One of the most important issues in the study of animal behaviour and ecology is how the
spatial distribution of resources affects the home range and the spatial distribution of
animals. When animals decide which resources they will use and where they will search
for them, they must evaluate both the benefits and the costs of the available options. The
benefits depend on the quality of the resources (the expected energy intake), whereas the
costs depend on their handling time and on their associated predation risks. Such risks
affect foraging decisions not only of low-trophic level species, but also those of large
predators, such as the brown bear. In this species, in fact, animals must face two types of
predation risks: firstly, humans, who hunt them, and, secondly, the other conspecifics, in
particular males, who attack females with cubs in the attempt to kill the latter. In this study, we analyse how these factors of risk affect the foraging behaviour of brown bears. The study was carried out in the “Core Bear Protective Area”, in South Slovenia, a region
where the animals live at a high density, but where they experience strong human impact.
In this area, hunters have and manage different feeding sites, created for diversionary
feeding purposes, but they are also used for hunting. Eighteen of these feeding sites were
monitored with camera traps for 2 consecutive years. The feeding sites were supplied
either with corn or with carrions, swapping the bait between the two years. Slovenian
hunters took care of all feeding sites and camera traps and they regularly delivered us the
SD cards of the camera traps. Pictures and videos were analysed one by one. For each
observation, we recorded into an Excel file the number and the sex of the observed
individuals, and we added the hour, the day, the name of the feeding site and other
information, such as the type of bait used and bear density (number of individuals per
squared kilometre). Each observation was classified into two categories, depending on whether it included cubs (with females) or other animals (either males or females, but
without cubs). To test the hypothesis that the different predation risk faced by the two
categories of individuals forced them to use the feeding sites in a different way, we
analysed the relationship between the type of observations (dependent binary variable) and a set of predictors (independent variables), using generalized linear mixed models
(GLMM). Specifically, we considered as independent factors the hour of observations, the
season, the type of bait used and the bear density in the area around the feeding site.
Results showed that females with cubs visited the feeding sites mostly at dawn and at dusk, whereas bears without cubs were observed mostly in the mid of the night. These
differences in feeding activity were larger during mating season, when the risk of
infanticide was higher. Moreover, females with cubs were more likely to be observed at the feeding sites supplied with corn rather than at those supplied with carrion. However, the probability of observing females with cubs did not appear to be affected by bear density at the feeding sites. Overall these results suggest that bears visited the feeding sites during the night, when the risk of bumping into humans was low. Since females with cubs had to trade off the risk of encountering humans with the risk of encountering dangerously aggressive males, they concentrated the activity at the feeding sites when both the types of risk were relatively low, that is, just after dusk and just before dawn. These findings showed how wildlife management strategies had a strong impact on the social behaviour of brown bears.