Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

An integration of habitat evaluation, individual based modeling, and graph theory for a potential black bear population recovery in southeastern Texas, USA

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Landscape Ecology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Population recovery is difficult for species that require large contiguous areas of habitat, particularly within areas of heterogeneous land ownerships. Ecologically, potential for recovery success requires assessment of quantity, quality, and distribution of available habitat. Our objective was to evaluate habitat for a possible Louisiana black bear recovery in southeastern Texas. First, we categorized land cover and identified remote areas of highly suitable habitat. Next, we used the individual based simulation model J-walk to estimate ability of female black bears to move among remote habitat patches. Then, we applied graph theory to J-walk output to evaluate overall connectivity of remote habitat. An estimated 225,626 ha of remote habitat were identified in 901 patches, most of which was located within the eastern half of the study area. Network analysis showed specific areas where targeted conservation efforts may help black bear population expansion throughout the study region. Ultimately, enough habitat area exists to sustain a black bear population and it is best connected among public and private lands largely within the eastern half of the study area. Habitat evaluation will need to be revisited if black bears establish themselves locally and actual habitat use data become available. Regardless, our analysis demonstrates an important first step that may be incorporated into a larger adaptive management framework, updated, and replicated as more-detailed habitat suitability and land use data are available.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Anderson DR (1997) Corridor use, feeding ecology, and habitat relationships of black bears in a fragmented landscape in Louisiana. Thesis, University of Tennessee

  • Batagelj V, Mrvar A (2010) Pajek 1.26. http://pajek.imfm.si/doku.php?id=pajek

  • Beausoleil BA (1999) Population and spatial ecology of the Louisiana black bear in a fragmented bottomland hardwood forest. Thesis, University of Tennessee

  • Black Bear Conservation Committee (BBCC) (1997) Black bear restoration plan. Black Bear Conservation Committee, Baton Rouge

    Google Scholar 

  • Bowker B, Jacobson T (1995) Louisiana black bear (Ursus americanus luteolus) recovery plan. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Atlanta

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunn AG, Urban DL, Keitt TH (2000) Landscape connectivity: a conservation application of graph theory. J Environ Manage 59:265–278

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Calabrese JM, Fagan WF (2004) A comparison-shopper’s guide to connectivity metrics. Front Ecol Environ 2:529–536

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark JD, Dunn JE, Smith KG (1993) A multivariate model of female black bear habitat use for a geographic information system. J Wildl Manage 57:519–526

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clark JD, Huber D, Servheen C (2002) Bear reintroductions: lessons and challenges. Ursus 13:335–345

    Google Scholar 

  • Dijkstra EW (1959) A note on two problems in connection with graphs. Numer Math 1:269–271

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Eastridge R (2000) Experimental repatriation of black bears to the Big South Fork Area of Kentucky and Tennessee. Thesis, University of Tennessee

  • Eastridge R, Clark JD (2001) Evaluation of 2 soft-release techniques to reintroduce black bears. Wildl Soc B 29:1163–1174

    Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari, JR (2005) Graph theoretic connectivity analysis of the Mid-Atlantic region of the United States. Thesis, University of Maryland

  • Ferrari JR, Lookingbill TR (2009) Initial conditions and their effect on invasion velocity. Biol Invasions 11:1247–1258

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ferrari JR, Lookingbill TR, Neel MC (2007) Two measures of landscape-graph connectivity: assessment across gradients in area and configuration. Landscape Ecol 22:1315–1323

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Freeman LC (1977) A set of measures of centrality based on betweenness. Sociometry 40:35–41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gardner RH, Gustafson EJ (2004) Simulating dispersal of reintroduced species within heterogeneous landscapes. Ecol Model 171:339–358

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Garner NP (1996) Suitability of habitats in east Texas for black bears. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Tyler

    Google Scholar 

  • Garshelis DL, Pelton MR (1981) Movement of black bears in the Great Smoky Mountains National Park. J Wildl Manage 45:912–925

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Gross JL, Yellen J (2006) Graph theory and its applications, 2nd edn. Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton

    Google Scholar 

  • Gurd DB, Nudds TD, Rivard DH (2001) Conservation of mammals in eastern North American wildlife reserves: how small is too small? Conserv Biol 15:1355–1363

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hamilton D (1999) Controversy in times of plenty. Mo Conserv 60:17–23

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcombe PA, Callaway G (1997) Management assessment of the water corridor units of Big Thicket National Preserve. National Park Service, Beaumont

    Google Scholar 

  • Harcombe PA, Marks PL (1977) Understory structure of a mesic forest in southeast Texas. Ecology 58:1144–1151

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellgren EC, Vaughan MR (1989) Demographic analysis of a black bear population in the Great Dismal Swamp. J Wildl Manage 53:969–977

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hellgren EC, Vaughan MR (1990) Range dynamics of black bears in the Great Dismal Swamp, Virginia-North Carolina. In: Proceedings of Annual Conference of the SEAFWA, vol 44, pp 268–278

  • Hellgren EC, Vaughan MR, Stauffer DF (1991) Macrohabitat use by black bears in a southeastern wetland. J Wildl Manage 55:442–448

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Keitt TH, Urban DL, Milne BT (1997) Detecting critical scales in fragmented landscapes. Cons Ecol 1:4. http://www.consecol.org/vol1/iss1/art4/

  • Larivière S (2001) Ursus americanus. Mamm Species 647:1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Larkin JL, Maehr DS, Hoctor TS, Orlando MA, Whitney K (2004) Landscape linkages and conservation planning for the black bear in west-central Florida. Anim Conserv 7:23–34

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lee DJ, Vaughan MR (2004) Black bear family breakup in western Virginia. Northeast Nat 11:111–122

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lindsey PA, du Toit JT, Mills MGL (2005) Attitudes of ranchers toward African wild dogs Lycaon pictus: conservation implications on private land. Biol Conserv 25:113–121

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Linnell JDC, Swenson JE, Andersen R, Barnes B (2000) How vulnerable are denning bears to disturbance? Wildl Soc B 28:400–413

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu J, Linderman M, Ouyang ZY, An L, Yang J, Zhang H (2001) Ecological degradation in protected areas: the case of Wolong Nature Reserve for giant pandas. Science 292:98–101

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Lookingbill TR, Gardner RH, Ferrari JR, Keller CE (2010) Combing a dispersal model with network theory to assess habitat connectivity. Ecol Appl 20:427–441

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Maehr DS, Noss RF, Larkin JL (2001) Large mammal restoration. Island Press, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Maehr DS, Smith JS, Cunningham MW, Barnwell ME, Larkin J, Orlando MA (2003) Spatial characteristics of an isolated Florida black bear population. Southeast Nat 2:433–446

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Marchinton FB (1995) Movement ecology of black bears in a fragmented bottomland hardwood habitat in Louisiana. Thesis, University of Tennessee

  • Marks PL, Harcombe PA (1981) Forest vegetation of the Big Thicket, southeast Texas. Ecol Monogr 51:287–305

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Miller JR, Turner MG, Smithwick EAH, Dent CL, Stanley EH (2004) Spatial extrapolation: the science of predicting ecological patterns and processes. Bioscience 54:310–320

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Minor ES, Urban DL (2007) Graph theory as a proxy for spatially explicit population models in conservation planning. Ecol Appl 17:1771–1782

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Minor ES, Urban DL (2008) A graph-theory framework for evaluating landscape connectivity and conservation planning. Conserv Biol 22:297–307

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Morzillo AT, Mertig AG, Garner N, Liu J (2007a) Resident attitudes toward black bears and population recovery in East Texas. Hum Dim Wildl 12:417–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morzillo AT, Mertig AG, Garner N, Liu J (2007b) Spatial distribution of attitudes toward proposed management strategies for a wildlife recovery. Hum Dim Wildl 12:15–29

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morzillo AT, Mertig AG, Garner N, Liu J (2009) Evaluating support for black bear restoration in East Texas. Hum Dim Wildl 14:407–418

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Morzillo AT, Mertig AG, Hollister JW, Garner N, Liu J (2010) Socioeconomic factors affecting local support for black bear recovery strategies. Environ Manage 45:1299–1311

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Nyland PD (1995) Black bear habitat relationships in coastal Louisiana. Thesis, Louisiana State University

  • Onorato DP, Hellgren EC (2001) Black bear at the border: natural recolonization of theTrans-Pecos. In: Maehr DS, Noss RF, Larkin JL (eds) Large mammal restoration. Island Press, Washington, pp 245–259

    Google Scholar 

  • Osborne PE, Alonso JC, Bryant RG (2001) Modelling landscape-scale habitat use using GIS and remote sensing: a case study with great bustards. J Appl Ecol 38:458–471

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ovaskainen O (2008) Analytical and numerical tools for diffusion-based movement models. Theor Pop Biol 73:198–211

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Peacock H (1984) The Big Thicket of Texas: America’s ecological wonder. Little Brown and Company, Boston

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelton MR (1986) Habitat needs of black bears in the east. In: Kulhavy DL, Conner RN (eds) Wilderness and natural areas in the eastern United States: a management challenge. Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, pp 49–53

    Google Scholar 

  • Pelton MR (2003) Black bear. In: Feldhamer GA, Thompson BC, Chapman JA (eds) Wild mammals of North America, 2nd edn. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 547–555

    Google Scholar 

  • Pitt JPW, Worner SP, Suarez AV (2009) Predicting Argentine ant spread over the heterogeneous landscape using a spatially explicit stochastic model. Ecol Appl 19:1176–1186

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  • Reading RP, Clark TW (1996) Carnivore reintroductions: an interdisciplinary examination. In: Gittleman JL (ed) Carnivore behavior, ecology, and evolution, vol 2. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, pp 296–336

    Google Scholar 

  • Reynolds DG, Beecham JJ (1980) Home range activities and reproduction of black bears in west-central Idaho. Bear Biol Assoc Conf Series 3:181–191

    Google Scholar 

  • Rogers LL (1987) Effects of food supply and kinship on social behavior, movements, and population growth of black bears in northern Minnesota. Wildl Monogr 91:1–72

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudis VA (1986) Emerging patterns in the distribution of roadless forested areas in the Midsouth. In: Kulhavy DL, Conner RN (eds) Wilderness and natural areas in the eastern United States: a management challenge. Stephen F. Austin State University, Nacogdoches, pp 265–270

    Google Scholar 

  • Rudis VA, Tansey B (1995) Regional assessment of remote forests and black bear habitat from forest resource surveys. J Wildl Manage 59:170–180

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Saura S, Pascual-Hortal L (2007) A new habitat availability index to integrate connectivity in landscape conservation planning: comparison with existing indices and application to a case study. Landsc Urban Plan 83:91–103

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schamberger MA, Farmer H, Terrell JW (1982) Habitat suitability index models: introduction. US Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwartz CC, Miller SD, Haroldson MA (2003) Grizzly bear (Ursus arctos). In: Feldhamer GA, Thompson BC, Chapman JA (eds) Wild mammals of North America, 2nd edn. John Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, pp 556–586

    Google Scholar 

  • Texas Parks Wildlife Department (TPWD) (2005) East Texas black bear conservation and management plan. Texas Parks and Wildlife Department, Austin

    Google Scholar 

  • Turner MG, Gardner RH, O’Neill RV (2001) Landscape ecology. Springer-Verlag, Inc, New York

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban DL (2003) LANDGRAPHS: a package for graph theoretic analyses of landscapes. Landscape Ecology Laboratory, Duke University, Durham NC

    Google Scholar 

  • Urban D, Keitt T (2001) Landscape connectivity: a graph-theoretic perspective. Ecology 82:1205–1218

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • US Fish Wildlife Service (USFWS) (1981) Standards for the development of habitat suitability index models for use in the habitat evaluation procedures. Division of Ecological Services, Washington

    Google Scholar 

  • van Manen FT (1991) A feasibility study for the potential reintroduction of black bears into the Big South Fork Area of Kentucky and Tennessee. Tennessee Wildlife Resources Agency, Morristown

    Google Scholar 

  • Vogt P, Ferrari JR, Lookingbill TR, Gardner RH, Ritters KH, Ostapowicz K (2008) Mapping functional connectivity. Ecol Indic 9:64–71

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wagner RO (1990) Movement patterns of black bears in south central Louisiana. Thesis, Louisiana State University

  • Wear BJ, Eastridge R, Clark JD (2005) Factors affecting settling, survival, and viability of black bears reintroduced to Felsenthal National Wildlife Refuge, Arkansas. Wildl Soc B 33:1363–1374

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Weaver KM, Tabberer DK, Moore LU Jr, Chandler GA, Posey JC, Pelton MR (1990) Bottomland hardwood forest management for black bears in Louisiana. Proceedings of Annual Conference of SEAFWA, vol 44, pp 342–350

  • White TH Jr, Bowman JL, Leopold BD, Jacobson HA, Smith WP, Vilella FJ (2000) Influence of Mississippi alluvial valley rivers on black bear movements and dispersal: implications for Louisiana black bear recovery. Biol Conserv 95:323–331

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wooding JB, Hardisky TS (1994) Home range, habitat use, and mortality of black bears in north-central Florida. Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Bear Research and Management, vol 9, pp 349–356

  • Woodroffe R (2001) Predators and people: using human densities to interpret declines of large carnivores. Anim Conserv 3:165–173

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yook SH, Jeong H, Barabasi AL, Tu Y (2001) Weighted evolving networks. Phys Rev Lett 86:5835–5838

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Funding for this research was provided by Michigan State University, the NASA Earth Systems Science Fellowship Program, Canon-National Park Service Fellowship Program, National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, Western National Parks Assoc., Texas Parks and Wildlife Dept, and Safari Club International-Deep Pineywoods Chapter. The US Fish and Wildlife Service, US National Park Service, and Big Thicket Association provided in-kind support. We thank J. Egeler, S. Keroson, C. Jenkins, B. Maurer, and particularly R.H. Gardner, as well as N. Schumaker, E. Hellgren, and 4 anonymous reviewers.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Anita T. Morzillo

    Present address: Department of Forest Ecosystems and Society, Oregon State University, 321 Richardson Hall, Corvallis, OR, 97331, USA

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Center for Systems Integration and Sustainability, Michigan State University, East Lansing, MI, 48824, USA

    Anita T. Morzillo & Jianguo Liu

  2. Appalachian Laboratory, University of Maryland Center for Environmental Science, Frostburg, MD, 21532, USA

    Joseph R. Ferrari

Authors
  1. Anita T. Morzillo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Joseph R. Ferrari
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jianguo Liu
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Anita T. Morzillo.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Morzillo, A.T., Ferrari, J.R. & Liu, J. An integration of habitat evaluation, individual based modeling, and graph theory for a potential black bear population recovery in southeastern Texas, USA. Landscape Ecol 26, 69–81 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-010-9536-4

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10980-010-9536-4

Keywords

Search

Navigation