake Trail, several miles from the scene of last week's attack, a distance within the roaming range for grizzlies, he said. The female grizzly from July's incident is not the only suspect.
Wenk said any bear that returns to the site of the latest mauling, about 5 miles west of the Hayden Valley trailhead, would be trapped so its DNA could be matched against samples of fur and feces found at the scene now being tested.
The park euthanized a 4-year-old male grizzly earlier this month after that 258-pound animal charged a man sitting on a hiking trail near Yellowstone Lake.
That hiker was unhurt but the bear involved was determined to pose a hazard to park visitors because of previous encounters.
Despite the recent flurry of Yellowstone grizzly confrontations with humans, Wenk said, "I don't think we're looking at a trend." He added that bear injuries in the park were still exceedingly rare.
Yellowstone averages just one bear-related human injury for every 3 million visitors, or about one a year, though no visitors were hurt by bears in all of 2010.
The Mary Mountain Trail runs 21 miles one way across Yellowstone's central plateau to the Nez Perce trailhead between Madison and Old Faithful. Signs posted warn of grizzly activity, and hikers are advised to travel in groups of six, make noise and carry bear repellent spray.
(Additional reporting by Laura Zuckerman; Writing by Steve Gorman; Editing by Jerry Norton and Cynthia Johnston)
Stephen Herrero Environmental Science University of Calgary 2500 University Drive Calgary, Alberta, Canada T2N 1N4 Phone (403) 220-7436 Fax (403) 243-5012 Email firstname.lastname@example.org During 2005 through October 14, 2005, I know of seven people who have been killed by American black bear (3), or brown (grizzly) bear (4) in North America (Table 1). This is more recorded fatal injuries than during any previous year since 1900. During the decade of the 1990s American black bears are known to have killed 11 people and brown (grizzly) bears 18. From 2000 until October 14, 2005, American black bears are known to have killed 11 people and brown (grizzly) bears 8 (Table 2). There are an estimated 900,000 American black bears in North America and 60,000 brown (grizzly) bears. American black bears outnumber brown (grizzly) bears by approximately 15:1 and they have killed fewer people since 1990. This suggests roughly how much more likely a person is to be killed by a brown (grizzly) bear versus an American black bear. Identification of a bear’s motivation in such incidents requires interpretation and in some instances may not be possible. To aid interpretation, some classification guidelines have been developed (Herrero and Higgins 2003). Application of these guidelines characterizes all but one of the fatal attacks during 2005 as either predatory or probably predatory. The seventh fatal attack may have been defensive or predatory or more complex than either of these simple categories. It is still under investigation. Each of the six fatal attacks classified as predatory or probably predatory was inflicted by a male bear. This is consistent with previous findings (Herrero and Higgins 1995, 1999) and seems to reflect a dramatic behavioral difference between the sexes of bears. Bear attacks may have major costs. Any serious or fatal bear attack has tragic costs to the person(s) injured and to their families. Bear conservation efforts may also be negatively affected. For example, in Alaska, “defense of life or property kills” (DLP) of bears, “appear to increase following newspaper accounts of attacks by bears and deaths caused by bears” (Miller and Tutterow 1999). Some fatal attacks that occurred during 2005 could have been avoided. I believe that it is our responsibility, as bear research and management professionals and supporters of bear conservation, to work toward educating interested people regarding how to be as safe as possible around bears at the same time as working to conserve bear populations and habitat. Literature Cited Herrero, S. and A. Higgins. 1995. Fatal injuries inflicted to people by black bear. Pages 75-82 in J. Auger and H.L. Black, editors. Proceedings of the Fifth Western Black Bear Workshop, Brigham Young University Press, Provo, Utah, USA. _____, and _____. 1999. Human injuries inflicted by bears in British Columbia: 1960-97. Ursus 11:209-218. _____, and _____. 2003. Human injuries inflicted by bears in Alberta: 1960-98. Ursus 14:44-54. Miller, S.D. and V.L. Tutterow. 1999. Characteristics of nonsport mortalities to brown and black bears and human injuries from bears i
Four types of bear-human interactions were reported in the survey: 138 observations, 66 attacks or depredations, 34 hunting kills of bears, and 19 live captures or sales of bears or bear parts (Table 1, n = 257 interactions). Most attacks or depredation were on crops (36 of the 66 interactions [54.5%]; primarily corn) and domestic animals( 39.4%;p rimarilyc attle;T able 1). Therew ere no reportso f injurieso r unprovokedb eara ttackso n humans. However, there were 2 accounts of bear aggression toward humans. In one case, young children observed a bear at close range without incident, but were subsequently pursued for a short distance when the bear became aggressive. In the second case, a farmer had an aggressive encounter with a bear while defending his pigs from the bear, but neither farmer nor pigs were injured. Bear-human interactions were most frequent in the Eastern Cordillera (108 interactions; Table 1; Fig. 1). Observations (56 of 138), hunting kills (18 of 34 interactions),a nd live captureso r sale of parts,p roducts, or derivatives (8 of 19 observations) were all more frequently reported in the Easter Cordillera; only interactions categorized as attacks or depredation were more frequent in the Western Cordillera (29 of 66; Table 1). Based on personal contacts with respondents, we estimated that as many as 50% of bear-human interactions were not reported to us for this survey. Reasons for not reporting interactions included a lack of interest by the officials who received the survey and the nonmandatory survey response. We did not detect any reporting bias by type of interaction or geographic www.bearbiology.com/fileadmin/tpl/Downloads/URSUS/Vol_16_1/Jorgenson_Sandoval_Vol_16_1_.pdf