Discussion

Interpretations of Main Findings

Corridor Delineation

This study is important in that it considers the movement of grizzly bears in a population not currently constrained by extensive human development, roadways, or habitat fragmentation. Therefore, the movement of grizzly bears can be considered more natural and intrinsic. The results of our analysis revealed such movement patterns between areas of high bear activity.

The kernel density analysis revealed differences between female and male dispersal patterns, with males traveling over much wider distances and between unique activity areas more frequently. Females tended to stay within particular ranges, raising the question of whether females would use corridors at all. These results suggest that the movement of males between meta-populations is integral to maintaining genetic diversity (McLellan & Hovey, 2001; Walker & Craighead, 1997).

Additionally, while male bear movement did link all high activity areas, different bears used different paths to travel between the same areas, suggesting that there is no single corridor that may be delineated. Rather, our results may reflect a general use of the area within and around the corridors.

Multiple-Criteria Evaluation

The results of the Multiple-Criteria Evaluation do have the potential to help improve our understanding of what may influence bear movement through the landscape. For instance, the use of slopes implies that possible barriers to movement exist where slopes >50%, and should not be within any future corridors. Both sexes had highest preference for wetland, suggesting the majority of forage is collected in these areas.

The percentage of time spent at different elevation intervals was the only significant difference between male and female bears. While females tended to move across a range of elevations, males clearly preferred areas 500-600 m above sea level. These results may reflect the effects of differing dispersal patterns.

Finally, bears spent the majority of their time in relatively close proximity to waterways throughout the region, appearing to travel along riverbanks. However, due to a lack of research pertaining to bear use of waterways and an inability to discern reliable measures of stream order from the DEM without skewing data results significantly, waterways were removed from the MCE analysis overall. This does not reflect their importance, as it is clear from observations that major waterways are necessary in determining animal movement within the region.