The Black Bear and Man in Chichibu, Central Japan

Ken ISHIDA1 and Yukihiko HASHIMOTO2

1 University Forest in Chichibu, University of Tokyo, Hinoda, Chichibu, Saitama 368, JAPAN

2 Laboratory of Wildlife Biology, University of Tokyo,Yayoi, Bunkyo-ku, Tokyo, JAPAN

Abstract

Black bears are popular animal among Japanese citizens, but in fact their ecology is very poorly understood by them. There are many scientific researches on the populations in Japan recently. And it was clarified that the bear is very close to human being, in spite of we seldom come across them in the forest. On the other hand, we have much straggle with the bear especially in northern honshu. Sometimes the bears injure a person, and often forage on agricultural products. The human society usually tries to kill a bear around the first appearance site without determining the guilty of the bear individual. To solve such unfortunate situation for both man and bear, we recommend to create buffer zone and to establish a managing professionals in the society.

Introduction

The Black Bear (Ursus thibetanus japonicus) has been popular among Japanese citizens since old days. It is appearing, for example, in an old tale of "Kintaro" and several children's ballad, and "Bears in Mt. Nametoko", a novel written by Kenji Miyazawa.

On the other hand, it is the largest wild animal in Honshu and southern Japan, and people seldom see them. Many people sometimes fear and respect the bear. They do not know that the bears inhabit close to mountainous villages, camping site and nature trail. The research in Chichibu with capturing and collared radio transmitters shows the bear inhabit very close to the human habitat. The difference between the bear in the mid of the citizens and the bear in fact is the cause of the present conflict between man and bear in Japan. Is this a normal condition between the two? -- No, we do not think so. Recently, it appears we have more conflict with wild animals such as bears, monkeys, deer and bores. We can understand, in a viewpoint, our way of reacting against them is not adaptive in the present situation.

Forests around residential areas have developed, and wild forest is just behind the village. There is no people with everyday activities in the forest, bears are easy to appear into the village. The interaction area have moved from behind forest ("satoyama" in Japanese) to in the village.

Black Bears are close to us, and we, humans, need to behave another way at present, while there is a new interactions between bears and people.

Study area

Study area is in the west part of Ohtaki-village, westernmost Saitama, called Oku-Chichibu. It is near the border to neighboring four prefectures, Nagano, Yamanashi, Tokyo and Gumma (Fig. 1).

The terrain is very steep. An amount of primitive and primitive-like broadleaf forest is left around there. The elevation of the study area is from about 600m to 2,000m. Black bears mostly stay in a cool-temperate deciduous forest and mixed forest up to about 1,700m.

About 260 species of trees are recorded in the University Forest in Chichibu, the University of Tokyo.

The dominant species are beech (Fagus crenata) and japanese-beech (F. japonica) on the slopes, hemlock (Tsuga sieboldii) and fir (Abies firma) on the ridges, and senwoods (Fraxinus spaethiana) in the valley of the slopes with much rock. Most of the area is covered second growth deciduous forest of oaks (mainly Quercus mongolica) , beech, japanese-beech, chestnut (Castanea crenata), maples (Acer spp.), cherry trees (Purnus spp.) and mix of other many species. It is diverse. The proportions of species are variate at place to place. There are vines of wild grape (Ampelopsis brevipedunculata) and arguta (Actinidia arguta ), bushes of rasberries (Rubus spp.) and so on, preferred much by bears. Nuts and acorns of beeches, oaks and chestnut trees are important food for the bear (Hashimoto 1995, Hashimoto et al. in this volume). They are characteristic for their large fluctuation of crops or masting (Kelly 1994, Miguchi 1996). In this area, however, the main four species' mastings are not synchronized, and the food condition for the bear in autumn appears rather stabile.

Method

We set thirteen bear traps made of drums, with a bait of beehive, in our university forest (Fig. 2). Trapped bears were tagged on the ear, attached with a microtip since 1995. We also attached collar mounted transmitters on a larger individuals.

We tried to capture the bear mainly during July, August and earlier September, from 1991 to 1996. The location of bears in this area was so hard with little automobile road, steep and complex terrain, and reflections of the radio wave. So we locate the bears roughly referring the direction and strength of the wave and ridges as barriers.

Results

We have caught 17 females and 27 males, by 101 times, during the study period. We had only three in 1991, but 5 to 7 females and 6 to 10 males, for 18 to 24 times, each year, in 1992 to 1996. We attached a transmitter on 23 individuals of them. We could follow their movement for 16 individuals of them.

The outlines of the home ranges of female bears in 1995 is shown in figure 2. The average density is about 5 to 8 square kilometers. The outlined home range of a male was up to 60 square kilometers in 1991-1992, but we could hardly estimate the area for the other males or for the same male in the other years.

The sex ratio of trapped bears are almost equal, and their behavior observed suggests the density of the male is as same as that of the female. There were untrapped, probably nomadic individuals, too.

Black bears mostly inhabit broadleaf forests. We do not have the data of the ratios of vegetation preferences, for we cannot locate their position exactly in our study area.

They are usually acting close to the camping and fishing sites, nature trails and the village. The individuals of O76 and R56 (Fig. 3) moves father east around the villages in other years.

Discussion

Following the hunting statistics of Saitama Prefecture in 1995 and before, bears were killed by sports and protection (of human and human properties against the wildlife) hunting from four to 14 and from zero to ten in each year, respectively, in the last decade. Most of the number of the protection hunting is zero. These numbers are much less than before, about 20 years ago.

There are small damages by bears against agriculture, such as orchards, bees, and forestry, but only one person was injured by a bear in 1965 (Sato 1995).

Appearances of bear in the village are reported almost every year out of their ordinary distribution area in western Saitama. They often forage on orchards and raising bees, and leave in a few days. In the study area, villagers and sports fishermen sometimes come across with a bear in and near the villages.

Mr. Yoshio Kamizuka, an old man of Ohtaki Village, tells there was seldom the chance to observe bears, deer or monkey near the village about 20 years ago and before.

The protection hunting or conflict with bears are not significant in Chichibu, but many bears are killed by protection hunting in northern Honshu and Hokkaido.

It is useful to refer Mr. Taguchi's area deviation (Fig 4), to discuss our policy of coexistence with wildlife, considering the present situations of Japanese black bears and historical life style of the mountainous people in Japan. The area could be classified into four area anyway- (1) village as the residence of human, (2) agricultural field among and around the village, (3) close forest or "Satoyama" behind the agricultural field, and (4) the wild forest.

Villagers thought Satoyama is about half an hours walk from their houses and wild forest is farther than one hours walk. Maybe in Oku-chichibu, the time was longer as the terrain is steep and it took them longer to walk. And there was little agricultural field.

In the close forest, Satoyama, they harvested various wild vegetables, berries, nuts, mushrooms, leaves for fertilizer and branches for fuel, produce charcoal, and also set animal traps, described by Mr. Taguchi as passive hunting. Satoyama was a kind of buffer zone between human territory and the wild. It was rather hard for the wild animals to invade to the agricultural land and village over Satoyama.

In 1960s with the fast economic growth and governmental policy of a huge deforestation, Satoyama was developed very much. With the introduction of fossil energy and chemical fertilizer, or more money economy and lost of self-sufficiency life style, Satoyama lost their value for the mountainous people, too. Satoyama was lost, and became human or wild area. It meant the lost of buffer zone and it became easier for the wild animals to reach the village and there have been more conflict between man and wild animals in the village and agricultural land including artificial plantation.

For the peaceful coexistence of wildlife, including large carnivores, and man, we have to act with governmental policy, as to compensate for those the people daily did previously in the mountainous villages. Then my recommendations are:

(1) to create the buffer zone between human and wildlife areas, like "Satoyama"

(2) to establish the position or professionals who manage both man and wildlife in the buffer zone

references

　 Hashimoto, Y. 1995. Food habit of Japanese Black Bear (Ursus thibetanus japonicus) in Chichibu. Ms. Thesis, Fac. of Agric., Univ. of Tokyo, 35pp.+XIV.*

　 Ishida, K., Hashimoto, Y., Ohmura, K and Saito, T. 1994. Effects of the road construction on the wildlife in Tokyo University Forest in Chichibu IV; hunting, acornharvest and Japanese Black Bear population. Transactions Jpn. For. Soc. 105: 557-558.*

Ishida, K. 1995. Food habit and characteristics of the life history of Japanese Black Bear. *

　 Kelly, D. 1994. The evolutionary ecology of mast seeding. Trends in Evolution and Ecology 9(12): 465-470.

　 Miguchi, H. 1995. Present terminus in the researches of masting Beach. Bull. Pop. Ecol. Soc. 52: 33-40.*

Sato, S. 1996. Memories of the university forests in Chichibu and Aichi, Enshurin 34: 1-40.*

　 Taguchi, H. 1992. The record of mountainous peoples hunting and life, Nobunkyo Co., Tokyo, 250pp.*

(* in Japanese)

Fig. 1 The location of the study area.

Fig. 2 The location of 13 bear traps.

Fig. 3 The outline of the homerages of female bears in 1995.

Fig.4 Territories of wildlife and man. (following Taguchi, 1992)