<rdf:RDF xmlns:rdf="http://www.w3.org/1999/02/22-rdf-syntax-ns#" xmlns:dcterms="http://purl.org/dc/terms/">
<rdf:Description rdf:about="https://cpw.cvlcollections.org/items/show/684">
    <dcterms:title><![CDATA[Summarizing Colorado’s black bear two-strike directive 30 years after inception <br />
]]></dcterms:title>
    <dcterms:subject><![CDATA[Black bear ]]></dcterms:subject>
    <dcterms:subject><![CDATA[<em>Ursus americanus</em>]]></dcterms:subject>
    <dcterms:subject><![CDATA[Mortality]]></dcterms:subject>
    <dcterms:subject><![CDATA[Conflict]]></dcterms:subject>
    <dcterms:subject><![CDATA[Second strike]]></dcterms:subject>
    <dcterms:subject><![CDATA[Translocation]]></dcterms:subject>
    <dcterms:description><![CDATA[Abstract: Colorado Parks and Wildlife implemented a new statewide management policy in 1985 fornuisance black bears (Ursus americanus), known today as the 2‐strike directive. It allowed wildlifemanagers to assess the repeatability of nuisance bear behavior after translocating them to quality bearhabitat away from human food sources. We evaluated this directive using 30 years (1987–2016)of nuisance black bear capture records. Statewide, 53% of 1,093 bears caught, marked, and moved(1st strike) were never reported again, while 25% were killed for a 2nd strike, and hunters harvested 17%. Subadult males committed 2nd strikes more quickly than adult males and females. Although timebetween strikes was greatest for adult females (496 days), they had the largest probability of committing a 2nd strike among all cohorts. We found that the number of 1st strike captures, from late summer throughfall was greatest during years of poor mast production. We suggest that the 2‐strike policy has been aneﬀective management tool for nuisance black bears in Colorado, USA, because of low rates of nuisancebehavior following 1st‐strike translocation. If a state or local management objective is to increase blackbear populations, wildlife managers may increase tolerance of adult bears that have received their 1ststrike in years when fall mast crops largely fail because they are less likely to commit a 2nd strike. Lowertolerance of subadult males may be warranted in bad food years, especially in areas where reductions inbear populations are desired, because they tend to repeat nuisance behaviors more quickly than otherbears.]]></dcterms:description>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[Lewis, Jonathan H.]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[Alldredge, Mathew W.]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[Dreher, Brian P.]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[George, Janet L.]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[Wait, Scott]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[Petch, Brad]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:creator><![CDATA[Runge, Jonathan P.]]></dcterms:creator>
    <dcterms:dateAccepted><![CDATA[2019-07-05]]></dcterms:dateAccepted>
    <dcterms:dateSubmitted><![CDATA[2018-02-27]]></dcterms:dateSubmitted>
    <dcterms:issued><![CDATA[2019-11-28]]></dcterms:issued>
    <dcterms:rights><![CDATA[<div class="field two columns alpha"><a href="http://rightsstatements.org/vocab/InC-NC/1.0/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">In Copyright - Non-Commercial Use Permitted</a></div>]]></dcterms:rights>
    <dcterms:isPartOf><![CDATA[Wildlife Society Bulletin]]></dcterms:isPartOf>
    <dcterms:format><![CDATA[application/pdf]]></dcterms:format>
    <dcterms:extent><![CDATA[9 pgs.]]></dcterms:extent>
    <dcterms:language><![CDATA[English]]></dcterms:language>
    <dcterms:type><![CDATA[Article]]></dcterms:type>
    <dcterms:bibliographicCitation><![CDATA[Lewis, J.H., Alldredge, M.W., Dreher, B.P., George, J.L., Wait, S., Petch, B. and Runge, J.P. (2019), Summarizing Colorado's black bear two-strike directive 30 years after inception. Wildl. Soc. Bull., 43: 599-607. https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.1032]]></dcterms:bibliographicCitation>
</rdf:Description></rdf:RDF>
