Aversive conditioning increases short-term wariness but does not change habitat use in black bears associated with conflict
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Conflict between humans and black bears (Ursus americanus) occurs throughout North America with increasing public demand to replace lethal management with non-lethal methods, such as aversive conditioning (AC). AC aims to teach animals to associate negative stimuli with humans or their infrastructure. We sought to test the efficacy of AC using radio-collared black bears in Whistler, British Columbia, by monitoring individuals and assigning those in conflict with people to control or treatment groups. We measured wariness using overt reaction distance, displacement distance, and reaction to researchers before, during and after executing 3-5-day AC programs that consisted of launching projectiles at bears in the treatment group. We also assessed predictors of successful AC events (i.e., leaving at a run), changes in bear use of human-dominated habitat during the day and at night, and the effects of including a sound stimulus to signal the beginning and end of AC events. Among treated bears, overt reaction distance increased by 46.5% and displacement distance increased by 69.0% following AC programs, whereas both overt reaction distance and displacement distance decreased over time among control group bears. Each additional AC event during the previous 30 days increased likelihood of bear departure in response to researcher presence by 4.5%. The success of AC events varied among individuals, declined with distance to cover, and increased with exposure to previous AC events. Projectiles launched from guns were slightly more effective at causing bears to displace compared to those launched from slingshots, and sound stimuli decreased the likelihood of a successful AC event. AC did not alter diurnal use by bears of human-dominated habitat. Our results suggest that AC effectively increases short-term wariness in black bears but does not alter bear use of human-dominated spaces, highlighting the importance of proactive attractant management and prevention of food conditioning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".