AUTONOMUS PROVINCE OF TRENTO

BEAR REPORT 2012

WITH APPENDICES ON THE LYNX AND THE WOLF

www.orso.provincia.tn.it

AUTONOMUS PROVINCE
OF TRENTO

FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE

DEPARTMENT

BEAR REPORT
2012

www.orso.provincia.tn.it
[email protected]

General coordination and supervision

Ruggero Giovannini - Wildlife Office Director
Coordination
Claudio Groff
Edited by
Natalia Bragalanti
Claudio Groff
Renato Rizzoli
Paolo Zanghellini
With the contribution of
Museo delle Scienze
Reference citations
The information contained in this report may be quoted, making due reference to:
Groff C., Bragalanti N., Rizzoli R., Zanghellini P. (editors), 2013
2012 Bear Report, Forestry and Wildlife Department of the Autonomous Province of Trento

Cover page
Mother bear with two cubs in the Val di Tovel, August 2012
Photo by Matteo Zeni - Adamello Brenta Nature Park
Back cover
Mother bear with three cubs in the upper Val Ambiez, August 2012
Photo by Michele Baldessari - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives
Photos
In the absence of captions: C. Groff (landscapes)
Layout and graphics
APT Wildlife Office - Publistampa arti grafiche
Printed by
Print centre of the Autonomous Province of Trento
Trento, April 2013

CONTENTS
Presentation

page

Introduction

page

1. Monitoring

page

2. Damage compensation and prevention

page

36

3. Management of emergencies

page

45

4. Communication

page

55

5. Training

page

59

6. National and international links

page

60

7. Research and conferences

page

62

Appendix 1 - The lynx

page

63

Appendix 2 - The wolf

page

68

BEAR REPORT 2012

Presentation
Management of the brown bear in Trentino is carried out on the basis of consolidated operational guidelines approved by the provincial government. The administration has assigned
the Forestry and Wildlife Department with the task of acting as the organisation of reference
in relation to carrying out specic programmes of action.
With the drawing up of this sixth issue of the Bear Report, supervised by the Wildlife Oce,
it is intended to conrm the choice made at the very beginning, namely to provide a complete
and in-depth annual report, including detailed technical documentation on the results of management and progress of the project.
This report has been made possible with the support of all those involved, in various ways,
in carrying out the activities involved in the project programmes, and to whom we would like
to direct our most sincere thanks; these include the forestry and technical sta of the Forestry
and Wildlife Department, the sta of the Museo delle Scienze (MdS), the Adamello Brenta Nature Park, (ABNP), the Istituto Superiore per la Protezione and la Ricerca Ambientale (ISPRA),
forest wardens, the gamekeepers of the Associazione Cacciatori Trentini (ACT) and numerous
volunteers. Special thanks must go to the Autonomous Province of Bolzano and to the administrative Regions in the alpine area (Veneto, Friuli Venezia Giulia and Lombardia), which
also participate in the project in order to put the programmes into eect and to gather and
make available some of the data contained in this report.
Following further success at biological level in terms of the population, which has continued to increase, in 2012 the project entered a decidedly critical phase, demanding widespread changes in a relatively short time.
While the number of bears is indeed by now close to the Minimum Vital Population threshold estimated by the feasibility study drawn up by ISPRA, with around 50 bears, this has been
accompanied by a marked fall in the level of social acceptance, despite specic measures
adopted in 2012. These included approval of the new provincial law no. 6 of 24 April 2012:
Modications to the provincial law on hunting in relation to compensation for damage caused
by wild animals and the positive experience of the round table with the categories most exposed to the presence of bears. Hence the unavoidable need to update management measures,
within an operational context which has undoubtedly changed since these measures were
drawn up.
It is essentially a question of redening the types of problem behaviour manifested by
bears (both in relation to dangerous behaviour and excessive damage that may take place)
and the consequential controlling action provided for by the PACOBACE (Plan of Action for the
Conservation of the Brown Bear in the Central-Eastern Alps). This may also take place by giving the local authorities called on to manage the species the possibility of acting with the necessary operational autonomy, in the context of common and predetermined criteria, with
the authorisation of the Ministry of the Environment.
It is clear that this new phase must necessarily be based on the indispensable constructive
and participatory contribution of the Ministry of the Environment and ISPRA, and those
called on to operate in the eld on a daily basis have every trust that this will take place.
DOTT.

MAURIZIO ZANIN

Manager of APTs Forestry and Wildlife Department

BEAR REPORT 2012

Introduction
The brown bear has never
completely disappeared from
Trentino, which is thus the
only area in the Alps that can
proudly affirm the continuous presence of bears.
However, protection of
bears, which began in 1939,
has not eliminated the risk of
their becoming extinct.
Direct persecution by
man and, to a lesser extent,
environmental changes taking place in the last two centuries, reduced the original
population, bringing it to the
threshold of extinction. At
the end of the 1990s there
were probably no more than
three or four bears remaining, confined to the northeastern Brenta area. However, just when all seemed
lost, there was turn in fortunes, originating in the action taken by ABNP, which
started up the Life Ursus
project together with the Autonomous Province of Trento
(APT) and ISPRA (formerly Photo 1 - Bear and lynx tracks in the snow. Campa mountains, April 2012 (C. Groff, APT
INFS), co-funded by the Eu- Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)
ropean Union. Between 1999
and 2002 this led to the rededicated to the conservation and standard
lease of 10 bears (3 males and 7 females), giv- management of the bear population, perhaps
ing rise to the population to which this report even more demanding, began in 2002. For this
refers. The release of the bears was preceded purpose the provincial government set out the
by a detailed feasibility study supervised by operational guidelines on which these manISPRA, which ascertained the environmental agement activities should be based in resolusuitability of a sufficiently large area to play tions no. 1428 of 26 June 2002 and no. 1988
host to a viable bear population (40-60 bears), of 9 August 2002. In particular, six prowhich is the ultimate aim of the project. This grammes of action were identified (Monitorarea extends well beyond the confines of the ing, Damage Management, Management of
province of Trento, also involving neighbour- Emergencies, Staff Training, Communication
ing regions and countries.
and National and International Links), which
Following the conclusion of the phase in- represent the underlying structure followed in
volving the release of the animals, the phase this report.
6

BEAR REPORT 2012

1. Monitoring
Monitoring of the bear has been carried field, camera traps, radio-tracking and genetic
out continuously by the Autonomous Province monitoring.
In 2012 genetic testing was again carried
of Trento for almost 40 years. Over time, traditional survey techniques in the field have out by technicians from the conservation gebeen supplemented by radiotelemetry (a netics laboratory at ISPRA. The samples colmethod first used in Eurasia, in the second lected (hairs, faeces, tissue or other) are sent
half of the 1970s), automatic video controls to the laboratory for genetic tests, carried out
by remote stations, camera traps and finally, using standard protocols, while the data is validated using population genetics software. The
since 2002, by genetic monitoring.
The latter technique is based on the col- organic samples collected may be analysed aclection of organic samples (hairs and excre- cording to the standard procedure (549 in
ment) and takes place using two methods 2012), or in more urgent cases (15 in 2012),
commonly described as systematic monitor- using a faster system, providing results within
ing, based on the use of traps with scent bait, a couple of weeks from receipt of the sample.
designed to capture" hairs using barbed wire, The methods developed, in accordance with
and on opportunistic monitoring, which is based on the
collection of organic samples
found in the area during
routine activities. In the last
few years, genetic monitoring has represented the most
crucial technique for collecting information regarding
the bear population present
in the province.
Genetic monitoring was
coordinated for the eleventh
consecutive year by APTs
Forestry and Wildlife Department, with the collaboration
of ISPRA, ABNP, the MdS Photo 2 - Staff busy in field monitoring (C. Groff, APT Forestry and Wildlife Department
and volunteers.
Archives)
It is nevertheless implicit
that the monitoring techniques cited do not the provisions of PACOBACE (Plan of Action
guarantee that all the bears present will be for the Conservation of the Bear in the Cendetected, so the data in this report must be tral-Eastern Alps), provide for amplification of
read bearing in mind this intrinsic limitation. ten different genomic regions (DNA miFinally it should be recalled that monitor- crosatellites) and molecular sexing of all the
ing of the other two species of large carnivores hair and faeces samples collected by staff and
in the Alps (the Eurasian lynx and the wolf) sent to the institutes laboratory. The high risk
began following their reappearance in the of error associated with analysis of samples
province, hence from the end of the 1980s for collected using non-invasive techniques
the lynx and since 2009 for the wolf. The demands the use of laboratory procedures
monitoring of these two species also involved designed to minimise the risk of genotyping
the use of traditional survey techniques in the errors. With this scope the multiple amplifica7

BEAR REPORT 2012

tion approach has been adopted, involving repeating a series of tests until a genotype considered to be reliable is obtained. Reliability
was established using statistical evaluation,
carried out using the Reliotype programme.
This calculates the likelihood of the particular genotype observed effectively belonging to
the population, based on the allele frequency
observed in the population of reference and
on the number of repeat tests providing concordant results. If the reliability of the genotype arrives at or exceeds 95% it is accepted
and the sample identified is added to the database. Following processing of the initial results
of genetic tests, the combination of genotypes
identified is subjected to careful quality control carried out subsequently, through comparison of genetic data, sampling and data
coming from other activities in the field
(telemetry, sightings etc.) designed to identify
samples potentially subject to error. Further
tests were used for these samples in order to
clarify any uncertainty.
A total of 646 organic samples from
bears (226 from rub trees, 169 at damage sites
and 251 elsewhere) were collected using the
opportunistic system in the province of Trento

in 2012, of which 564 samples were sent to

ISPRA for genetic testing (403 samples of
hair, 156 of excrement, 4 of tissue and 1
tooth), bringing the total number of organic
samples collected and subjected to genetic
testing since 2002 to 4,952. Some of the
samples collected (82) were not sent for testing, as they were duplicates (or further repeats) of samples already positively identified.
The fact that genetic monitoring has now
been carried out for eleven consecutive
years makes the Trentino case particularly
interesting, as the medium-long term
timescale for these activities (generally difficult to keep up and hence rare, perhaps without precedent), makes certain types of analysis possible which would be unthinkable with
more fragmentary monitoring.
The 646 samples were collected by the
staff of the Autonomous Province of Trento
(414; 64%), ABNP (180; 27.8%) and by volunteers (52; 8%).
Further samples were collected outside the
province, contributing towards determining
the total number of bears from this population identified; the data was kindly provided
by the Autonomous Province of Bolzano,

BEAR REPORT 2012

the Lombardia Region, the Veneto Region

and the Autonomous Region of Friuli
Venezia Giulia.

The trend in relation to the number of

samples collected in Trentino over the last
eleven seasons can be seen below (Graph 1).

Graph 1

N of organic samples collected by method

N of samples

900
800

Sistematic

700

Opportunistic

600

Total

500
400
300
200
100
0
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Years

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

TOT.

45

125

319

193

228

205

290

311

514

587

646

3463

Systematic

227

464

154

255

135

83

167

1489

TOTAL

49

352

783

347

483

340

373

311

681

587

646

4952

N of traps

39

41

42

47

17

57

57

Opportunistic

During 2012, alongside traditional opportunistic monitoring and with the collaboration
of ABNP, the Forestry and Wildlife Department
again carried out monitoring of rub trees,
namely plants on which bears leave signs of
their presence by leaving their odour and hair
on the bark. This monitoring activity began in
2010 and for the first time it took place in a
standardised manner, as described below
and with the results summarised below.
Monitoring of a total of more than 100
trees equipped with barbed wire was carried
out systematically, with the scope of collecting organic samples, assessing the possible significance of the use of these trees by bears and
consequently understanding how useful they
may be in monitoring the population. The
checks, carried out every three weeks from
April until November, on a total of 11 occa-

sions, provided for the collection of samples

of organic material from each positive rub tree
(collected exclusively from the barbs of the
barbed wire). In order not to change the
habits of bears, no lures were used. Identification and monitoring of the sites was possible thanks to the local knowledge of staff from
the Wildlife Office, the park wardens of the
Adamello Brenta Nature Park, the staff of the
Trentino Forestry Service and forest wardens.
During the season 226 hair samples were
collected, representing around a third of the
organic samples collected in an opportunistic manner during the year. A total of 13
bears were genotyped; 7 males and 6 females (representing 27% of males and 35%
of females known to be present in the area
studied in 2012, also considering all the
cubs). Of these 11 were adults, 1 a young and
9

BEAR REPORT 2012

1 a cub. In the three years of monitoring

(2010-2012), a total of 16 bears actively frequented the rub trees.
The significant difference between the
sexes in the use of rub trees was confirmed:
males made considerably more visits to rub
trees than females and these visits were concentrated in the spring-summer months (during the reproductive season). The use of rub
trees by females would instead appear to be
more sporadic and mostly limited to the autumn months. Furthermore, young bears
would appear to make only marginal use of
rub trees in comparison to adults: all this suggests that bears may use the activity to estab-

lish a sort of social hierarchy, in order to avoid

direct conflict.
Sampling bears by collecting hairs left naturally on rub trees was thus confirmed as a
helpful addition to monitoring methods providing for opportunistic collection of samples
and the use of hair traps with lures. Rub trees
are indeed an efficient, safe, flexible, non-invasive and relatively cheap method for the collection of data useful for estimating the extent
of the population investigated and population
trends.
Photographic monitoring of rub trees
was also commenced in a standardised manner for the first time in 2012 (Box 1).

BOX 1 - Photographic monitoring of rub trees

Following promising exploratory use of camera traps in 2010 and 2011 and the agreement signed by APT and the Museo delle Scienze, in collaboration with ABNP, standardised
camera trap monitoring of rub trees commenced for the first time in 2012.
The main scope was to obtain quantitative and qualitative data on the use of rub trees
by bears, in relation to the frequency and ways in which they are used by the different sexes and age groups and during different seasons. Secondly, the camera traps made it possible to obtain important
information on seasonal variations and the
activities of bears in
general, along with information about the
numerous other species
captured on film.
20 IR-plus camera traps were used
(Photo A). These are
activated by infrared
sensors following the
passage of animals,
recording a video or
photographic image after a trigger time of
Photo A - Camera trap positioned on a tree (P. Zanghellini - APT Forestry and Wildlife
around 1 second from Department Archives)
the time the animal
comes within the field of the sensor.
The cameras were attached to trees opposite the chosen rub tree, at a height of around
2 metres and an average distance of around 4 metres. They were set to video mode, with

10

BEAR REPORT 2012

continuous filming Figure A

(sequence lasting 20 Location of the camera traps and the relative number of bears passing
seconds) and the date
and time of the
footage impressed on
the image. They were
equipped with a 4 GB
memory card making
it possible to record
hundreds of videos, also thanks to the extensive operational autonomy guaranteed by an
external battery, in addition to the internal
batteries.
The traps were
checked every 3
weeks by APT/ABNP
staff, in order to download the data and control the batteries.
20 of the more
than 100 rub trees
identified and monitored, uniformly distributed in the area
frequented by bears,
were chosen for monitoring with camera
traps (Figure A).
The sites chosen, in
addition to being uniformly distributed in
the area, were known
to be used regularly by
bears, a fundamental
requisite for maximising the data acquired.
Photographic sampling
was carried out from
6 May to 19 November 2012, with a total of 3,022 camera days in terms of effective operation (an average
of 151 days per camera). The sampling was not quite as extensive as expected, due to reduced operation by some of the cameras because of full memory cards or problems with batteries, and to the theft of three cameras. However, over and beyond this, all the cameras
worked effectively and the sampling carried out was nevertheless significant.

11

BEAR REPORT 2012

Results (bears)

The cameras recorded a total of

4,736 videos of animals and men, including 128 of bears (Photos B and C).
For the purposes of analysis, individual
events relating to the passage of bears
(or other species) were established, joining together sequential videos because
they referred to a single event (such as a
bear checking and using a rub tree for example), or in the event that the same an- Photo B - Bear filmed by a camera trap at the foot of the rub tree
imal spent a long time in front of the (Andalo forestry station - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department
camera, leading to several videos within Archives)
a standard time interval (established as 1
hour). In this way 110 (out of a total of
128 recordings) individual events (or
separate events independent of each
other) resulted for bears, with an average
of 5.5 per camera (from a minimum of 0
to a maximum of 20).
Graph 1 shows the seasonal changes
in the presence of bears recorded by the
cameras, expressed as the % of cameras
Photo C - Bear marking a rub tree (C. Sartori - APT Forestry
capturing images of bears, in relation to and Wildlife Department Archives)
the total number of cameras. The trend
also provides information about changes in the activity of the species in general, given that
the rub trees are situated along paths or forest roads used by bears: one can note a peak in
May, coinciding with the reproductive season, decreasing up to July-August and with a recovery in terms of activity in September before pre-hibernation lethargy.

Graph 1 - Seasonal changes in the activity of bears recorded at rub trees monitored with camera traps, expressed as the %
of sites recording the presence of bears in relation to the total number of sites monitored with camera traps

Seasonal changes in activity

Proportion (%) of sites recording
the presence of bears

100
80
60
40
20
0

12

May

June

July

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

BEAR REPORT 2012

Proportion (%) of individual events by category

The bears behaviour at rub trees was assigned to one of 4 categories: (1) indifferent (bear
did not stop at tree), (2) checking of tree, (3) checking of tree and rubbing, (4) only rubbing.
Graph 2 shows the percentages for these different categories of behaviour in terms of the 110
overall events recorded, also by age group and sex. Overall, 41% of events involved indifferent bears (Photo D), whereas the remaining 59% involved checking the tree (40%), checking and rubbing (12%),
2 - % distribution of behavioural categories in terms of the use of rub trees (in reor just rubbing (7%). Graph
lation to individual events recorded by camera traps) by different age groups
One interesting result is
that the bears rubbing
Behaviour at rub trees
themselves against the
90
tree were mostly male
MM adults (N=35)
80
FF adults (N=8)
adults, as shown in the
70
Undetermined adults (N=4)
images (in 18 events
60
CUBS (N=11)
YUNGS (N=22)
out of 21), while the 3
50
Other Undetermined (N=30)
40
remaining events in30
volved individuals of
20
unidentified gender (so
10
the effective proportion
0
checking
checking and rubbing
indifferent
of males is probably
higher).

Proportion (%) of individual events by category

None of the adult females filmed rubbed themselves against the trees, however most of
those ascertained to be females checked the rub tree (5 out of 8 individual events). This
data confirms the results of genetic monitoring, providing further information about the
use of rub trees: only
a small proportion of
males was indifferent
to the rub trees (6 out
of 35 individual
events). As regards
differentiation according to age groups, it is
interesting to observe
that in almost 45% of
cases of passing cubs
Photo D - Bear with indifferent attitude to the presence of the rub tree (M. Tiso - APT Fo(5 out of 11) the cubs
restry and Wildlife Department Archives)
checked the rub tree,
but none of them rubbed themselves; their behaviour is similar to that of youngs (41%
checked trees), with the difference that there was one case of a young bear rubbing himself against the tree. In this context it should be underlined that youngs were necessarily
identified in an empirical manner, based on the markedly smaller size of young as
compared to adults. They were classified in a conservative manner, so it is possible that
some young were considered to be adults, whereas the opposite is unlikely.
It can be noted that active behaviour (checking and rubbing + rubbing categories) regards above all adult males. The other undetermined bears group relates to bears whose size
did not make it possible to determine the sex or age group.

13

BEAR REPORT 2012

Analysis of seasonal
changes in behaviour at
rub trees (Graph 3) reBehaviour trend over time
veals an interesting
14
trend for adult male
checks
bears, with a marked
12
checks and rubs/rubs
peak in activity in May,
10
namely during the re8
productive season, as
compared to subsequent
6
months. This further re4
inforces the theory that
2
rub trees have a fundamental role in inter-spe0
May
June
July
Aug
Sep
Oct
Nov
cific
communication
linked to reproduction.
The behaviour of other species at rub trees was also analysed. There was widespread indifference to the trees, however active use (marking with urine) by the pine/beech marten and fox
was recorded in a limited number of cases (6.5%), along with passive use (checking) by four
ungulates (5.2%). The trend was only partially similar to the trend for use by bears, however
it has emerged that rub trees also have a role in the social behaviour and intra-specific communication of other species. The overall results for events involving the use of rub trees for all
months did not show any statistical link between the bear and other species, or any link between
marking and checking species.
In addition to the use of rub trees, the results revealed other interesting aspects regarding the
habits of bears. In particular, by plotting events by time bands, it is possible to arrive at a profile for daily activities (Graph 4). This shows the typical trend for a nocturnal and crepuscular
species, with peaks in terms of passage (and hence activity) early in the morning (4:00-6:00)
and in the evening (18:00-22:00).
Number of events (male bears)

Graph 3 - Trend in the behaviour of adult male bears at rub trees over time. The data
refers to individual events recording the passage of bears (N=29)

Graph 4 - Daily activity of bears, in terms of events in which passing bears were filmed by camera traps (the graph shows the
% of events by time band out of the total, N=110)

Daily activity
20

% frequency of events
captured on film

18
16
14
10
8
6
4
2
0
00-02

02-04

04-06

06-08

08-10

10-12

12-14

14-16

16-18

18-20

Daily time bands (intervals of 2 hours)

14

20-22

22-24

BEAR REPORT 2012

Results (all species)

In addition to the bear, a further 13 species of medium-large mammals were captured on

film, including man. In Graph 5, the species are placed in order of the overall number of events
recorded, allowing straightforward comparison of the results for different species. It is interesting to observe that man is the species most frequently captured on film (2,080 events, not
included in the graph in order to better appreciate the differences between the other species).
The variety of species filmed shows the usefulness of camera traps in monitoring a wide range
of mammals. The following animals were recorded more frequently than the bear, in order of
frequency: roe deer, red deer, alpine chamois, fox and pine/beech marten (the latter were often
not distinguishable as nocturnal images are in black and white).
Graph 5 - Individual events recorded for all species of medium-large mammals

Species sampled
Number of individual events
involving passage

700
600
500
400
300
200
100

n
(N

=1

ffl
o

nx

n
ai
nt
ou
M

Li

re
ha

ha
an
pe

ro
Eu

M
ou

re

l
rre

er
dg

ui
Sq

Ba

og
D

ar

Be
a

te
n

x
ne
Pi

Al

pi

/b
e

ne

ec

ch

am

Fo

oi

er
de

er
R

ed

de
oe
R

Analysis of the data, in order to assess any possible links related to avoidance or association between the presence of the bear and other species, did not show any specific relationships. For example, there is no documentation supporting the theory that the presence
of the bear may influence the behaviour of ungulates, limiting their numbers.

Conclusions

The positioning of cameras on rub-trees made it possible to obtain important data on

the way such trees are effectively used by bears, along with a range of additional information (changes in coat, beginning and end of activity, daily pattern of activity, interaction between individuals and species, consistency between genetic and morphological data etc.).
As confirmed by many studies, camera traps are however only suitable for individual
identification in the case of species with a specific coat, such as felines; recognising individuals on the basis of incidental marks or individual peculiarities is occasionally possible, but
this is an exception, meaning that the method cannot be considered as an effective monitoring tool. Even the additional information provided by genetic testing in the specific case
of rub trees does not usually allow visual identification of the individual which can also be
used on other occasions.
by Francesco Rovero and Natalia Bragalanti

15

BEAR REPORT 2012

Status of the population in 2012

Processing of the data collected provided

the information given subsequently regarding the identification of the bears sampled,
estimation of the minimum population, the
number of litters during 2012, the trends in
terms of population development and the use
of the area by the animals.
It should be noted that starting from this
edition of the report, the graphs regarding
demographic aspects have been updated
not only in relation to 2012, but also with
data regarding previous years that monitoring in 2012 has made it possible to recover
(for example in relation to so-called rediscovered bears ). This explains the differences which can sometimes be found between the graphs in previous reports and this
years report. This therefore leads to ongoing updating of the data available and the
relative graphs, which must therefore be considered to substitute previous ones, bearing
in mind the greater reliability of the background information and hence the related
analysis.

Definitions
cubs: bears aged between 0 and 1;
youngs: males between the age of 1 and
5 and females between the age of 1 and 3;
adults: males over the age of 5 and females over the age of 3;
detected bears: bears whose presence
has been ascertained during the last year,
either genetically or on the basis of unequivocal and repeated observations;
undetected bears: bears which were not
detected in the last year alone;
missing bears: bears certainly or most
likely no longer present within the population, as they have been found dead, killed,
emigrated, taken into captivity or for which
no genetic evidence has been found in the
last two years;
rediscovered bears: bears detected genetically after two or more years during
which their presence was not recorded;
roaming: movement outside western
Trentino by bears born in this area, with16

out them reaching the territory habitually

frequented by bears belonging to the Dinaric-Balkan bear population;
emigration: the abandoning of the population present in the province by bears
reaching the territory habitually frequented
by bears belonging to the Dinaric-Balkan
bear population;
immigration: the arrival in the province
of bears coming from the Dinaric-Balkan
bear population.
Overall 43 animals were detected genetically in Trentino and neighbouring
provinces and regions during 2012. All of
them were detected using opportunistic genetic monitoring. At least 7 cubs belonging
to four different litters must be added to
these, as they were repeatedly observed
and/or filmed in the company of their mothers (all genetically detected) during the year,
although the cubs were not identified genetically.
It is however necessary to subtract 7
bears from the total: 5 of these died and 2
were considered to have emigrated as they
were recorded in Friuli Venezia Giulia, in the
eastern part of the region. The stable presence of a group of bears has been ascertained
in this area, representing the most northwesterly ramification of the Dinaric-Balkan
bear population.
Finally, it should be recalled that on the
one hand a further bear was found dead in
the province of Sondrio on 22 September
2012, which however had not been genetically identified at the time this report was
printed (so for the moment it is has not been
considered in the analysis which follows),
while on the other hand a further bear was
identified through genetic monitoring. The
results suggested this was the son of DJ3,
taken into captivity in 2011 (see the 2011 report for details). However, the presence of
this last bear has not been confirmed by observations in the field (DJ3 was monitored at
length with a radio collar) nor by known data
on the reproduction of the bear in question.
So for the moment it has not been included

BEAR REPORT 2012

in the calculations, but may be included subsequently should elements clarifying the situation emerge in the future.
Hence a minimum of 43 bears are consid-

ered to have been present at the end of 2012,

of which 22 males, 14 females and 7 of undetermined sex (Graph 2) (sex ratio M-F
1:0.4 - n=36).

Graph 2

18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

females
males
sex not determined

sexual maturity of males

F13

M22

M19

M20

M17

M18

M16

F12

M15

F8

M11

F7

M13

F5

M9

F4

M7

F2

M4

M3

M2

M1

M6
DJ1G1

JJ4

DG3

DG2

MJ2G1

MJ5

BJ1

MJ4

KJ2

MJ2

KJ1

Daniza

sexual maturity of females

Gasper

Age (years)

Structure of the population at the end of 2012

? ?

Bears

Once again this year it is very likely that

the genetic monitoring carried out in the
province did not detect all the bears making
up the population. Considering the presence
of individuals not detected in the last year
alone (5, including 4 cubs that were not detected in 2012, although present in 2011) as
possible, and excluding those missing for two
or more years (13), the estimated population in 2012 was from 43 to 48 bears. It
should be underlined that the minimum num-

ber (43) represents the number of bears certainly present, whereas the maximum (48) is
exclusively an evaluation of probability, based
on specific criteria shown to be essentially
valid to date, but which have intrinsic limitations. The 43 bears therefore represent a
minimum population estimate, which is different from a genuine population estimate, requiring the use of demographic
models involving capture, marking and recapture (CMR).

17

BEAR REPORT 2012

The acquisition of consolidated demographic data over time also makes it possible
to evaluate the efficacy of genetic monitoring in retrospect, comparing the number of

individuals identified year by year with the individuals shown by monitoring in subsequent
years to be actually present in the same period (Graph 3).

Graph 3

Percentage of bears identified - 2002-2011

100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%

100%

90%

100%

83%

95%

96%

89%

83%

78%

76%

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

40%
30%
20%
10%
0%

Graph 4 shows the average percentage of

genetically identified bears in comparison to
the bears actually present in the 20022011 period, with reference to the whole

population (89%), females and males

(93% and 83% respectively) and the three
age groups (adults 97%, youngs 88%,
cubs 79%).

Graph 4

Percentage of bears identified 2002-2011:

total, by gender ad by age groups
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%

89%

93%

83%

97%

88%

79%

males

adults

youngs

cubs

40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
total

18

females

BEAR REPORT 2012

The population trend was once again confirmed to be positive in 2012 (Graph 5). In
this graph the figures for previous years no
longer show the range which characterises

2012, as the relative minimum certain numbers have been updated and supplemented
using data acquired in subsequent years.

Graph 5

Population trend 2002-2012

60

not detected in the last year alone

minimum certain number

N of bears

50

48
5

40
30
20
10

11

10

2002

2003

15

18

22

23

2005

2006

2007

27

29

2008

2009

37

38

2010

2011

43

0
2004

2012

Years

The average annual growth in the bear

population in the 2002-2012 period, with
reference to the minimum certain population, was 15.6% and saw an increase last
year.
Graph 6 shows the evolution in the average annual growth rate in the 2004-2012

period. Following an initial period, during

which the growth rate was even higher than
20%, the rate has gradually settled around
the current level of 15-16%. This is nevertheless positive when compared with the
data in existing reference material as regards
the species.

Graph 6

Average growth rate (%)

Average growth rate in the minimum certain population 2004-2012

35%
20%
15%
10%
5%
0%
2002-2004

2002-2005

2002-2006

2002-2007

2002-2008

2002-2009

2002-2010

2002-2011

2002-2012

Years

19

BEAR REPORT 2012

Reproduction

In 2012 the presence of 7 litters during the

year was ascertained (genetic monitoring plus
certain sightings), with a total of 16 cubs. In
three cases the litters were made up of three
cubs, in a further three cases there were two
cubs, whereas in the last case there was a single cub (3+3+3+2+2+2+1). However, it is
not possible to exclude the possibility of other
cubs being present in the case of the litter with
a single cub, so this is not taken into consideration in the calculations, for example with regard to the average number of cubs per litter.

Genetic testing made it possible to identify 9 of the 16 cubs (7 males and 2 females),
along with a further cub (F12) probably born
to F2 last year (2011), whose presence was
already known but not accompanied by genetic identification.
There have therefore been 34 litters ascertained to date in Trentino (32 genetically
and 2 repeatedly observed in 2011) in the last
eleven years, and at least 69 cubs have been
born (33 males, 25 females and eleven of unknown gender) (Graph 7), M-F sex ratio
1:0.76 (2002-2012, n=58).

Graph 7

Litters and cubs 2002-2012

16
15

litter

14

male cub

N of cubs and litters

13

female cub

12

cub sighted but not determined

11

genetically

10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Years

5 of the 30 litters (17%) for which both

parents have been genetically identified were
the result of mating between blood relatives
(between father and daughter in three cases,
between mother and son in one case and between bears with only the father in common
in the fifth case).

Reproductive animals

As mentioned above, all seven of the mothers in 2012 were identified through genetic

20

testing, combined with direct sighting or

footage with camera traps (such as the photo
on the cover page, showing the female BJ1 accompanied by two cubs born during the year
and not yet genetically identified). They were
Daniza, KJ1 and KJ2 (Photo 3) (3 cubs
each), F4, JJ4 and BJ1 (2 cubs each) and
MJ2 (apparently with a single cub). This is
the 5th ascertained birth for Daniza, the 4th for
KJ1 and KJ2, the 3rd for MJ2, the 2nd for BJ1
and JJ4 and the 1st for F4.

BEAR REPORT 2012

Photo 3 - The mother bear KJ2 with her cubs (I. Bommassar - published in the Trentino on 14.05.2012)

There were three recognised fathers for

these litters: Gasper (three litters), M4 (one)
and MJ5 (one). Information about the fathers
and cubs of the other two litters is not available.
14 females and 5 males have therefore reproduced in the period 2002-2012.
There were 7 sexually mature males and
10 sexually mature females present at the
end of 2012.
The average age of primiparous females
in the period 2006-2012 (n=9) has to date
been 3.67.
The average gap between consecutive

litters for the same female, recorded in the

period 2002-2012 (n=18 gaps, referring to 9
females), is 2.11 years.
The average number of cubs per litter is
2.06 (2002-2012, n=33), a figure to be considered in relation to the average age of
mothers, which is 7.2.
The number of cubs per litter to date has
essentially been related to the age of the
mother, with 2 or less cubs for females aged 37 and 3 for females aged 8 or over (Graph 8).
This data refers to 31 litters out of 34, naturally not bearing in mind the two litters in
2011 whose mothers are not currently known,

Graph 8

Average no. of cubs

Average number of cubs/ mothers age

R2 = 0,669

4,00
n = number of recorded births

(n=2)

(n=1)

(n=1)

(n=2)

3,00

(n=1)

(n=3)

(n=1)

2,00
(n=7)

1,00

(n=4)

(n=4) (n=2)

(n=3)

0,00
3

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

Age of mothers (in years)

21

BEAR REPORT 2012

nor MJ2s litter this year, for which the number of cubs is unknown.
The link between the average number of
cubs per litter and the age of the mother is
represented with a certain degree of approximation by the red polynomial regression line
in the graph, with a coefficient of determination of 0.616.

Rediscovered bears

During 2012, 3 bears, all males, which

had not been identified for at least two years,
were rediscovered genetically (M7, M1 and
DJ1G1, not detected for 2, 3, and 4 years respectively). In the past this had only happened with one bear. All three bears were rediscovered outside the province.

Bears undetected in 2012

Only one bear present in 2011 was undetected for the first year in 2012 (F3, a female who would now be five years old). She
has not yet been classified as a missing bear
(see definitions on page 16), as there is a concrete possibility that she is still present.

Missing bears

As mentioned previously, once again in

2012 it was possible to document cases of
emigration, with reference to the male bear
KJ2G2, who was already based in the area of
the Dinaric-Balkan bear population (a frontier
area between Italy, Austria and Slovenia) during 2011, and M8, who instead only moved
this far east this year (see Box 4 on page 20 of
the 2011 Bear Report for further details of the
case).
The case of the 7-year-old male bear
KJ2G2, who has spent the last 6 years away
from his original population, is particularly
worthy of note: in 2007, just after leaving his
mother, he reached the southern part of
Monte Baldo (VR) (2007 Bear Report, page
11), the following year he crossed the Adige
Valley (the first documented crossing, to the
south of Bolzano), making his way across the
Vallarsa and the foothills of Vicenza to the Asiago tableland (2008 Bear Report, page 15). In
2009 he continued to move north and east,
22

crossing the whole length of the province of

Belluno and entering eastern Tyrol in Austria
(2009 Bear Report, page 20). In 2010 KJ2G2
was detected in Friuli Venezia Giulia and for
the first time also further east in Carinthia,
south of Villach, a short distance away from
the Slovenian border. In 2011 KJ2G2 was still
in the area, specifically around Tarvisio (2011
Bear Report, pages 21-22). Finally, this year
the bear was followed, again through genetic
tests, on a long journey taking him from the
frontier with Slovenia further north-east to
Styria in central Austria, to then return to the
frontier area between Italy, Austria and Slovenia (Georg Rauer, pers. comm.). Thus he has
probably made the longest documented journey in the Alps for a bear (around 1,000 linear km over the six years taken into consideration, estimated however exclusively on the
basis of genetic data, which is much more limited than the data provided by radiotelemetry).
Two new bears (the female F9 and the
male M10) are instead considered to be missing, as they have not been genetically detected in the last two years.
When calculating the number of missing
bears in 2012 it is also necessary to consider
the death of 5 bears:
The female F10, aged 2.5 (Photo 4), found
on 20 September 2012 on wooded slopes
above the town of Caderzone in the Val Rendena, on the right-hand side of the River
Sarca.

Photo 4 - The carcass of the female bear F10 (V. Calvetti - APT
Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

BEAR REPORT 2012

The condition of the carcass (several

months old) meant that it was not possible
to establish the cause of death. The autopsy,
carried out at the Istituto Zooprolattico
delle Tre Venezie in Trento, did not show
any signs of rearms, the remains of bullets
or any traces of poison.
A cub born during the year (aged 3-4
months), female, called F11, whose remains
were found in the Val di Nambrone on 26
April 2012. Once again it was not possible
to establish the cause of death, which is in
any case very likely to be from natural
causes (Photo 5).

Photo 5 - Carcass of the cub F11 (E. Bonapace - APT Forestry and
Wildlife Department archives)

M14 and M12, two two-year-old brothers,

who met with a very similar fate, both being
killed in road accidents in the province of
Bolzano, respectively on 22 April 2012 in
the Val dIsarco on the main road near Ponte
Gardena and on 8 June 2012 on the MeBo road near Terlano. There is a third
brother, M13, who is the only one still alive
and who spent most of 2012 in Swiss territory (see Box 2).
The male bear JJ5, aged 6, who died of suffocation during an attempt to capture him
on 12 June 2012 near Monte Terlago (see
the section regarding captures for details).
Thus by the end of 2012 there were 13
bears undetected genetically for at least
the last two years, 14 dead bears (7 corpses
found and 7 bears killed accidentally or deliberately), 2 taken into captivity and two
emigrating bears.
Hence there were a total of 31 missing
bears at the end of 2012. As regards this data,
see the considerations in the survival rates
section on page 25.
Graph 9 shows the balance between
births-rediscovered-immigrating/missing
bears year by year. In 2012 there was a very
positive balance (+11). This was the result of
16 births in 2012, 3 rediscovered bears, 5
deaths, 1 new emigrating bear and 2 new
bears classified as missing.

Graph 9

N of bears

Population balance 2002-2012

20
19
18
17
16
15
14
13
12
11
10
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1

born-immigrating
missing
balance

+2

+1

+4

+3

+7

-2

+4

+2

+4

+3

+ 11

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Years

23

BEAR REPORT 2012

In the year of their disappearance the

missing bears (n=31) included 10 adults, 16
youngs and 5 cubs (Graph 10). Of the missing bears, 14 have died, two have emigrated
and thirteen have not been detected genetically for at least two years, (see definitions on
page 16), (Graph 11).

The dead bears (n=14) belonged to the following age groups: cubs (5), youngs (6) and
adults (3), the shares being shown in Graph 12.
The deaths (Table 1) were the result of
natural causes in 4 cases, unknown in 3 cases
and as a result of action by man in the other
7 cases (Graph 13).

Graph 10

Graph 11

Missing bears: age groups

(2002-2012 - n=31)
Cubs (=1 year)
Youngs (aged 1 to 3/5)
Adults ( 3/5 years)

Missing bears: causes

(2002-2012 - n=31)
In captivity
6%

Cubs
16%

Emigrating
6%

Adults
32%
Deaths
46%
Undetect for at
least 2 years
42%

Youngs
52%

Graph 12

Graph 13

Dead bears: age groups

(2002-2012 - n=14)

Dead bears: causes

(2002-2012 - n=14)

Adults
21%

Cubs
36%

Unknown causes
21%

Youngs
43%

Natural causes
29%

Table 1
Cause of death * in Germany ** in Switzerland, ad=adult, juv=young, cub=cub
Year

natural causes

road accident

shot down for

management

management
accident

unknown

2003

1 cub

1
0

2004

2005
2006

1 cub,1 ad

1 juv*

3
0

2007
1 cub

2008

1 juv**

1 juv

3
0

2009

24

total deaths
0

2002

2010

1 cub

2011

1 ad

2012

1 cub

2 juv

TOTAL

1 ad

1 juv

14

Human causes
50%

BEAR REPORT 2012

Survival rates

The new data available makes it possible

to update the survival rates for the three different age groups (cubs, youngs and adults,
according to the definitions on page 162) as
compared to 2011, differentiated for the two
sexes (Graph 14).
The data refers to a period of 11 years
(2002-2012), during which it was possible
to record the survival or death of 64 differ-

ent bears, with 291 passages from one year

to another (291 bear-years). The mortalities" category, considered in the broader
sense, also includes bears undetected in the
last two years or taken into captivity, confirming the criteria used for missing bears.
The data regarding any emigrating bears
is instead only considered up to the time
that they leave their original population.

Graph 14

Survival rates by age group

100
94,6

95

91,9

% survival

90

92,9

86,2

91,2

91,2

91,3

85
80

76,9

Females
Males
General

81,8

75
70
65
60
cubs

youngs

adults

Age groups

Excluding the four bears killed or removed following management decisions and
referring thus exclusively to natural
causes of death, one can note an increase
in the survival rate for young males (from
91.9% to 94.3%) and adult females (from
91.2% to 92.4%).
Cubs are therefore confirmed as the category with the lowest survival rate (around
4 out of 5 cubs reach their first birthday).
Furthermore, it should also be considered
that it is very likely that the calculation excludes a number of cubs born and dying
within the first year of life without their
presence being detected through genetic
monitoring. The survival rate for young and
adult bears (over 90%) instead shows that
around one out of 10 individuals (young/
adult bears) disappears from the population
each year.

Structure of the population

At the end of 2012 the certain population

was made up of 17 adults (7 males and 10
females), 11 youngs (8 males and 3 females) and 15 cubs (7 males, 1 female and
7 of undetermined sex). Graph 15 shows the
trend for the 2002-2012 period.
It should be noted that this again shows
the figures for each year including data acquired thanks to monitoring in subsequent
years; so all the data, even if relating to previous years, is constantly updated in relation
to the new knowledge provided by continuing monitoring.
This graph also shows the effective population (Ne) recorded annually, namely the
number of bears capable of reproducing in
that year, made up of adult males plus half
the female bears recorded (given that they
generally give birth in alternate years).
25

BEAR REPORT 2012

Graph 15

Age groups
50

14

Adults
Youngs

45
40

Cubs

35

N of bears

12
10

Ne

30

25
20

15

10

5
0

0
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Years

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Adults

11

12

16

17

Youngs

12

11

15

16

16

11

Cubs

10

15

Total

11

10

15

18

22

23

27

29

37

38

43

3,5

4,5

4,5

5,5

7,5

11

12

Ne

The percentage of bears in the three

age groups (adults, youngs and cubs) in
the period 2002-2012 is shown in Graph 16.
Graph 16

Age group by percentages

80
Adults
Youngs

70

Cubs

60

50
40
30
20
10
0
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

Years

26

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

BEAR REPORT 2012

Graph 17

Average age of bears

8,00
7,50

General
Males
Females

7,00
6,67

Average age

It is also interesting to
note the evolution in the
average age of the bear
population over the 11 year
period examined (Graph
17). In 2012 there was a
slight fall in average age
(now 4.38), after several
years in which it had risen.
This was due above all to the
high number of cubs
recorded this year. It should
be noted that to calculate the
average age for males and females the gender of cubs
born during the year was attributed arbitrarily, respecting the M/F proportions in
the known population.

6,00

5,60
5,27
5,13

5,00

5,10

5,29

5,20

4,73

4,75

4,44

4,62

4,17

4,00
3,50
3,59

5,24

4,38
4,32

4,19

3,96
3,73

3,79

5,35

4,66

4,19

4,00

4,00

5,32

3,65

4,38
3,68

3,53

3,10

3,00
2,00
2001

2002

2005

2007

2009

2011

2013

Years

27

BEAR REPORT 2012

Use of the territory

36 out of the 43 bears detected in 2012

were present within the territory of
Trentino (34 only in Trentino, 2 also in
neighbouring provinces/countries). The
other 7 were present only in neighbouring
regions: 2 in the province of Bolzano (M1
and MJ2G1), 2 in Veneto (DG2 and M4), 3
in Lombardia (DJ1G1,M7 and M9). All 9

bears identified as also or completely present outside the province in 2012 were males.
The 882 area fixes related to the presence of bears collected within the province
during 2012 (all recorded indicators of presence, with the exception of those coming
from satellite monitoring of three bears) are
shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1
Reports of bears in the province of Trento in 2012

Area occupied by the population

Considering also the longest journeys made

by young males during 2012, the population
of brown bears present in the central Alps,
which is mainly centred around western
Trentino, was distributed over a theoretical
area stretching out over 19,425 km in 2012
(Figure 2). The area occupied by the females
28

in a stable manner is decidedly smaller

(1,052 km), still entirely situated within the
province. The areas occupied were estimated
using the minimum convex polygon method,
applied to 100% of the xes available. This
also leads to the inclusion of vast areas which
are not suitable and/or not actually used, especially within the macro-area including the

BEAR REPORT 2012

movements of young males. Furthermore, as

regards Figure 2, it should be emphasised that
it shows genetic xes for adult males (in dark
blue) and young (in light blue), highlighting
the greater links of the former with the areas
frequented by the females.

The only clear exception would appear to

be the xes in the most easterly sector of the
territory (in the province of Belluno), which
however refer to only two adults, one of whom
(MJ4) in any case returned to the females
area during the mating season.

Figure 2
Area occupied by bears in the central Alps in 2012 (in light blue), highlighting the area within this occupied by females in a stable manner (in pink). Data from outside the province provided by the Lombardia and Veneto regions and the Grigioni Canton (CH)

Population density

The population density in the area frequented by the bears in a more stable manner
in 2012 was 3.2 bears/100 km (34 bears, including cubs born during the year, within the
area occupied by the females, namely 1,052
km). It should be considered that this gure is
to some extent underestimated, given that the
territory also includes areas which are unsuitable and not actually used (e.g. valley oor with
urban development, rocky peaks). At all events,
it is essentially in line with the data present in
the bibliography in relation to the alpine environment and the forecasts of the feasibility
study preceding the Life Ursus project.

Roaming

In the period 2005-2012 it was possible to

document roaming (understood as movement
outside western Trentino) involving 21 bears
(all young males). 4 of these have died (2
killed following management decisions in foreign countries and 2 run over in the province
of Bolzano), 1 disappeared in 2005 in the
frontier area between Engadina (CH) and the
province of Bolzano and 2 are currently considered to have emigrated to the DinaricBalkan bear population.
The other 14 were still present in 2012:
some (6) have returned (although it is not
possible to say whether denitively or not) or
29

BEAR REPORT 2012

have remained in areas straddling the

province of Trento, whereas 8 are currently
outside the province.
In this context it is interesting to recall the
case of the male MJ4 who left the Belluno
area in spring and returned to western
Trentino (Paganella area), to then return to
the province of Belluno a few weeks later
(data obtained from genetic monitoring). The
traces found in the Val dei Mocheni (eastern
Trentino) in May (Photo 6) very probably belong to this bear.
To date no roaming of females born in
Trentino has been documented.

Photo 6 - Bear tracks in the Val dei Mocheni, at SantOrsola

(F. Zambotti)

Other monitoring activities

in 2012

During 2012 3 bears were monitored

using satellite telemetry: Daniza, M2 and
M13.
M11 (see Box 3 on page 15 of the 2011
Bear Report) was instead monitored using radiotelemetry (through ear tags).
The 2012 home-ranges of Daniza and
M2, calculated using the minimum convex
polygon method, stretched respectively over
346 km and 408 km (respectively 1,031
30

and 391 GPS xes in the periods 1 January 31 December 2012 and 1 July -31 December
2012) and are shown in Figures 3 and 4. M13
instead spent almost the whole of the year
outside the province. See Box 2 as regards this.
Figure 3
Home-range of Daniza in 2012 (MCP)

Figure 4
Home-range of M2 in 2012 (MCP)

BEAR REPORT 2012

BOX 2 - M13
M13 was born in January 2010 in the Paganella-Gazza mountain range, in the municipality of Terlago (Tn). Only the following year was it possible to ascertain, thanks to
genetic monitoring, that he was the son of KJ2 and Gasper and the brother of M12 and
M14.
The young male spent the whole of 2010 and part of 2011 with his mother and brothers in the area around the Paganella and Monte Bondone. In May 2011 M13 left his
mother, a new mating season beginning for her, and headed first south towards Garniga
(Monte Bondone) and Monte Stivo (municipality of Arco), exploring an area further south than the one he had previously
frequented with his mother. M13s
vagabond nature, typical of males of his
age, soon led him to move on again, this
time heading north, first to the mountainous area near Cles and then to the Val di
Sole. In autumn he established himself in
the Maddalene mountains, causing some
damage to sheep in the Val dUltimo (righthand bank). These events led the staff of
the Autonomous Province of Bolzano, with
the support of APT personnel, to decide the
capture of the bear, which was fitted with a
GPS radio collar on 16 October 2011 Photo A - Awakening of M13 following capture in the Val dUltimo (D. Righetti - Autonomous Province of Bolzano Archives)
(Photo A).
Immediately after his capture M13 returned to Trentino, more specifically to the Val di Bresimo, where he was sighted and filmed
on several occasions in January 2012, together with another bear, subsequently identified,
thanks to genetic tests, as his brother M14. Shortly afterwards M13 also spent time with
his other brother, M12, confirming that in some cases bears from the same litter can maintain a bond even after leaving their
Figure A
mother and roaming to other areas.
Home range of M13 in 2012 (MCP) KORA Ecology of carnivores
On 7 February 2012, M13s collar was
and management of wild fauna Hunting and Fishing Office of the
Grigioni Canton (CH)
found by APT staff in the Val di Bresimo,
the fastening screws having broken. From
that moment on, the bear was followed
thanks to genetic tests and sightings, also
facilitated by the frequent presence of his
brother M12, making it possible to attribute sightings to the two male bears.
In March the two brothers headed northwest, to the frontier between the province
of Bolzano and Austria, in the Spiss area
(Inn valley). Subsequently M13 continued alone, heading south down the same
valley and crossing the frontier into

31

BEAR REPORT 2012

Switzerland, where he was filmed near Scuol on at least one occasion. Following damage
caused by the bear, the Swiss authorities decided to equip him with a new GPS radio collar. The transmitter was fitted on 12 April 2012. Shortly afterwards, on 1 May 2012, M13
met with an accident, being hit by a train in Switzerland in the Inn valley, fortunately
without serious consequences. However, the impact caused the GPS radio collar to break.
On 30 June the Swiss authorities saw to once again capturing and fitting a transmitter, which made it possible to follow the bear throughout the summer and autumn. In this
period M13 adopted a specific method for moving between Bormio (SO), Poschiavo (CH)
and the Val Camonica (BS). Indeed the young bear crossed very high mountains no less
than four times, remaining at high altitude for over 24 hours, during which he crossed
glaciers and passes over 3,000 metres high in the Ortles-Cevedale, Adamello and Bernina
ranges (Figures B, C, D and E).
On one occasion he arrived at an altitude of 3,405 metres, the highest altitude ever
documented for a bear in Europe.
M13 then decided to spend the hibernation period in the Poschiavo area, his home
range in 2012 having covered an area of 3,701 km2.
As this report was about to be printed we learned that M13 had been shot down on 19
February 2013 in Val Poschiavo (CH) by gamekeepers in the Grigioni Canton.
M13s satellite telemetry data was kindly provided by KORA - Ecology of carnivores
and management of wild fauna, and by the Hunting and Fishing Office of the Grigioni
Canton (CH).
Figure B - First crossing of glaciers in the Ortles-Cevedale range
KORA - Ecology of carnivores and management of wild fauna - Hunting and Fishing Office of the Grigioni Canton (CH)

32

BEAR REPORT 2012

Figure C - Crossing of glaciers in the Bernina range

KORA - Ecology of carnivores and management of wild fauna - Hunting and Fishing Office of the Grigioni Canton (CH)

Figure D - Second crossing of glaciers in the Ortles-Cevedale range (13 Cime area)
KORA - Ecology of carnivores and management of wild fauna - Hunting and Fishing Office of the Grigioni Canton (CH)

33

BEAR REPORT 2012

Figure E - Crossing of glaciers in the Adamello range

KORA - Ecology of carnivores and management of wild fauna - Hunting and Fishing Office of the Grigioni Canton (CH)

The genetic monitoring conducted without

interruption since 2002 has made it possible
to follow most of the bears in a continuing
manner, confirming their presence over time
and the home-ranges used, at least partially.
These are recorded year by year for each individual animal. As an example, below we give
the home-ranges (MCP) of the male Gasper
and the female Daniza from 2004 to 2012
(Figures 5 and 6). Naturally these figures are
indicative and not in any way comparable
with those obtained from radiotelemetric
monitoring of animals, as compared to which
they are likely to be significantly underestimated.

34

Figure 5
Home-range of Gasper in the 2004-2012 period

BEAR REPORT 2012

Figure 6
Home-range of Daniza in the 2004-2012 period. The dotted line
shows the 2012 home-range resulting from satellite fixes

35

BEAR REPORT 2012

2. Damage compensation and prevention

By now APT has gained more than thirty
years experience as regards compensation
and prevention of damage caused by brown
bears. Indeed, since 1976 100% of the material value of assets damaged has been reimbursed and it is possible to acquire prevention
works (mostly consisting of electric fences).
The relative regulations, dealt with in article
33 of provincial law no.24/91, have been revised and updated several times over the
years, also on the basis of directives imposed
by the provincial government with resolution
no. 1988 of 9 August 2002. With Resolution
no. 697 of 8 April 2011 the provincial government further reviewed the regulation of damage compensation, also providing for compensation of ancillary expenses and extending
100% compensation to damage caused by
lynx and wolves.
During 2012 new regulations were approved on the compensation of damage
caused by wild animals, particularly brown
bears, lynx and wolves (L.P. no. 6 of 24 April
2012), modifying previous regulations in order to assure better guarantees of compensation for those suffering damage.
The process of approving these regulations
was the result of three different bills, one of
popular origin, which came together in a single proposal, leading to a new bill which introduced article 33 bis into Law no. 24/91 and
almost entirely cancelled the old article 33.
Bearing in mind the provisions of existing
regulations, the Forestry and Wildlife Department also promotes the prevention of damage to beekeeping and livestock through the
adoption of electric fencing or other protective measures considered suitable, with the
scope of reducing the damage caused by
brown bears. This takes place in two main
ways: funding covering up to 90% of the cost
of works and/or gratuitous loans of prevention works mainly to protect livestock or beehives, along with support and consultancy
provided to farmers by technical experts, such
as the livestock liaison officers.
36

Finally, in the context of reducing bureaucracy for the administration and the public,
the forms relating to processes for damage
compensation, the granting of funding for
prevention works and for reporting bears
and other large carnivores were reviewed and
updated in 2012.

Compensation for damage caused

by bears

In 2012, 201 reports of damage caused by

wild predators were forwarded to the Forestry
and Wildlife Department. 191 cases of damage were attributed to brown bears (187 in
western Trentino and 4 in eastern Trentino),
with an increase of 55% as compared to 2011
(123 cases of damage). In 1 case the predator
was identified as a wolf, in 2 cases the damage was attributed to dogs, whereas in 7 cases the responsibility of predators was excluded.
172 claims for compensation were received by the department, of which 169 have
been processed (164 accepted and 5 rejected), while 3 are currently being examined.
The remaining 29 reports were either not followed up by the claimant or a cumulative
claim was presented by the damaged party for
the damage suffered.
In 82% of cases of damage, inspections
were carried out by forestry staff, who were
responsible for drawing up a report.
Overall, 97,800.29 compensation for
damage caused by brown bears was paid out,
whereas no claim for compensation was presented in the only case of damage attributed
to a wolf.
The considerable increase in the number
of cases of damage as compared to the previous year would once again appear to be linked
to the availability of wild fruit and nuts, given
the scarcity in 2012, particularly in relation to
beechnuts.
In 56 cases, namely around 29% of all incidents recorded, genetic monitoring made it
possible to determine the identity of the

BEAR REPORT 2012

riod of around fifteen days (Photo 8). The two

bears made several attacks on a flock protected by a single electrified fence, which the
bears broke through several
times. In order to reduce the
problems caused to the shepherd by the constant presence of the bears and to encourage him to remain near
the flock at night, an accommodation unit was transported up the mountain using a helicopter and intense
monitoring activities were
carried out by the emergency
teams. This intervention
made it possible for the shepherd to better supervise his
flock and reduce the predatory activity of the bears,
which only took place on
one further occasion, when
Photo 7 - Damage to a beehive (APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)
the sheep were taken to an
which the bear responsible was identified ge- area of pasture where it was not possible for
netically), JJ5 and M2 (with 8 cases of dam- the shepherd to remain overnight.
The second particularly problematical sitage - 14% each). However the bear causing
the most damage was Daniza, one of the uation linked to damage was caused by the
founding bears, accompanied by her 2 cubs. bear called M2, who was attributed with preyOnce she had been fitted with a radio collar, ing on around ten donkeys in the Val Rendethrough GPS fixes it was possible to attribute na and Val di Rabbi, (Photo 9) and a number
no less than 16 cases of damage to her (29% of the total),
for an overall value of
15,400 euro (16% of the total compensation in 2012).
Thus almost three quarters of the damage (73%)
which can be attributed to a
known animal involved just
four bears.
Daniza, together with another female bear (KJ1), accompanied by 3 cubs, can also be attributed with one of
the two most serious situations involving damage in
2012. This took place in the
Val Ambiez with the killing Photo 8 - Preying on sheep in the upper Val Ambiez (M. Baldessari - APT Forestry and
of at least 24 sheep over a pe- Wildlife Department Archives)
bear/s involved with certainty. The animals
causing most damage were, as in 2010 and
2011, M6 (in 9 cases - 16% of damage in

37

BEAR REPORT 2012

of cows. Given the type of prey and in some

cases the vicinity to inhabited areas, these incidents were given a great deal of publicity in
the local media and had a considerable impact
at local level. As a result of the problems

caused by M2, he was captured (see specific

chapter), with the scope of better following
his movements and improving the efficacy of
possible deterrent measures or eventually to
remove him.

Photo 9 - A donkey preyed on by M2 (R. Calvetti - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

Graph 18 shows the trend for damage

caused by brown bears and for which compensation has been paid since 1990, whereas

graphs 19 and 20 show the chronological distribution of this damage in 2012 and in the
period 2002-2012.

Graph 18

Damage compensated from 1990 to 2012

140.000,00

250

120.000,00

N of incidents

200

100.000,00
150

Euro

80.000,00
60.000,00

100

40.000,00
50

20.000,00

Years

38

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

N of incidents

Euro

BEAR REPORT 2012

Graph 19

No. of incidents ascertained by type in 2012

16

N of incidents

14
12
10

LIVESTOCK
BEE-HIVES
CROPS
OTHER

8
6
4
2
0
Jan

Feb

Mar

Apr

May

Jun

Jul

Aug

Sep

Oct

Nov

Dec

2011

2012

Mounth

Graph 20

No. of incidents ascertained by type in 2002-2012

60

N of incidents

50
40

LIVESTOCK
BEE-HIVES
CROPS
OTHER

30
20
10
0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

Mounth

39

BEAR REPORT 2012

The geographical distribution of recorded damage can be seen in Figure 7.

Figure 7
Geographical distribution of damage by bears recorded in 2012

Prevention of damage by bears

Following internal reorganisation of the

Forestry and Wildlife Department, since 2011
the District Forestry Offices have seen to the
distribution of prevention works in the form
of gratuitous loans, while the Wildlife Office
has dealt with applications for the funding of
prevention works.
Overall, the new system has made it possible to improve the service and in particular
to improve contact between users and the
staff responsible for distributing materials. Indeed, in many cases it is forestry station staff
who suggest that applicants request prevention works or ask for consultancy or an inspection before deciding whether to present
an application. A preliminary inspection also
makes it possible to suggest the type of pro-

40

tection most suitable for the users needs, to

recommend specific measures to improve the
efficacy of works and to raise awareness of
the various problems linked to the care and
maintenance of the works among users. Close
contact with users also allows evaluation of
the validity of the materials supplied over
time and of whether they respond to the operational needs of users. Last but not least, an
awareness of the siting of prevention works
by local forestry staff allows more effective
control of their use.
During the year, a total of 128 applications for prevention works to protect assets
from damage by brown bears were presented. Of these 113 were provided by the District Forestry Offices in the form of gratuitous loans (district offices: Mal 32, Tione

BEAR REPORT 2012

46, Trento 20, Cles 13, Rovereto 2), 62 of

which designed to protect beehives (476 in
total since 2002) and 51 livestock (359 in total since 2002). The remaining 15 applications concerned cattle and horses and were
dealt with by the Wildlife Office. Of these, 6
were accepted with funding of 60% of ad-

missible expenditure, 6 were rejected and 3

cancelled as the prevention works were not
carried out or did not comply with the construction criteria required.
The overall expenditure borne by
the Department, also thanks to funds from
the Life Arctos project
(63.24% of the expenditure) amounted to a total of
around 52,500 euro.
Below it is possible to see
the trend in the distribution
of prevention works over a
number of years (Graph 21)
and the different types of
works in the period 20022012 (Graph 22), with reference to livestock and beekeeping.

Photo 10 - An electric fence around beehives (APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)
Graph 21

Prevention works funded from 1989 to 2012

140
60.000

Euro

120

50.000

100
80

30.000

60

20.000

40

10.000

20

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2003

2004

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

1989

Euro

40.000

N of works funded

N of incidents

Years

41

BEAR REPORT 2012

Graph 22

Prevention works funded from 2002 to 2012 by type

80

N of works funded

70

BEE-HIVES
LIVESTOCK

60
50
40
30
20
10
0

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

Years

The geographical distribution of the works

set up in western Trentino in 2012 can be
seen in Figure 8.

42

Figure 8
Location of prevention works distributed in 2012

2012

BEAR REPORT 2012

Meetings with farmers

and businesses

In 2012 the relations already started up

for some time with the sectors and farmers
most affected by the presence of bears and
other large carnivores continued.
Once again, a Round Table with representatives of breeders, farmers and beekeepers was organised, the meeting being
held on 20 September 2012. During the
meeting the provincial administration underlined on the one hand its desire to constantly inform and update the relevant categories
as regards the system for compensation and
prevention of damage currently adopted, and
to evaluate the experience of previous years,
while on the other it expressed its intention
to listen to the needs and proposals of those
involved and to gather any possible comments and suggestions that may emerge during consultation.

Intervention to support
shepherds and protect livestock

orative relations with shepherds and to provide training and information.

The organisation of the department currently provides for subdivision of the provincial territory within which brown bears are
present in a stable manner into 6 homogeneous areas, with one person taking responsibility for each area. In 2012 a total of 43
flocks with almost 17,000 sheep and 800
goats overall were supervised or assisted.
The shepherds requesting assistance were
supplied with a total of 95 fences and 21
fence electrifiers of adequate power (2.6
joules), with rechargeable batteries fuelled by
solar panels.
Furthermore four prefabricated structures (accommodation units) (Photo 11)
were transported to the mountains to allow
shepherds to remain close to their flocks during the night. In areas not reachable by other
means, the material necessary for mountain
pasture activities, the prevention works and
the accommodation units were transported to
the mountains by the helicopter unit of the
Fire and Civil Defence Service.

The constant presence of the shepherd and

the adoption of more appropriate systems for preventing
damage, along with fair compensation, are fundamental
in guaranteeing coexistence
between large carnivores and
livestock reared in the mountains. Bearing this in mind,
one of the objectives of the
provincial administration is
to encourage shepherds to
stay at high altitude with
their flocks, also by providing
temporary shelters, and encourage them to make use of
prevention works. These objectives are also pursued
through the activities carried
out by the livestock liaison
officers, which take the form Photo 11 - Transport of an accommodation unit to the mountains (APT Forestry and
of support and consultancy, Wildlife Department Archives)
mainly during the period of
alpine pasture. The main objective of the liveOn at least 50 occasions the livestock liaistock liaison officer is thus to establish collab- son officers or forestry staff from the relevant
43

BEAR REPORT 2012

areas carried out visits to

support and control mountain pasture activities.
In 2012 there were 9 incidents involving damage
by brown bears to the 21
flocks protected (around
14,000 sheep) (Photo 12).
Overall, the deaths of 30
sheep (0.2% of the livestock
protected) can be attributed
to brown bears, 24 of the
sheep being killed during
four attacks on the same
flock.
Photo 12 - Flock of sheep (APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

As in 2011, the systematic

adoption of prevention works (electric fences)
and the constant consultancy and support provided to shepherds by the livestock liaison officers contributed towards reducing attacks by
bears and the rapid solution of difficult situations, despite the problems noted above.
In the overall context, a significant problem
which has remained relevant regards the hiring of shepherds from Eastern Europe by the
owners of flocks, relations sometimes proving
difficult, also due to language problems. Fur-

44

thermore there are unsolved, and probably unsolvable issues, at least in the short term,
linked to specific situations in which the
farmer does not wish to accept the adoption
of prevention measures and management systems compatible with the presence of large
carnivores. Ultimately it is believed that the
support of figures such as the livestock liaison
officers is indispensible for guaranteeing the
coexistence of livestock in the mountains with
brown bears.

BEAR REPORT 2012

3. Management of emergencies
The Law of 11 February 1992 no. 157 includes the brown bear among the species
granted special protection (article 2, paragraph 1).
The D.P.R. of 8 September 1997 no. 357
(subsequently amended and supplemented by
D.P.R. 120/03), implementing the 92/43/EEC
directive (Habitat Directive) regarding the
conservation of natural and semi-natural habitats and wild flora and fauna, includes this
species in enclosure B (species of community
interest, whose conservation requires the designation of special areas of conservation) and
D (species of community interest which require strict protection), thus considering the
brown bear as a priority species.
The current national legal framework
therefore forbids the disturbing, capture and
killing of large predators (D.P.R. 357/97, article 8).
However, action may be taken to control
problem bears in critical situations, in accordance with the provisions of national regulations (D.P.R. 357/97, article 11, paragraph 1;
L. 157/92, article 19, paragraph 2; L. 394/91,
article 11, paragraph 4 and article 22, paragraph 6), regional and provincial regulations.
Indeed, in order to avoid conflict with human activities and for reasons of public safety or for other compelling reasons of relevant
public interest, the possibility of an exception
to the ban on the capturing or killing of animals is provided for, subject to the authorisation of the Ministry for the Environment, Land
and Seas, having consulted ISPRA, on condition that there are no other practicable solutions and that departure from the rules does
not prejudice the satisfactory conservation of
the populations of the protected species,
(D.P.R. 357/97, article 11 paragraph 1).
In the province of Trento the management of emergencies represents a field of action in which it has only been necessary to operate in the last few years, given the
considerable expansion in the bear population
and more specifically as a result of the pres-

ence of a few animals considered to be problematic.

In July 2003, the Autonomous Province of
Trento, in agreement with the Ministry for the
Environment, Land and Seas, had already prepared a specific Protocol for action regarding
problem bears and intervention in critical situations, in accordance with D.P.R. 357/97
and subsequent amendments. Together with
the Plan of Action for the Conservation of the
Brown Bear in the Central-Eastern Alps, it represents the document of reference for the operational programme.
This protocol provides the technical guidelines on the basis of which the Forestry and
Wildlife Department, which represents the
provincial organisation of reference, has identified, trained and equipped the staff in charge
of intervening in these situations. Operational
management in Trentino is based on the use
of staff from the Provincial Forestry Service
(PFS), to which the Forestry and Wildlife Department makes recourse, through the setting
up of a special unit which is on call.
This has been operational since 2004 and
is active each year from March to November.
In 2012 it was made up of 9 coordinators,
who have the support of an emergency team
of two people, also on call in turn within a
group of specially chosen and trained staff
made up of 14 members. When necessary the
team is joined by veterinary staff from the
provincial health services (given special training since 2008).

Activities of the emergency team

In 2012 the activities of the emergency

team took place from 5 March to 3 December.
During this period the coordinators received 413 calls of various kinds, of which
344 during the day (from 7.00 to 20.00), 18
at night (from 20.00 to 7.00) and 51 at unspecified times. In addition to these, there
were an unspecified number of calls received
and passed on in order to organise inspections
to ascertain damage, set in motion and coor45

BEAR REPORT 2012

dinate the emergency team, inform the department in more critical cases or simply to
inform or reassure users.
The calls came from forestry service staff
present in the area (227), directly from private citizens (105), forest wardens (14), the
Fire Service (5), the Wildlife Office (23), the
forest emergency unit (4) or other parties
(7), while 28 calls were of unknown provenance.
The calls mainly concerned the reporting
of possible damage (211), sightings of bears
or the finding of signs of their presence (97),
presumed problematical situations (33) or
other aspects (72).
In numerous cases (160) no inspections
were necessary, whereas in the other cases di-

rect intervention was requested: by forestry

service staff responsible for ascertaining damage (in 160 cases), by staff at the relevant
forestry stations responsible for the area (66),
by the staff of the emergency team (16) and
by bear dog handlers (3).
In 2012 the emergency team was called
into action 37 times (Graph 23), in most cases following reports of damage or the sighting
of bears close to facilities frequented by man
or inhabited areas (Photo 13). The activities
of the team were mostly limited to watching
over and informing the population, while only 7 cases (19% of call outs) involved visual
contact with the bear, during 6 of which the
staff carried out direct intervention to deter the animal.

Graph 23

Emergency team call-outs in the period 2002-2012

90

N of cases of intervention

80
70

(5)

The number of cases of direct

intervention on bears is given
in brackets

60

(15)

(6)

50
40

(6)

(2)

(7)

(4)

30
(0)
(1)

20
10
0
2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Years

The most significant cases requiring the

intervention of the emergency team concerned:
the Valle dei Laghi (Terlago area above all),
due to two bears (JJ5 and M6), who frequented farmyards close to dwellings, at
night, preying mostly on poultry. The unit
intervened on a number of occasions to
deter the bears and one of the two animals
(JJ5) was subsequently captured in the
46

same area and died as a result of the

anaesthesia (see chapter on captures on
page 49);
the Val Rendena and Val di Rabbi, where
following repeated preying on donkeys and
cows also close to inhabited areas, staff intervened to deter and capture the male
bear M2;
the area at the Ballino pass (Tenno), where
bear dogs were used to deter Daniza and her

BEAR REPORT 2012

cubs while she was close to the carcass of an

animal she had killed.
The experience gained to date certainly reinforces the theory that deterrence gives better

results if carried out on young and that it must

be intensive and continuing. Furthermore, it
should undoubtedly be accompanied by the
adoption and correct use of prevention works.

Photo 13 - Intervention by the emergency team (APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

The location of intervention by the emergency bear team in 2012 is shown in Figure 9.

Figure 9
Location of intervention by the emergency team in 2012

47

BEAR REPORT 2012

Close encounters with mother

bears defending their cubs

There were a number of particularly significant incidents linked to so called false

attacks taking place during 2012 and involving female bears accompanied by their
cubs.
On 24 May there was a close encounter
between a mother bear accompanied by two
cubs born during the year and three people
in the woods above Carisolo.
Tests of organic samples collected and
satellite collar data made it possible to ascertain that the bear involved in the false attack was Daniza.
The incident was characterised by the
classic charge of the bear towards the people, to then return to her cubs once the danger to them had been overcome. In this case
it should be noted that in order to defend
himself one of the people even hit the bear a
glancing blow with a stick.
On 2 August two people met a mother
bear accompanied by at least one cub born
during the year in the area between
Spormaggiore and Castel Belfort. In this
case the bear bounded up to the protagonists
twice in rapid succession, to then move away
and disappear once she had seen that the
two people had removed themselves.
Genetic tests of organic samples (faeces)
collected at the site did not make it possible
to identify the female involved in the false attack with certainty. However, MJ2 (with one
cub, probably) and F4 (with two cubs) were
present in the area.
On the evening of 8 August a man coming down the path linking Vallene di Monte
Terlago and Terlago on his bicycle encountered a bear cub on the path, with a female
bear accompanied by a second cub a short
distance away; the mother bear immediately
approached him with a couple of bounds and
growled. She then moved away from the
path, allowing the cyclist to get back on his
bike and move away without further problems.
A few days later a similar situation arose
on the slopes above Monte Terlago, near the
48

forest refuge, where a jogger encountered a

bear accompanied by two cubs, which initially approached him before moving away
immediately.
In neither of these last two cases was it
possible to discover the identity of the bear,
but it is presumed that it may have been F4.

Waste management

In 2012 problems linked to the distribution of bins for organic waste were once
again dealt with. The experience gained in
the production and distribution of bins in the
previous phase made it possible to prevent
practical problems, such as those linked to
freezing of the closing mechanism of bins in
areas remaining in the shade for much of the
winter.
Municipalities requiring further modifications to bins already in use in the area
were also identified: Spormaggiore,
Cavedago, Fai della Paganella, Andalo, Molveno, Vezzano and Terlago. ASIA (Azienda
Speciale per lIgiene Ambientale), the company responsible for the collection and disposal of organic waste in the municipalities
concerned, provided a list of waste bins currently situated within the area. On the basis
of this information, a map indicating the location of waste bins has been drawn up and
linked to a scale of priorities for the substitution of bins which have not yet modified.
There are around a hundred standard bins
which it is expected to substitute with bearproof bins in 2013 and 2014, also thanks to
the funding guaranteed by the Life Arctos
project.
Replacement of the existing bins with the
new type of bins will proceed once the appropriate sites have been identified: the locations will be georeferenced using GPS and
a special map will be drawn up which can be
immediately consulted as required.

Capture

In the context of emergency management, there is a capture team made up of

staff specially trained for such activities.
They are supported by two vets from the

BEAR REPORT 2012

provincial health services, dealing with

health aspects.
During 2012 it was necessary to capture
three male bears (JJ5, M2 and M11, aged
6.5, 4.5 and 1.5 respectively), who for different reasons displayed problematic or potentially problematic behaviour. The reasons
and situations leading to the capture of the
three bears are described below.

Capture of JJ5

tured. It appeared to be relatively calm at the

time of the control and had no evident problems. After checking the bears state of health
visually, the vet prepared the anaesthetic for
the bear according to the standard procedure. A few minutes after the drug was administered and while the bear was still inside
the trap, it began to show sudden difficulty in
breathing. The coordinator of the capture
team, in agreement with the vet responsible,
evaluated the danger and having ascertained
that the operators were safe, ordered the
rapid removal of the bear from the trap, so
that its condition could be evaluated directly.
An initial assessment immediately
showed that the bear had stopped breathing
and that there was no heartbeat; despite manoeuvres carried out to resuscitate the bear
and the administration of specific drugs,
there was no sign of recovery by the animal
(Photo 14).
From the autopsy carried out on 14 June
by health service vets, in collaboration with
the Istituto Zooprofilattico delle Venezie,
Trento branch, it was possible to ascertain
that the cause of death could be attributed
to layrngospasm following the inhaling of
regurgitated food into the trachea, with
consequential worsening of the hypoxia
inevitable during the course of pharmacological sedation.

As in previous years, numerous incidents

involving damage to chicken coops situated
close to the towns of Monte Terlago, Covelo,
Ciago and Lon were recorded in 2012. It was
possible to attribute these incidents to two
adult male bears: M6 (aged 5) and JJ5 (aged
6). This situation once again caused apprehension and alarm among the population
and the local authority asked the Forestry
and Wildlife Department to intervene, in
order to try and limit the problems caused
by the bears raids.
Forestry staff from the Vezzano station
and the emergency teams on call therefore
began intensive monitoring activities in the
area, with the scope of carrying out deterrence and equipping one or both of the problem bears with a GPS radio collar.
Given the nature of the problem bears to
be captured, bears having no difficulty in approaching inhabited areas
and entering closed structures such as chicken coops,
it was decided to make use
of a tube trap. The trap was
then positioned at Maso
Parisol and on 4 June the
trap was activated, having
confirmed through video
footage that it was frequented by a bear which
could well have been JJ5 or
M6, judging by its size.
The alarm went off in the
early hours of the morning
on 12 June and the staff on
duty confirmed that a large
male bear had been cap- Photo 14 - The carcass of JJ5 (C. Groff - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)
49

BEAR REPORT 2012

Capture of M2

At the beginning of May there were a series of incidents involving the killing of donkeys, some of which very close to the towns of
Strembo and Caderzone in the Val Rendena.
This type of preying on animals, essentially
new in Trentino, was immediately given a
great deal of attention by the local media and
had a considerable social impact, leading the
Department to attempt to capture the bear
and equip it with a radio collar, in order to
facilitate attempts to condition the bears behaviour through deterrent action. As regards
this, it should be recalled that subsequent
events, summarised below, led to the issuing
of an extraordinary emergency order by the
President of the Province for the removal of
the bear in question.
Preying on other animals, in this case cattle, took place in June near Malga Polinar in
the Val di Rabbi. A further heifer was then

killed at Malga Arza in the municipality of

Denno, followed by another donkey in July
at Malga Tassulla in the municipality of Tassullo.
In all the cases above there were attempts
to capture the bear, but without success.
On 30 July a new killing of a heifer in the
Val di Rabbi was reported and the capture
team was immediately set in motion, a capture site with two Aldrich snares already being set up that same evening. The alarm
sounded shortly after midnight on 31 July
and the staff in the team ascertained that a
large male had been captured. Following genetic testing this was identified as M2 himself (Photo 15). After having been weighed
(210 Kg), the bear was fitted with a radio collar, measured and released at the site, carrying out the highest possible level of deterrent
action with the use of rubber bullets and bear
dogs.

Photo 15 - M2 at the time of capture (E. Bonapace - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

50

BEAR REPORT 2012

Capture of M11 (Box 3)

BOX 3 - M11, A CONTINUING STORY

M11, recovered as a cub in spring 2011, treated and cared for over a period of almost
forty days at the Casteller centre and subsequently freed in the heart of the Brenta mountains (see Box 3 on page 15 of the 2011 Bear Report), succeeded in spending his first winter alone. After he was freed there was no trace of him for some time; the first certain sighting took place in September on the Paganella. During the autumn of 2011 other sightings
in the southern Stivo area (Val di Gresta) and near Loppio suggested that this was again
M11 and that he had probably spent the winter without going into genuine hibernation,
as he was observed several times in vineyards above Mori or in the countryside around
Ronzo.
In spring 2012 the Verona newspaper LArena published an article recounting that a
family from Verona had been fortunate enough to observe and photograph a small bear in
the Monte Baldo area, which had first stopped for a few seconds, intrigued, to then run away
suddenly into the woods. While there was no certainty, the circumstances suggested that the
bear could have been M11. After this first sighting, there were numerous others during the
summer and early autumn, with several articles in the press in both Veneto and Trentino.
While M11 had never been shown to have caused any damage, let alone to be dangerous in any way, his interest in areas frequented by man led to some concern among certain
residents, as well as among those working in the sector.
Following the familiarity shown by this young bear (1.5-years-old at the time of capture), the Forestry and Wildlife Department then began monitoring activities in order to
deter him and at the same time create the conditions for possible capture and radio tagging.
Given the confident nature of the bear it was decided to opt exclusively for capture with
a tube trap. A trap was
positioned at Malga
Alpesina on 28 August
and on subsequent
days this was monitored and supplied by
the staff of the
Rovereto-Riva forestry
unit.
The same staff also
carried out deterrent
action with rubber bullets, which however did
not essentially modify
the bears behaviour;
the young bear continued to show himself
and to approach people
without showing much
wariness (Photo A).
Photo A - M11 on Monte Baldo

51

BEAR REPORT 2012

On 10 September the trap was prepared. The trap was triggered on the
same evening at 8 p.m. and the staff on
duty, having ascertained that the bear
had been captured, proceeded to anaesthetise the young animal, weigh him
(60 Kg), measure him and equip him
with two RFID ear tags, given the impossibility of using a GPS radio collar,
due to the age and size of the young
bear (Photo B).
Once the operations above had
Photo B - M11 at the time of capture (P. Zanghellini - APT Forestry and
been
completed, the bear was released
Wildlife Department Archives)
at the site, carrying out intense deterrent action with the use of rubber bullets and bear dogs.
After capture M11 was only seen again on a few occasions, despite intensive monitoring. In subsequent months the young bear was observed increasingly less frequently, before
going into hibernation in November.
by Alberto Stoffella

The following table summarises captures taking place in the period 2006-2012.
Table 2 Captures taking place in the period 2006-2011
No.

Date
of capture

Location

Scope of
intervention

Age

Weight

Notes

140

Weight estimated

10

130

No cubs

12

106

No cubs

95

Died by drowning
in Lake Molveno

28/06/2007

Rifugio
Genzianella Jurka (2nd)
(Terres)

Free
ranging

Taken into captivity

02/07/2007

Maso Dos
(Pinzolo)

Daniza

Free
ranging

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

2/7/07
5/5/08

13/06/2008

Molveno
(Molveno)

KJ2G1

Free
ranging

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

13/07/2008

Loc. Mangio
(Castel
DJ3
Condino)

Free
ranging

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

13/7/08
23/6/10

On site with
deterrence (dogs
+ rubber bullets)

95

No cubs

27/9/08
5/4/09

On site with
deterrence (dogs
+ rubber bullets)

130

No cubs

3-5

175

Bear immigrating
from the eastern
Alps

27/09/2008

Loc. Pineta
(Molveno)

KJ1G1

Aldrich
snare

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

On site without
deterrence

Sex

Malga Grum Jurka (1 )

23/8/06
28/6/07

Method
of release

23/08/2006

st

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

Period of radio
monitoring

Free
ranging

On site without
deterrence

15/10/2009

Val Canali
(Tonadico)

M5

Aldrich
snare

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

15/10/09
13/5/10

On site with
deterrence (dogs
+ rubber bullets)

22/10/2010

Malga
Pozze
(Praso)

DJ3

Aldrich
snare

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

22/10/10

On site without
deterrence

130

No cubs

16/05/2011

Rodugol
(Stenico

Daniza

Tube trap

Fitting of GPS radiocollar

16/05/2011 -

On site without
deterrence

15

80*

Accompanied
by male

10

17/05/2011

Rodugol
(Stenico

DJ3

Tube trap

Taken into captivity

75*

Accompanied
by male

11

12/06/2012

Monte
Terlago

JJ5

Tube trap

Fitting of GPS
radio-collar

185

Died following
anaesthesia

12

31/07/2012

Malga
Polinar

M2

Aldrich
snare

Fitting of GPS radiocollar

31/07/2012

On site with
deterrence (dogs
+ rubber bullets

210

13

10/09/2012

Malga
Alpesina

M11

Tube trap

Fitting with RFID ear

tags

10/09/2012

On site with
deterrence (dogs
+ rubber bullets

1.9

60

*estimated weight
52

Method of
capture

Bear

BEAR REPORT 2012

Road accidents

During 2012 there were no less than six

cases of road accidents involving bears
(two outside the province), bringing the
total number of such accidents recorded
since 2002 to 19 (Table 3). In one case, in
the Valle dei Laghi, the young bear M3, the
so-called white bear was hit by a car. He
undoubtedly survived the accident, as he
was subsequently detected genetically in
the Cimone and Vezzano areas. On two occasions accidents involved the family of the
female KJ2, once again in the Valle dei
Laghi, but in both cases the impact was not

fatal, as both mother and cubs were subsequently caught on lm by a camera trap.
In one case (near Stenico) the identity
and the fate of the bear are unknown. An
inspection carried out on site with the use
of bear dogs suggested that the bear had
immediately moved away from the site of
the accident without suering physical
damage. In two cases the accidents took
place in the province of Bolzano, involving
two young males (M12 and M14) who
both died immediately. The drivers of the
vehicles were not physically injured in any
of the cases recorded.

Table 3
Road accidents reported in the period 2002-2012 (provinces of Trento and Bolzano)
No.

Date

Location

Bear/s involved *

Sex and age

Fate of the bear

30 August 2001
at 00.50

Laives (BZ)
(A22 motorway

Vida

Female

Injured quite seriously but survived

4 November 2005 at 6.45

Preare
(S.P. n 34)

DJ3

Female

Survived and reproduced

28 June 2006 at 00.30

Fai
(S.P. n 64)

MJ2

Female

Survived and reproduced

28 October 2006 at 3.00

Caldes
(S.S. n 42)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

29 October 2007 at 23.25

Ciago
(S.P. n 18)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

18 July 2008 at 4.00

Villa Rendena
(Strada Prov. n. 34)

Daniza + 3 cubs
born that year

Female aged 13 with

3 cubs born that year

1 female cub died

22 July 2008 at 22.30

Nembia
(S.P. n 421)

KJ1G1

Female aged 2.5

Survived with no consequences

16 August 2008 at 23.45

Strembo
(S.P. n 236)

Daniza + 2cubs

Female aged 13 with 2

cubs born that year

1 cub injured, probably survived

15 October 2008 at 00.30

Bus de Vela
(S.S. n 45 bis )

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

10

9 April 2009 at 23.00

Passo Palade (BZ)

(S.S. n 238)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

11

9 December 2009 at 19.30

Tione
(S.P. n 37)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

12

25 May 2010 at 22.30

Strada del Fa
(S.P. n 43)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

22 October 2010 at 6.30

Vicolo Baselga
(S.P. n 84)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

21 April 2012

Chiusa
(Brenner main road)

M14

Male aged 3

Died

15

4 June 2012 at 22.35

Molino Manzoni
(S.S. n 45 bis)

M3

Male aged 5

Survived

16

8 June 2012 at 00.30

Vilpiano
(Mebo)

M12

Male aged 3

Died

17

16 August 2012 at 21.00

Vecchio Mulino
(S.S. n 45 bis)

KJ2 + 3 cubs

Female aged 10 +
3 cubs

Survived

15 September 2012 at 20.30

Stenico- Doss da Doa

(S.S. n 45 bis)

Unknown

Unknown

Unknown**

1 October 2012 at 6.15

Vecchio Mulino
(S.S. n 45 bis)

KJ2 + 3 cubs

Female aged 10 +
3 cubs

Survived

8
9

13
14

18
19

* the identity of the bear was ascertained through genetic testing

** an immediate inspection took place with dogs, suggesting that the animal (or animals) hit moved o autonomously

53

BEAR REPORT 2012

Bear dogs

In 2012 the dogs were put into action on

a total of 27 occasions. 3 of these involved
checks on reported damage, while in 11 cases
the dogs were used in operations to deter
bears (in 2 cases for deterrent action on captured bears), in 3 cases to look for bears hit in
road accidents, in 1 case for checks linked to
a false attack and in 9 cases for other reasons,
such as searching for traces or checking dens
(Photo 16).
Once again this year the dogs represented
a useful tool, particularly in the management
of critical situations, such as operations to

deter problem bears or in the event of accidents.

They also made an important contribution
to checking damage reports, particularly those
involving livestock, and to looking for signs of
presence in specic situations.
The fundamental importance of continuing training is conrmed, both for handlers,
in relation to technical aspects linked to the
management of the dogs during operations,
and for emergency team coordinators, in
order to correctly evaluate cases in which the
dogs can be used eectively.

Photo 16 - Bear dog with handler (APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

54

BEAR REPORT 2012

4. Communication
Communication is considered by the
provincial administration to be an aspect of
fundamental importance in the management
of bears and represents one of the six programmes of action referred to in the previously mentioned resolution of the provincial
government no. 1988 of 9 August 2002.
Considering this, starting from 2003 a
specific information campaign was started
up called Getting to know the brown
bear, which has involved numerous initiatives in the past and is still currently active.
This report, which among other things also
has an informative role, is one of the initiatives designed to allow the wider public to

Evening sessions and

meetings

Table 4 lists the 16 meetings/evenings organised by

the Department within the
context of the information
campaign Getting to know
the brown bear (772 participants overall). Some of
these meetings were specifically organised in response
to local situations and requests for information, also
in relation to situations arising when certain bears
caused special concern due
to the number of incidents
involving damage.

better understand this animal, with the conviction that only knowledge can lead to harmonious coexistence with the bear in the
medium to long-term.
With regard to these communication activities, the Forestry and Wildlife Department
has always been supported by the Adamello
Brenta Nature Park, which has been active in
this field for many years in its own area, and
by the Museo delle Scienze in Trento, which
has offered educational activities on bears to
schools from the very beginning.
The main activities undertaken during
2012 are summarised below.

Table 4
Public meetings held within the context of the Getting to know the brown bear campaign
Type

Date

Place

In collaboration
with

No. o
participants

Public meeting - presentation of

2011 Bear report

7/3/2012

Museo delle
Scienze di Trento

Museo delle Scienze

di Trento

170

Public meeting

10/4/2012

Campodenno

Municipality of
Campodenno

30
10

Public meeting

20/5/2011

Cogolo

Stelvio National
Park

Meeting for schools

5/6/2012

Trento

Primary schools

50

Meeting for beekeepers

14/6/2011

Trento

Beekeepers
association

30

Meeting for beekeepers

18/6/2012

Cles

Beekeepers
association

60

Tione

Beekeepers
association

70
20

Meeting for beekeepers

20/6/2012

Public meeting

25/7/2011

Rabbi

Stelvio National
Park

Public meeting

27/7/2012

Monte Bondone

Local businesses

20

Public meeting

10/8/2012

Monte Bondone

ELocal businesses

20

Vallarsa

Tra le rocce e il
cielo Festival

60
60

Public meeting

2/9/2012

Public meeting

19/9/2012

Stravino

Municipality of
Stravino

Meeting with farmers

and beekeepers

20/9/2012

Trento

Representative
organisations

12

Meeting for beekeepers

13/10/2012

Croviana

Beekeepers
association

40

Public meeting

16/11/2012

Mal

Tourist office, Mal

70

Rovereto

Beekeepers
association

50

Meeting for beekeepers

19/11/2012

55

BEAR REPORT 2012

Press releases

13 press releases regarding the bear were

issued by the Forestry and Wildlife Department
with the assistance of the Press Office:
No. 448 of 24 Feb. 2012
Meeting this morning with the members of
the special group of forestry staff
BEARS, WOLVES AND LYNX: DELLAI COMPLIMENTS THE CAPTURE TEAM
No. 565 of 5 March 2012
Presentation of the 2011 Report on
Wednesday 7 March 2012 at 20.30
BEARS, WOLVES AND LYNX: A SUMMARY
AT THE SCIENCE MUSEUM
No. 1283 of 15 May 2012
Published at the bear web site and on the
web TV channel of the Autonomous
Province of Trento
THE VIDEO OF THE WHITE BEAR
No. 1413 of 25 May 2012
President requests a meeting to find new
and more effective solutions
PROBLEM BEAR, DELLAI WRITES TO MINISTER CLINI AND THE EUROPEAN COMMISSIONER, POTONIK
No. 1652 of 5 June 2012
Summary of May news at the web site orso.provincia.tn.it: lots of sightings, bear hit in
road accident at Vezzano on Monday evening
VIDEO OF BEAR WITH CUB ON THE
PROVINCIAL WEB TV CHANNEL
No. 1666 of 6 June 2012
The image was stolen on the Internet
THE DEAD BEAR WHOSE PHOTOS WERE
SENT TO THE MEDIA IS AN AMERICAN
BLACK BEAR
No. 1749 of 12 June 2012
Forestry and Wildlife Department reports
on events in Terlago woods during control
operations
BEAR CAPTURED THIS MORNING DIES
No. 2080 of 9 July 2012
There is also a report with the June news
at the dedicated site of the Autonomous
Province of Trento
IMAGES OF A MOTHER BEAR SUCKLING
HER CUBS IN THE VAL RENDENA
No. 2127 of 13 July 2012
56

Second edition of the sweetest event of the

summer returns to Croviana in the Val di Sole
MELISSA, THE NEW HONEY FESTIVAL
No. 2161 of 16 July 2012
Second edition of the sweetest event of the
summer presented in Trento
MELISSA, THE NEW HONEY FESTIVAL
No. 2227 of 20 July 2012
DELLAI: HYDROELECTRIC DEVELOPMENT AND BEARS, DISCONCERTING
NEWS FROM ROME
No. 2759 of 16 Sep. 2012
BEAR AT RABBI. DELLAI ASSURES MAYOR: IF NECESSARY THE BEAR WILL BE
CAPTURED
No. 3095 of 11 Oct. 2012
Today and tomorrow 12 October in Zenzer
IN THE GRIGIONI REGION, THE LAST
ARGE ALP WORKSHOP DEDICATED TO
LARGE PREDATORS

Questions

The necessary information was provided in

order to respond to the following 13 questions
raised regarding bears:
Question for written reply no. 4043/XIV:
Introduction of the bear to the S.Romedio
enclosure and relative costs
Question for immediate oral reply no.
4106/XIV:
Carrying out of a survey on appreciation of
the bear by the Trentino population
Question for immediate oral reply no.
4426/XIV:
Incursion of bear in the town of Terlago
Question for written reply no. 4549/XIV:
Damage caused to farms and businesses by
the presence of the bear
Question for immediate oral reply no.
4595/XIV:
Presence of the bear and measures to guarantee the security of the Trentino population
Question for written reply no. 4699/XIV:
Presence of the bear and relative controls to
guarantee the security of people and animals
Question for immediate oral reply no.
4752/XIV:

BEAR REPORT 2012

Presence of the bear in the area and relative

control measures to guarantee the security
of people
Question for immediate oral reply no.
4755/XIV:
Presence of the bear in the area and identification of a numeric threshold
Question for written reply no. 4806/XIV:
Compensation for damage caused by the
presence of the bear in Trentino and relative control measures
Question for written reply no. 4898/XIV:
Discussion of problems related to the capture of the bear
Question for written reply no. 4992/XIV:
Presence of the bear on Monte Baldo
Question for written reply no. 5073/XIV:
Incursions by the bear on Monte Baldo

Communication project for

schools: Getting to know the
brown bear, in collaboration
with the Museo delle Scienze in
Trento

For the ninth consecutive year the museum

continued to offer a package of tried and
tested educational activities on the subject of
brown bears in Trentino. The activities are kept
up-to-date thanks to coordination with the
Wildlife Office of APT, which also guarantees
consultancy on the content. The 2011-2012
edition of the guide to the educational activities of the museum also contained all the educational initiatives realised in collaboration
with the Forestry and Wildlife Department, as
has taken place since the 2003-2004 edition.
In the context of the agreement between the
Forestry and Wildlife Department and the museum, the Museo delle Scienze in Trento organised six educational activities in schools regarding bears, involving a total of 104 pupils.

Communication project for

schools: Sometimes they
return, in collaboration
with the Museo Civico in Rovereto

During the 2012-2013 school year, in collaboration with the Forestry and Wildlife De-

partment, the Museo Civico in Rovereto also

started up workshops to increase knowledge
and understanding of large carnivores, entitled Sometimes they return, within the
context of educational activities for schools.
The workshop dedicated to nursery
schools had the objective of raising awareness
of large carnivores, starting from one of the
many popular stories in which they are the
protagonists.
With primary and secondary school pupils
it was also attempted to encourage responsible behaviour, after providing an initial summary of biological and behavioural information regarding the bear, analysing articles
taken from the local press to stimulate critical
discussion. This was designed to overcome the
usual stereotypes and encourage the formation of responsible citizens in the future.
125 pupils attended the workshops on
large carnivores during the 2012-2013 school
year. In spring 2013 the Museo Civico in
Rovereto also organised a cycle of zoology
meetings entitled Men and Animals: a Story
of Coexistence, in collaboration with the Societ Museo Civico. The first three meetings
all had large carnivores (bears, wolves and
lynx) as their theme.

Informative material produced

and distributed

The fifth Bear Report (2011 Bear Report)

was issued, representing both a valid means of
communicating and raising public awareness
and a useful working tool for the office.
In 2012 a further 5,000 copies of the
brochure In the Land of the Bear were
printed, updating the text, along with new
versions of the poster (1,000 copies of each
of the three versions).

Web sites

The site www.orso.provincia.tn.it, also

available in English, was further updated and
all sections completed. It is currently organised into 250 pages and received 42,269
views by 24,155 visitors in 2012. The site also contains this report and the documents
mentioned it. The site is updated at least once
57

BEAR REPORT 2012

a month, also giving the main news regarding

the presence of the lynx and the wolf in the
province.

Graph 24 shows the increase in the number of views and visitors over the last five
years (more than doubled).

Graph 24

Bear web site

N of views and visitors

45.000
40.000

VIEWS

35.000

VISITORS

30.000
25.000
20.000
15.000
10.000
5.000
0
2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

Years

Other communication initiatives

Radio-TV broadcasts
Under the supervision of APTs Forestry
and Wildlife Department, interviews and participation in the following radio and television programmes took place:
Participation in a radio programme on
Radio 24 (17 May 2012)
Debate on large carnivores on RTTR (25
May 2012)
Participation in a radio programme on
Radio NBC (2 July 2012)
Participation in a RSI (Swiss Italian-speaking channel) television broadcast (20 November 2012)
Support for the making of a documentary
on bears for the German TV channel Servus
TV (July-August 2012)
Support for the making of a documentary
on bears destined for RAI-TV, in terms of
images and footage provided, staff in the
field, aerial filming and other support.

Newspaper and magazine articles

APTs Forestry and Wildlife Department

58

supervised the production of articles (scientific or informative) and interviews, supplying content and iconographic material, in the
following publications:
Article in IBA news - February 2012: Rub
trees: testing a new methodology for genetic
monitoring of brown bear (Ursus arctos L.)
in the province of Trento, Italian central Alps
Article in IBA news - May 2012: Status of
the brown bear population in the central
Alps (Trentino - Italy)
Article in Schweizer Familie no. 23 of 7
June 2012 (Die Abenteuer von Meister
Petz)
Article on the bear in Alpenvereinjahrsbuch Berg 2013 (magazine for alpine
clubs in Bavaria. Tyrol and South Tyrol)
Article providing an update on the bear
and other large carnivores in the Alps for
UNCZAs Caccia alpina magazine (November 2012)
Article providing an update on the bear
and other large carnivores in the Alps for
the magazine Il Cacciatore trentino (December 2012).

BEAR REPORT 2012

5. Training
Correct management of the bear population is inextricably linked to the availability
of specially trained staff, prepared to deal
with any problems of a technical and nontechnical nature that may arise during activities in the field, above all as regards the management of emergencies, dealing with
damage and, to a lesser extent, monitoring.
Training represents one of the six programmes of action referred to in the previously mentioned resolution of the provincial
government no. 1988 of 9 August 2002.
APTs staff are given specific training
which is constantly updated. The training initiatives realised during 2012 are illustrated
below.

Main training initiatives

regarding bears

The following meetings were held by the

Forestry and Wildlife Department to train
staff in various roles responsible for the management of bears:
meeting to update forestry staff involved in
the management of bears (Casteler, 1
March 2012);
participation in a day of training and updates for forestry staff and forest wardens
promoted by Cles District Forestry Office
(Castelfondo, 20 April 2012);
training day for the forestry staff of ABNP
involved in the monitoring of large predators on the use of camera traps (Spormaggiore, 4 May 2012);
training session with a delegation from the
Bavarian government (Trento, 17-20 October 2012);
training session with the forestry service
staff of the Autonomous Region of Friuli
Venezia-Giulia and the Veneto Region
(Paluzza, 27-29 November 2012);
participation in a day of training and updates for forestry staff and forest wardens
promoted by Tione District Forestry Office
(Tione, 11 December 2012).
59

BEAR REPORT 2012

6. National and international links

Links with neighbouring regions and countries take on a strategic importance in the
management of such a highly mobile species
as the brown bear. Bearing this in mind, even
before the start of the Life Ursus project, official contact was made with neighbouring regions, it being clear that the area of western
Trentino was not sufficiently large to house a
viable population of bears. Over time these relationships have been strengthened and consolidated, with regard both to the territorial
expansion of the small population, which has
effectively concerned neighbouring regions
and countries, and effective policy coordination implemented by the Provincial Government with the previously mentioned resolution no. 1988 of 9 August 2002. Following
this, links transcending provincial boundaries
were institutionalised and with the input of
the Ministry for the Environment, Land and
Seas and the coordination of APT the Action
Plan for the Conservation of the Brown
Bear in the Central-Eastern Alps (PACOBACE) was approved by all the partners
and printed in 2010. In addition to the Autonomous Province of Trento, this also involved the Autonomous Province of Bolzano
and the Lombardia, Veneto and Friuli Venezia
Giulia Regions.
Activities designed to guarantee transnational coordination also continued, in the
light of the numerous cases of young bears
moving into neighbouring areas reported over
the last few years.

LIFE+ ARCTOS Project

(continuation in 2012)

On 31 May 2010 the European Commission

approved the co-funding proposal for a new
LIFE+ project on the brown bear (Figure 10).
The project, called ARCTOS Conservation of the Brown Bear: Coordinated Action
for the Alps and Apennines (LIFE09
NAT/IT/000160), is promoted by Abruzzo,
Lazio and Molise National Park and provides
60

for the participation of WWF Italia, the State

Forestry Service, the University of Rome La
Sapienza, the Abruzzo, Lazio and Lombardia
regions, the Autonomous Region of Friuli
Venezia Giulia, the Autonomous Province of
Trento and Adamello Brenta Nature Park,
all partners which have previous experience
of European projects (LIFE NATURA) aimed
at the conservation of the species.
The initiative developed out of the need to
combat the main threats to the conservation
of the brown bear in Italy, identified as the
progressive loss of the natural habitat, conflict
with the activities of man (particularly animal
husbandry) and the lack of sufficient ecological-ethological knowledge about the species
to enable adoption of the most suitable management practices.
The main objective of LIFE+ ARCTOS is
to implement management procedures and
protocols designed to ensure conservation of
the brown bear populations present in Italy
in the long term, through careful identification, sharing and preparation of experience,
methods and effective tools for safeguarding
the species (for further details see www.lifearctos.it).
Figure 10
Logos of the Natura 2000 network and the LIFE Arctos project

BEAR REPORT 2012

The project provides for a duration of 4

years, starting on 1 September 2010 and
ending on 31 August 2014, with total expenditure of 3,984,820, of which 67.63%
( 2,694,934) funded by the European Commission.
APT is involved in the implementation of
action designed to prevent damage (installation of electric fences), discourage bears
from approaching inhabited areas (production and distribution of bear-proof waste
bins) and actions related to communication.
In order to do so it has available a budget
of 172,368, with EU funding representing
109,013 of this.
ABNP is involved in implementing communication activities (promotion and dissemination of information on bears and
project actions, through the involvement of

residents, administrators, schools etc), for

which overall expenditure of 114,967 euro
is provided for, of which around a third
( 34,452) covered directly by the Park.
In the context of initiatives linked to general coordination of the project, APT and
ABNP attended technical meetings organised
in Verona (Technical Round Table on the
Alps, on 20 March 2012 and 25 September
2012) and the workshop on the management
of difficult situations and emergencies held
in Abruzzo National Park on 6/7 May
2012).
As regards actions involving APT, the
provincial administration has acquired and
distributed 113 prevention works in the
area (as specified in the chapter relating to
damage compensation and prevention), with
total investment of 52,500.

61

BEAR REPORT 2012

7. Research and conferences

Conferences and workshops

The staff of the Wildlife Office also attended the following conferences:

Conference on Reintroduction, a tool to restore ecosystems?. Lyon (FRA), 10 / 11

February 2012.
Workshop on the management of critical situations involving bears. Abruzzo National
Park, 6/7 May 2012.

Degree thesis

APTs Wildlife Office also supervised the

following decree thesis during 2012: Miti-

62

gating conflict between man and the brown

bear (Ursus arctos L.) as a tool for conserving the species in Trentino (dr.ssa
Tarin Tonon). University of Parma, 19 April
2012 - Faculty of Mathematical, Physical and
Natural Science, Nature Conservation specialisation.
The results of sample monitoring have
confirmed that works are often not managed
properly by users, prejudicing the effectiveness of the measures. This has given rise to
a programme of specific control activities
which it is expected to begin implementing
in 2013.

BEAR REPORT 2012

APPENDIX 1

The linx

Photo 1 - B132 shortly after capture on 14 February 2012 (C. Groff - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

Today the lynx is only

present in the Alps thanks to
reintroduction programmes
taking place in the 1970s in
Switzerland and Slovenia, as
it had become completely
extinct at the beginning of
the 20th century.
The most up-to-date information on the distribution
of the feline in the alpine
area regards its presence in
the three-year period 20092011 and was drawn up by
SCALP (Status and Conservation of the Alpine Lynx Population) (Figure 1).
The only viable population is present in the central-

Figure 1
Distribution of the lynx in the Alps 2009-2011 (SCALP)

63

BEAR REPORT 2012

western Alps (in Switzerland) and is made up of

around a hundred animals.
There is a small nucleus
settled in the St Gallen Canton (north-eastern Switzerland), while individual animals from these source
populations can be found in
the French Alps and the central Alps, also in Trentino.
All the animals present
in the eastern Alps probably
originate from the by now
very small Slovenian-Croatian population (a few dozen
lynx).
As reported, the only
lynx certainly present in the Photo 2 - The capture team with B132 (C. Groff - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department
province of Trento starting Archives)
from 2008 (the male known
as B132), comes from the
small Swiss population in
the St Gallen Canton (see
page 45 and subsequent
pages of the 2008 report,
and subsequent Bear Reports).
Given that the radio collar batteries had ceased to
function in spring 201, the
animal was captured on 14
February 2012 (Photos 2
and 3) (see the 2010 Bear
Report, pages 52-54 as regards the first capture carried out in Trentino). The
animal was caught in the
same place as two years
previously, using the same
method (wooden box trap
with lynx urine scent lure)
3 - Close-up of the front paw of B132 (C. Groff - APT Forestry and Wildlife Departand equipped with a GPS- Photo
ment Archives)
GSM radio collar, capable of
transmitting satellite fixes
During 2012 there were several reports of
at pre-established intervals through the cel- the presence of the feline not linked to
lular phone network, as well as functioning GPS/VHF monitoring, thanks to monitoring
using the traditional VHF radio mode for with video-camera traps; on no less than 25
searching in the field.
occasions it was possible to film the animal
64

BEAR REPORT 2012

Photo 4 - B132 immortalised by the camera trap (M. Tiso - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

Photo 5 - B132 filmed by the camera trap while marking his territory (E. Dorigatti)

using this equipment, 24

times in the period between
23 February and 15 April
2012 (Photos 4 and 5), and
on one further occasion on
18 October 2012.
The monitoring of prey,
carried out thanks to the
support of a student writing
a degree thesis, made it possible to identify 14 prey: 10
roe deer (2 females, 3 males
and 5 of undetermined sex),
3 alpine chamois (undetermined) and 1 red deer (female) (Photo 6).

Photo 6 - Carcass of a red deer preyed on by B132 (C. Groff - APT Forestry and Wildlife
Department Archives)

65

BEAR REPORT 2012

In this last case it was also possible to document the use of the lynxs prey by other
species, such as the bear and the golden eagle
(Photos 7 and 8), demonstrating the important role of carcasses left on the ground for
the ecosystem.
For much of the year, the lynx again frequented the area in the Brenta mountains and
Monte Gazza, where he has effectively established his home range since spring 2008.

However, starting from the middle of November the lynx abandoned his traditional
area, moving south-west until he reached the
mountains on the right-hand bank of the
Chiese valley, on the border with the
province of Brescia. He remained in this area
until at least the end of January 2013.
Before this sortie, B132 had already left
his traditional territory on two previous occasions, again heading south, frequenting the

Photo 7 - A bear at the carcass of the deer killed by B132 (S. Hueller - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

Photo 8 - Golden eagles at the carcass of the deer killed by B132 (S. Hueller - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

66

BEAR REPORT 2012

Figure 2
Home range of the lynx B132 from 14 February to 31 December 2012 calculated using the minimum convex polygon (MCP) method

mountains above the Bleggio area (Cadria

and Misone-Casale mountains) for brief periods (from 2 September to 6 October and from
24 October to 8 November), to then return to
the southern Brenta mountains.
The home range of the lynx from 14 February to 31 December 2012, calculated using
the minimum convex polygon (MCP) method,
was thus 846 km (Figure 2), more than triple
the HR recorded in previous years.
The animal, which belongs to a species
which is, if possible, even shyer and more elusive than the brown bear, remained the only

lynx whose presence was ascertained within

Trentino.
As regards communication activities, the
documentary The Lynx: the Story of its
Return, produced by the Forestry and
Wildlife Department with direction by Enrico
Costanzo, was screened during the Festival of
the Mountains in Trento on 1 May 2012.
Finally, staff from the Wildlife Office participated at the Arge Alp conference on management of the lynx in the Alps, held in
Zernez (CH) on 11/12 October 2012.

67

BEAR REPORT 2012

APPENDIX 2

The Wolf
For the third consecutive year it was possible to document the presence of the wolf in
the province of Trento. At least four wolves
gravitated around Trentino and/or neighbouring areas during the year. First of all,
there was confirmation of the presence of the
male wolf known as M24, first reported in
Trentino on 13 April 2010 by wardens of the
Adamello Brenta Nature Park (in the northeastern Brenta mountains) and subsequently

identified genetically (for his story see the

2010 Bear Report, pages 56-58 and subsequently the 2011 Bear Report, pages 63-65).
Once again in 2012 the animals presence
was documented objectively (with genetic
tests) on at least three occasions in the
province of Trento. The same wolf was also
filmed by camera traps on the Trentino side
of its home range on seven occasions during
the year (Photo 1).

Photo 1 - The wolf M24 with a deer carcass (Fondo forestry station - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

The data acquired in

2012 provides a relatively
precise idea of the territory
occupied by the wolf over
the course of the year, situated between the Maddalene mountains and mountains in the upper Val di Non
(Figure 1).
Only one case of damage
was attributed to wolves in
the province of Trento. This
took place in the municipality of Castelfondo (upper
Val di Non) on 24 September 2012 and concerned
68

Figure 1
Signs of the presence of wolves in the provinces of Trento and Bolzano during 2012. Data
for Alto Adige: Hunting and Fishing Office, Autonomous Province of Bolzano

BEAR REPORT 2012

four sheep, for which no compensation was

requested.
However, the most interesting news in
2012 as regards the presence of the wolf in
the province came from the southern area,
specifically from the Lessini mountains. As reported, at the end of December 2011 a young
male wolf fitted with a radio collar in
Slovenia in the summer of the same year entered Austria, crossing Carinthia and heading
north until it reached lower Styria, then moving south-west until it reached the Isel valley
and Alto Adige (Val Pusteria) in eastern Tyrol
at the beginning of February 2012. The wolf,
known as Slavc, then continued its long
journey in a south-westerly direction until it
reached the southern edge of the Alps, in the

provinces of Vicenza and Verona. During this

journey, on two occasions it also crossed territory in the province of Trentino, first at Primiero (20/21 February in the Sagron Mis area
and 27/28 February, crossing the Val Noana
and Vederne) and then in the lower Valsugana (1/2 March, when it crossed the River
Brenta, to then make its way to the Asiago
tableland at Tezze).
This long journey eventually terminated,
probably not by chance, in the Lessini mountains, where a further wolf of unknown origin
has been reported in the province of Verona
since the beginning of 2012, not far from the
border with the province of Trento (camera
trap images from the State Forestry Service of
Bosco Chiesanuova - VR) (Figure 2).

Figure 2
The long journey of the wolf Slavc from Slovenia to the Monti Lessini (SLOWOLF - Life+ - University of Ljubljana)

69

BEAR REPORT 2012

During the year it was then possible to ascertain that the two wolves moved around together and above all, thanks to genetic tests,
that the second wolf was a female coming
from the Italian population. However,
after Slavcs radio collar stopped working

(August 2012), the first genetic confirmation

of the new couple was only obtained at the
end of October, when tracks in the snow were
found at Revoltel (Ala - TN, 30 October 2012
- Photo 2) and organic samples collected
there confirmed that the two wolves were still
present and moving around
together.
Before this report, it was
not possible to take this for
granted, as on 12 August
2012 a female wolf was
found dead, again in the
Lessini mountains on the
Verona side. She was also of
Italian origin and showed
signs of poisoning. For some
time it was therefore believed that this was the
Slavcs companion.
Subsequently the pair of
wolves was filmed for the
first time by a camera trap
(again in Trentino, by staff
from the Wildlife Office and
Ala Forestry Station - 4 December 2012) (Photo 3).
Very clear images of the
Photo 2 - Tracks of the two wolves in the snow (B. Pinter - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)
two wolves were also ob-

Photo 3 - Pair of wolves in Lessinia (Wildlife Office and Ala Forestry Station - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

70

BEAR REPORT 2012

tained during the day by staff from the

Lessinia Regional Park (VR), on 27 December 2012 (Photo 4).
Finally on 7 January 2013 for the first
time it was succeeded in obtaining a short

nocturnal video of the two wolves with a

camera trap (again in Trentino by staff from
the Wildlife Office and Ala Forestry Station).
This is the first couple of wolves whose

Photo 4 - Pair of wolves in the Lessinia mountains (P. Parricelli, M. Samaritani Lessinia Park Archives)

presence has been documented in the eastern tation of individual wolves in Trentino and
alpine area, around one and a half centuries Alto Adige, but also in neighbouring Lombarafter the disappearance of the species in the dia, Austria and Bavaria.
In 2012 it was possible to document the
area.
The event is also particularly significant presence of at least a further three wolves in
because it involves two
wolves coming from different populations (Italian and
Dinaric-Balkan) and it is the
first time that the joining of
the two populations has
been demonstrated with
certainty.
Clearly the hope is that
they will reproduce and
have a litter, perhaps already
in spring 2013 (Photo 5).
Thus 2012 saw continuation of the natural expansion of the species in the
Alps into the province and
neighbouring areas. In the
last few years this has been
demonstrated by documen- Photo 5 - Wolf cub (M. Krofel)
71

RAPPORTO ORSO 2012

Austria in the eastern alpine area (one in

southern Austria, Schneeberg area, since
2010, one in Styria, Gleinalm area, at least
since spring 2012 and one in Carinthia,
Karawanken, where there could also be a second wolf) - G. Rauer, pers. comm.
The Forestry and Wildlife Department attended two conferences regarding management of the wolf:

Conference on management of the wolf in

Bologna (22 October 2012)
Workshop on management of the wolf in
Innsbruck within the context of Arge Alp
(26/ 27 April 2012).
A specific training initiative was also organised in Slovenia (15-18 April 2012),
where a Life project is underway to monitor
the wolf (Photo 6).

Photo 6 - Inspection of the prey of a wolf (C. Groff - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department Archives)

A stand on the wolf (as well as one on

fish) was set up during the Expo Riva Caccia
Pesca e Ambiente fair (Expo Riva: Hunting,

Fishing and the Environment) held in Riva

del Garda on 31 March and 1 April 2012
(Photo 7).

Photo 7 - View of the stand dedicated to the wolf (C. Frapporti - APT Forestry and Wildlife Department archives)

72

NOTES

AUTONOMUS PROVINCE OF TRENTO

FORESTRY AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT
WILDLIFE OFFICE
via G. B. Trener, 3 - 38121 TRENTO
www.orso.provincia.tn.it
[email protected]