Tremarctos ornatus 

Scope: Global
Language: English
Status_ne_offStatus_dd_offStatus_lc_offStatus_nt_offStatus_vu_onStatus_en_offStatus_cr_offStatus_ew_offStatus_ex_off

Translate page into:

Taxonomy [top]

Kingdom Phylum Class Order Family
Animalia Chordata Mammalia Carnivora Ursidae

Scientific Name: Tremarctos ornatus (F.G. Cuvier, 1825)
Common Name(s):
English Spectacled Bear, Andean Bear
French Ours à lunettes, Ours Andin
Spanish Oso de Anteojos, Oso Frontino, Oso Real
Synonym(s):
Ursus ornatus F. G. Cuvier, 1825

Assessment Information [top]

Red List Category & Criteria: Vulnerable A3c+4c ver 3.1
Year Published: 2017
Date Assessed: 2016-02-02
Assessor(s): Velez-Liendo, X. & García-Rangel, S.
Reviewer(s): Garshelis, D.L. & McLellan, B.N.
Contributor(s): Viteri Espinel, M., Wallace, R., Rumiz, D.I., Pacheco, L., Lameda, I., Goldstein, I., Bracho, A.E., Zug, R., Amanzo, J., Castellanos, A., Marquez, R., Restrepo, H. & Hidalgo-Hermoso, E.
Justification:

A landscape assessment of habitat suitability and connectivity carried out for this assessment identified ~30% of habitat as unsuitable to sustain viable Andean Bear populations. Key patches for sustainable populations of Andean Bears were defined as areas larger than 400 km² and within 15 km of the nearest patch (Verboom et al. 2001, Velez-Liendo 2014). At the national level, Venezuela showed the greatest projected loss of key patches (70%), with only two of these key patches available to sustain its bear population. Peru, Colombia and Ecuador are projected to lose 31%, 29% and 27% respectively, and Bolivia 19%. Causes of this loss of key patch habitat is associated with human development activities that have not ceased, and in some areas may increase by allowing oil exploration and exploitation within some protected areas. Expansion of the agricultural frontier, inadequate agricultural practices and land/agrarian reforms; mining and oil exploitation, conversion of land to coca crops and the drug trade, have been the main drivers of the loss and degradation of Andean bear habitat (Ataroff and Rada 2000, Palminteri et al. 2001, Armenteras et al. 2003, 2011; Rodríguez et al. 2003, Kattan et al. 2004, Yerena et al. 2007, Velez-Liendo 2010, Dávalos et al. 2011, García-Rangel 2012, Portillo-Quintero et al. 2012, Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2014). Three main data sources were used to map these human intrusions on Andean Bear habitat: disturbed areas (roads, settlements, agriculture fields, etc.) from Josse et al. (2009), forest cover loss derived from satellite imagery for the period 2000-2013 (Hansen et al. 2013) and 8 years (2000-2008) of fire activities from MODIS Rapid Response System data sets (http://modis-fire.umd.edu/index.php) (Velez-Liendo 2010; note: data and imagery were from LANCE FIRMS operated by the NASA/GSFC/Earth Science Data and Information System (ESDIS) with funding provided by NASA/HQ).

Furthermore, as a consequence of habitat loss, human-bear conflicts are likely to increase resulting in reduced tolerance and escalating bear kills (Goldstein et al. 2006; Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2008, 2014; García-Rangel 2012; Zukowsky and Ormsby 2016). Thus, even where a habitat patch is of sufficient size to maintain a bear population, human-caused mortality is likely to reduce bear density.

Climate change projections for 2010-2039 by Tovar et al. (2013) indicate that all ecosystems inhabited by Andean Bears will exhibit a degree of loss: 30% loss for Tropical high altitude grasslands, 24% for Tropical dry and moist shrublands, and 18% for Tropical moist lowland and montane forests. Based on the current state of the Andean Bear’s habitat, the fact that many threats causing reduction and degradation of Andean Bear ecosystems have not ceased, and projected patterns of biodiversity shift caused by climate change, the species is vulnerable to widespread future decline.

Andean Bear species’ experts in the Bear Specialist Group considered all of these threats and provided estimates of rates of decline.  Experts estimated rates of decline of >30% for each of the five range countries in the next 30 years and also in a 30-year time window overlapping the present (2000–2030). This qualifies the species for Vulnerable, under criteria A3 and A4. There is also a reasonable likelihood that the global population consists of <10,000 mature adults (given a total population of <20,000 bears), a condition under criteria C1, but since the rate of future population decline is only suspected based on rates of habitat loss or alteration, the nature of the evidence is insufficient (i.e., not directly estimated) to categorize the species under C1.

Previously published Red List assessments:

Geographic Range [top]

Range Description:

The Andean Bear is the only extant bear species in South America and is endemic to the Tropical Andes (Kattan et al. 2004; Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2006, 2007; Viteri 2007; Viteri and Waits 2009; García-Rangel 2012). The distribution of this species is long (ca 4,600 km) and narrow (ca 200-650 km) in the mountains from Venezuela to Bolivia (Peyton et al. 1998, Yerena 1998, Peyton 1999, Rodríguez et al. 2003, Kattan et al. 2004). From North to South, Andean bears are found in Sierra de Perijá and Cordillera de Mérida in Venezuela; the Occidental, Central, and Oriental Andean mountain ranges of Colombia; both Eastern and Western slopes of the Ecuadorian Andes; across the three Peruvian Andean mountain ranges, including a portion of the North Pacific coastal desert; and in the Eastern slope of the Tropical Andes in Bolivia (García-Rangel 2012). The possible presence of the bear in Panama was reported by Hershkovitz (1957), but recent surveys in the area did not find evidence to support this claim (Goldstein et al. 2008). Recently, presence of Andean bears in Northern Argentina has been confirmed by Cosse et al. (2014) through genetics. However, given that these presence points are up to 300 km south (straight line) of the known most-southerly population in Bolivia, they may represent vagrant individuals rather than resident populations.

Countries occurrence:
Native:
Bolivia, Plurinational States of; Colombia; Ecuador; Peru; Venezuela, Bolivarian Republic of
Additional data:
Lower elevation limit (metres):200
Upper elevation limit (metres):4750
Range Map:Click here to open the map viewer and explore range.

Population [top]

Population:

Expert knowledge, data extrapolations, genetic analysis, mark-recapture, radio tracking and sign surveys, as well as ecological modelling have been used to estimate population sizes and densities of Andean Bears (Peyton 1984, 1999; Yerena 1994; Peyton et al. 1998; Cuesta and Suárez 2001; Ruiz-García 2003; Kattan et al. 2004; Viteri 2007; Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2007; Velez-Liendo 2010; Garshelis 2011; García-Rangel 2012). Wild populations are believed to be on decline due to habitat loss and fragmentation, and illegal killing (Rodríguez et al. 2003, Kattan et al. 2004, Yerena et al. 2007, Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2008, Velez-Liendo et al. 2009, Velez-Liendo and Paisley 2010, García-Rangel 2012). National assessments applying different approaches estimated 1,100-1,600 bears in Venezuela (Ruiz-García 2003), 3,000-6,000 in Colombia (Ruiz-García 2003), 1,200-2,000 in Ecuador (Cuesta and Suárez 2001, Viteri 2007), ~5,000 bears in Peru (Peyton 1999), and ~3,000 bears in Bolivia (Velez-Liendo 2010). These rather crude countrywide estimates, yielding a range-wide estimate of 13,000-18,000 bears (5-7 bears/100 km² over its 260,000 km² range), are reasonably consistent with three empirically-derived mark-recapture (re-sight) density estimates of 3-8 bears/100 km² (Viteri 2007, Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2007, S. Molina, pers. comm). It should be cautioned, however, that all abundance and density estimates for this species have known biases, so consistency among the estimates is not verification of their accuracy (Garshelis 2011).

Current Population Trend:Decreasing
Additional data:
Number of mature individuals:2500-10000Continuing decline of mature individuals:Unknown
Population severely fragmented:No

Habitat and Ecology [top]

Habitat and Ecology:

Andean Bear altitudinal range extends from 200 to 4,750 m above sea level, with an area of occupancy covering approximately 260,000 km² along the Tropical Andes. The lower limit is on the Western Peruvian range; the upper limit is within Carrasco National Park in Bolivia (Peyton 1980, 1984, 1999; Goldstein 1990, Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Cadena 1991, Rodríguez et al. 2003, Sánchez-Mercado 2008, Figueroa and Stucchi 2009, Velez-Liendo 2010, García-Rangel 2012, Appleton et al. 2013).

The species inhabits a great variety of ecosystems along the Tropical Andes including Tropical dry forests, Tropical moist lowland and montane forests; Tropical dry and moist shrublands, and Tropical high altitude shrubland and grasslands (García-Rangel 2012). Seasonal shifts in habitat use due to changes in food availability have been reported (Peyton 1980, Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Cadena 1991, Velez-Liendo 1999, Paisley 2001, Cuesta et al. 2003, Troya et al. 2004, Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2006, Figueroa and Stucchi 2009). Andean bears are mostly found in Tropical moist forests and Tropical high-altitude grasslands (Peyton 1980, 1987a, 1987b, 1999; Velez-Liendo 1999, Cuesta et al. 2003, Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2006, Sánchez-Mercado 2008), but it remains unclear whether bears can live entirely in high-altitude grasslands and paramo without access to forested areas (Paisley and Garshelis 2006). In the north coast of Peru, Andean bears inhabit a Tropical dry shrubland (Peyton 1999, Figueroa and Stucchi 2009, García-Rangel 2012, Appleton et al. 2013).

Andean bears are omnivorous and have a suite of physical adaptations for this life style (McLellan and Reiner 1994, Sacco and Van Valkenburgh 2004, Christiansen and Wroe 2007, Christiansen 2008). Anatomical skull and dentition adaptations to grind (Christiansen 2008) and a pseudo-thumb (Salesa et al. 2006) to aid in consuming a diet of fibrous, hard vegetative matter. Andean bears also opportunistically prey on mammals, including rabbits and mountain tapirs (Castellanos 2011a), but most notably free-ranging domestic cattle (Goldstein 1990, 2002; Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Cadena 1991; Peyton 1999; Cuesta and Suárez 2001; Sacco and Van Valkenburgh 2004; Goldstein et al. 2006; Christiansen and Wroe 2007; Christiansen 2008; Torres 2008; Figueroa and Stucchi 2009; García-Rangel 2012). Bromeliads and palm trees constitute the most common food items in the diet of Andean Bears across the majority of their range (Peyton 1980, Goldstein 1990, Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Cadena 1991, Goldstein and Salas 1993, Troya et al. 2004, Rivadeneria-Canedo 2008, Figueroa and Stucchi 2009, Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2009, García-Rangel 2012). On a seasonal basis, fruits are key food sources for the species as they provide carbohydrates, protein and fat necessary to balance their diet (Peyton 1980, 1984, Goldstein 1990, Rodríguez-Rodríguez and Cadena 1991, Rivadeneira-Canedo 2001, Troya et al. 2004, Kattan et al. 2004, Figueroa and Stucchi 2009, Ríos-Uzeda et al. 2009).

Andean Bears are excellent climbers and commonly build tree platforms where they rest, feed on fruits and carcasses, as well as guard feeding areas (Peyton 1980, 1984; Goldstein 1990, 1991, 2002; Torres 2008, García-Rangel 2012). Activity patterns are mainly diurnal, but they vary seasonally and between geographic areas (Paisley 2001, Paisley and Garshelis 2006, Castellanos 2011b). As food is available all year-round in most parts of their range, Andean bears do not hibernate (Peyton 1999, Garshelis 2009). Information on reproduction is limited for Andean Bears and has mainly come from captive individuals (Bloxam 1977, Rosenthal 1988, Claro-Hergueta et al. 2007, Spady et al. 2007, García-Rangel 2012, Enciso and Guimarães 2013).

The species is polyestrous, a facultative seasonal breeder and experiences delayed implantation (Claro-Hergueta et al. 2007, Spady et al. 2007). In captivity, females show three to four oestrous cycles during a single breeding season with no seasonal ovarian activity (Enciso and Guimarães 2013). Mating has been recorded in the wild at various times of year but peaking between March and October (Peyton 1980, Peyton et al. 1998). Litter size varies from one to four, with twins being most common, and may be related to female weight and hence food abundance (Saporiti 1949, Bloxam 1977, Peyton 1980, Claro-Hergueta et al. 2007, García-Rangel 2012). Field observations in Bolivia (Velez-Liendo 1999) suggested that births occur two to three months before the peak of the fruit season, perhaps to allow mothers to leave the den with their cubs when fruits are abundant (Peyton 1980, Peyton et al. 1998, Velez-Liendo 1999, Velez-Liendo and Paisley 2010). In captivity, time of birth varies with latitude but births usually occur from February to September (Garshelis 2004, Claro-Hergueta et al. 2007).

Systems:Terrestrial
Generation Length (years):10

Use and Trade [top]

Use and Trade:

Some bears are killed for cultural and medical purposes. The extent of commercial trade is unknown but likely limited.

Threats [top]

Major Threat(s):

Habitat Loss
The Tropical Andes has been home to human communities, including the great Inca Empire, for thousands of years and, as a consequence, 90% of Andean ecosystems have been transformed in some way (Young 1998, 2009; Vina and Cavelier 1999; Ataroff and Rada 2000; Myers et al. 2000; Kattan et al. 2004; Armenteras et al. 2011). The expansion of the agricultural frontier, together with inadequate agricultural practices and land/agrarian reforms, have been the main drivers of the loss of natural ecosystems (Peyton et al. 1998, Yerena 1998, Young 1998, Vina and Cavelier 1999, Ataroff and Rada 2000, Armenteras et al. 2011, Portillo-Quintero et al. 2012). Mining and oil exploitation are becoming an increasing menace not only to bears, but to local communities due to land expropriation, loss of habitat connectivity, and contamination of water and soil (Young and León 1999, Bury 2002, Bebbington et al. 2008, Bebbington 2009). Conversion of land to coca crops and the drug trade, together with guerrilla groups in some parts of the Andes, favours a lawless land-use system that also impacts the quality of Andean Bear habitats and the bear's probability of long-term survival (Rodríguez et al. 2003, Yerena et al. 2007, Dávalos et al. 2011, García-Rangel 2012).

Illegal Killing
Illegal killing is an important, but underestimated threat for Andean Bears. Based on a review of the literature, an average of about 180 bears are known to be killed per year across its range—it is suspected that the real number is much higher, and is likely increasing. For example, recent assessments in northern Ecuador showed unprecedented numbers of cattle killed by bears (at least 320 during the period 2009-2014; Zukowski and Ormsby 2016), as more people are turning to dairy cow farming as a livelihood (Jampel 2016). Bears are killed for retaliation against crop or livestock depredations (or protection against future depredations), for cultural or medical beliefs, and for commercial trade (Orejuela and Jorgenson 1999, Peyton 1999, Rumiz and Salazar 1999, Rodríguez et al. 2003, Yerena et al. 2007, Figueroa 2008, Figueroa and Stucchi 2009, Lameda 2011, E.D. Rodríguez pers. comm. 2014, M.P. Viteri pers. comm. 2014). Since the number of bears killed is likely underestimated by a wide margin, the effects of such killing on bear populations is hard to assess, but rates of killing are high in some areas. Sanchez-Mercado et al. (2008, 2014) estimated that up to 36% of the bear’s distribution in the Cordillera de Merida in Venezuela was within an “ecological trap”, due to human threats. These authors estimated that the effects of this threat combined with habitat fragmentation could be fostering an extinction probability higher than 50% over the next 50 years across this mountain range. Bears are killed during opportunistic encounters, while sport hunting, or as retaliation after damaging crops, particularly maize, or killing livestock (Goldstein 1991, 2002; Peyton 1999, Poveda 1999, Morales Vargas 2003, Goldstein et al. 2006, Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2008, Torres 2008).

Climate Change
Global projections of effects of climate change show a general tendency towards upslope displacement of the mountain biome, suggesting that the Tropical Andes is among the most vulnerable region to climate change (Malcom et al. 2006, Urrutia and Vuille 2009, Beaumont et al. 2011). However, the heterogeneity of this hotspot shows a more complex response (Tovar et al. 2013) affecting phenological patterns and increasing species vulnerability with predictions of species loss ranging from 20-50% due to range contractions for many taxa (Cuesta-Camacho et al. 2008, Lawler et al. 2009, Aguirre et al. 2011, Graham et al. 2011, Hoffmann and Sgrò 2011, Chen et al. 2011, Velásquez-Tibatá et al. 2013, Richardson et al. 2013, Pacifici et al. 2015).

It is likely that all ecosystems associated with Andean Bears will exhibit reductions in their extension. With an increment of +0.74 C in the last century, and a projected increase of 4.3 +/- 0.7 C by 2100 (IPCC 2013), extensive changes in habitat are expected: the Tropical high altitude grasslands is the most fragile ecosystem, with an estimated loss of 30% (Tovar et al. 2013) due to the lack of upslope area for migration. Projected reduction in annual rainfall (IPCC 2013) is likely to affect species highly dependent on humidity such as epiphytic bromeliads (Colwell et al. 2008, Svenning and Condit, 2008, Tewsksbury et al. 2008). Tropical dry and moist shrublands are likely to lose 24% of their area (Tovar et al. 2013), mainly due to a significant variation in the number of dry months (IPCC 2013), while a loss of 18% in area was estimated for Tropical moist lowland and montane forests and Tropical dry forests due to upslope displacements. Furthermore, the extensive (and intensive) land use by human activities in Paramo grasslands, are likely to encroach even further, affecting not only the biodiversity associated to this ecosystem, but also the ecosystem services this biome provides to the region.

Changes in climate regimes must therefore be considered as a growing threat for Andean Bears, as they are likely to alter habitat quality as well as land-use patterns, and increase the probability of human–bear encounters and conflict (Karanth and Chellam 2009, Aguirre et al. 2011, Hoffmann and Sgrò 2011, Chen et al. 2011, Sheridan and Bickford 2011, Mysterud 2013, Ripple et al. 2014). Even more, the areas considered to be most vulnerable to climate change across the Andes are those considered important for Andean bears including: Yanachaga Chemillen National Park (NP) (Peru), Manu NP (Peru), Madidi NP (Bolivia), Apolobamba ANMI (Bolivia), Carrasco NP (Bolivia) and Amboro NP (Bolivia) (Hoffman et al. 2011).

Conservation Actions [top]

Conservation Actions:

The Andean Bear has been listed as Vulnerable by the IUCN since 1982 and has been included in CITES Appendix I since 1975. A total of 58 protected areas have been established across the Andean Bear distribution, but threats remain within their boundaries with most of these areas being no more than “Paper Parks” lacking adequate budget and staff (Hardner 2008; Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2008; Monsalve Dam et al. 2010; García-Rangel 2011, 2012). Although efforts to establish, maintain and connect old and new protected areas along the bear’s range have been carried out (e.g., Vilcabamba-Amboro corridor between Peru and Bolivia and the interconnected system of protected areas in the Venezuela Andes), large portions of the bear’s habitat are still unprotected and poaching has not been controlled (Yerena 1994, 1998;Yerena et al. 2003, Kattan et al. 2004, Surkin et al. 2010, Yerena and García-Rangel 2010, Hoffman et al. 2011, Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2014). Recently (2007-2014), a number of important steps towards Andean Bear conservation have been undertaken across its distribution including: (1) promotion of Andean Bear conservation by local education programmes and research projects carried out by conservation groups, NGOs, zoological parks, universities, research institutes and government agencies in Bolivia, Peru and Venezuela (Figueroa and Stucchi 2009, Albarracín 2010, García-Rangel 2012). (2) The publication of national action plans for Venezuela, Colombia and Ecuador (Sánchez-Mercado 2008, Castellanos et al. 2010, Monsalve Dam et al. 2010), and a national assessment for Bolivia (Velez-Liendo, et al. 2009). Unfortunately priority actions highlighted by some of these programs have not been undertaken. Such is the case for the three key areas identified for connectivity conservation within the Venezuelan Action Plan (Yerena et al. 2007).

Knowledge regarding the species ecology has improved, with information about home range sizes, movement patterns and population sizes for some locations in Peru, Ecuador and Colombia (Rodríguez et al. 2003, Monsalve Dam et al. 2010, Sánchez-Mercado et al. 2010, García-Rangel 2012). Nevertheless, in order to develop robust conservation actions, further efforts regarding population sizes and limiting factors are required. Current and future research need to focus on populations, habitat and connectivity, human dimensions, and climate change effects on both the ecology of the species and human-bear conflict (Rodríguez et al. 2003, Jorgenson and Sandoval 2005, Yerena et al. 2007, Monsalve Dam et al. 2010, Velez-Liendo and Paisley 2010, García-Rangel 2012). Finally, it is important to encourage conservation initiatives to focus on a more holistic and creative approach where the needs of the species and the people inhabiting the Andes mountain range are jointly considered (García-Rangel 2012).

Classifications [top]

1. Forest -> 1.5. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Dry
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Forest -> 1.6. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Lowland
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Forest -> 1.9. Forest - Subtropical/Tropical Moist Montane
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
3. Shrubland -> 3.5. Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical Dry
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
3. Shrubland -> 3.6. Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical Moist
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
3. Shrubland -> 3.7. Shrubland - Subtropical/Tropical High Altitude
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
4. Grassland -> 4.7. Grassland - Subtropical/Tropical High Altitude
suitability:Suitable  major importance:Yes
1. Land/water protection -> 1.1. Site/area protection
1. Land/water protection -> 1.2. Resource & habitat protection
2. Land/water management -> 2.1. Site/area management
2. Land/water management -> 2.3. Habitat & natural process restoration
4. Education & awareness -> 4.1. Formal education
4. Education & awareness -> 4.2. Training
4. Education & awareness -> 4.3. Awareness & communications
5. Law & policy -> 5.1. Legislation -> 5.1.2. National level
5. Law & policy -> 5.1. Legislation -> 5.1.3. Sub-national level
5. Law & policy -> 5.2. Policies and regulations
5. Law & policy -> 5.3. Private sector standards & codes
5. Law & policy -> 5.4. Compliance and enforcement -> 5.4.2. National level
6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives -> 6.1. Linked enterprises & livelihood alternatives
6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives -> 6.4. Conservation payments
6. Livelihood, economic & other incentives -> 6.5. Non-monetary values

In-Place Research, Monitoring and Planning
In-Place Land/Water Protection and Management
  Conservation sites identified:Yes, over entire range
In-Place Species Management
In-Place Education
  Subject to recent education and awareness programmes:Yes
  Included in international legislation:Yes
  Subject to any international management/trade controls:Yes
11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.1. Habitat shifting & alteration
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Whole (>90%) ♦ severity:Very Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:High Impact: 9 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.3. Indirect ecosystem effects

11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.2. Droughts
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 

11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.3. Temperature extremes
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 

11. Climate change & severe weather -> 11.4. Storms & flooding
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.1. Shifting agriculture
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.2. Small-holder farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.1. Annual & perennial non-timber crops -> 2.1.3. Agro-industry farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.2. Species disturbance

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming & ranching -> 2.3.1. Nomadic grazing
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Minority (<50%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Low Impact: 5 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

2. Agriculture & aquaculture -> 2.3. Livestock farming & ranching -> 2.3.2. Small-holder grazing, ranching or farming
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

3. Energy production & mining -> 3.1. Oil & gas drilling
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

3. Energy production & mining -> 3.2. Mining & quarrying
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.1. Ecosystem conversion
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

4. Transportation & service corridors -> 4.1. Roads & railroads
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Rapid Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 7 
→ Stresses
  • 1. Ecosystem stresses -> 1.2. Ecosystem degradation

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.1. Intentional use (species is the target)
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Unknown ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Unknown 
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

5. Biological resource use -> 5.1. Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals -> 5.1.3. Persecution/control
♦ timing:Ongoing ♦ scope:Majority (50-90%) ♦ severity:Slow, Significant Declines ⇒ Impact score:Medium Impact: 6 
→ Stresses
  • 2. Species Stresses -> 2.1. Species mortality

1. Research -> 1.2. Population size, distribution & trends
1. Research -> 1.5. Threats
1. Research -> 1.6. Actions
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.1. Species Action/Recovery Plan
2. Conservation Planning -> 2.3. Harvest & Trade Management Plan
3. Monitoring -> 3.1. Population trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.3. Trade trends
3. Monitoring -> 3.4. Habitat trends

Bibliography [top]

Aguirre, L.F., Anderson, E.P., Brehm, G., Herzog, S.K., Jørgensen, P.M., Kattan, G.H., Maldonado, M., MartInez, R., Mena, J.L., Pabón, J.D., Seimon, A. and Toledo, C. 2011. Phenology and interspecific ecological interactions of Andean biota in the face of climate change. In: S.K. Herzog, R. Martínez, P.M. Jørgensen, and H. Tiessen (eds), Climate change and biodiversity in the Tropical Andes. Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), pp. 426. Säo José dos Campos, and Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE), Paris, France.

Albarracín, V. 2010. Experiences of environmental education for the conservation of the Andean bear (Tremarctos ornatus) in the indigenous community, Lambate South Yungas, La Paz, Bolivia. International Bear News 9(4): 22-23.

Appleton, R., Tobler, M. and Van Horn, R. 2013. A Comparison of Andean Bear (Tremarctos ornatus) densities using camera traps at waterholes and bear trails in the tropical dry forest of Northwestern Peru. International Association for Bear Research and Management, Provo, USA: 38.

Armenteras, D., Gast, F. and Villareal, H. 2003. Andean forest fragmentation and the representativeness of protected natural areas in the eastern Andes, Colombia. Biological Conservation 113: 245-256.

Armenteras, D., Rodríguez, N., Retana, J. and Morales, M. 2011. Understanding deforestation in montane and lowland forests of the Colombian Andes. Regional Environmental Change 11: 693-705.

Ataroff, M. and Rada, F. 2000. Deforestation impact on water dynamics in a Venezuelan Andean cloud forest. Ambio 29: 440-444.

Beaumont, L.J., Pitman, A., Perkins, S., Zimmermann, N.E., Yoccoz, N.G. and Thuiller, W. 2011. Impacts of climate change on the world's most exceptional ecoregions. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 108(6): 2306-2311.

Bebbington, A. 2009. The new extraction: rewriting the political ecology of the Andes. NACLA. Report on the Americas 42: 12-20.

Bebbington, A., Humphreys, D., Bury, J., Lingan, J., Muñoz, J.P. and Scurrah, M. 2008. Mining and social movements: struggles over livelihood and rural territorial development in the Andes. World Development 36: 2888-2905.

Bloxam, Q. 1977. Breeding the spectacled bear Tremarctos ornatus at Jersey Zoo. International Zoo Yearbook 17: 158-161.

Bury, J.T. 2002. Livelihoods, mining and peasant protests in the Peruvian Andes. Journal of Latin American Geography. 1: 1-19.

Castellanos, A. 2011a. Do Andean Bears Attack Mountain Tapirs? International Bear News 20(4): 41-42.

Castellanos, A. 2011b. Andean bear home ranges in the Intag region, Ecuador. Ursus 22: 65-73.

Castellanos, A., Cevallos, J., Laguna, A. and Achig, L. 2010. Estrategia nacional de conservación del Oso Andino. Imprenta Anyma, Quito, Ecuador.

Chen, I.-C., Hill, J.K., Ohlemüller, R., Roy, D.B. and Thomas, C.D. 2011. Rapid range shifts of species associated with high levels of climate warming. Science 333: 1024-1026.

Christiansen, P. 2008. Feeding ecology and morphology of the upper canines in bears (Carnivora: Ursidae). Journal of Morphology 269: 896-908.

Christiansen, P. and Wroe, S. 2007. Bite forces and evolutionary adaptations to feeding ecology in carnivores. Ecology 88: 347-358.

Claro-Hergueta, F., Göltenboth, R., Kitchener, A., Kolter, L., Law, G., Linke, K., Matern, B., Reid, A. and Smith, J.U. 2007. EAZA Ursid Husbandry Guidelines, 2nd edition. Kölner Zoo, Germany.

Colwell, R.K., Brehm, G., Cardelús, C.L., Gilman, A.C. and Longino, J.T. 2008. Global warming, elevational range shifts, and lowland biotic attrition in the wet tropics. Science 322: 258-261.

Cosse, M., Del Moral Sachetti, J.F., Mannise, N. and Acosta, M. 2014. Genetic evidence confirms presence of Andean bears in Argentina. Ursus 25: 163-171.

Cuesta-Camacho, F., Peralvo, M. and A. Ganzenmüller, A. 2008. Posibles efectos del calentamiento global sobre el nicho climático de algunas especies en los Andes Tropicales. Grupo de Trabajo en Páramos del Ecuador/EcoCiencia, Quito, Ecuador.

Cuesta, F. and Suárez, L. 2001. Oso de anteojos (Tremarctos ornatus). SIMBIO/EcoCiencia/Ministerio del Ambiente/UICN, Quito, Ecuador.

Cuesta, F., Peralvo, M. F. and Manen, F. T., van. 2003. Andean bear habitat use in the Oyacachi River Basin, Ecuador. Ursus 14(2): 198-209.

Dávalos, L.M., Bejarano, A.C., Hall, M.A., Correa, H.L., Corthals, A. and Espejo, O.J. 2011. Forests and drugs: Coca-driven deforestation in tropical biodiversity hotspots. Environmental Science & Technology 45: 1219-1227.

Enciso, M.A. and Guimarães, M.A.B.V. 2013. Knowing the reproductive endocrinology in the female Andean bear through non-invasive methods. International Bear News 22: 33-34.

FAO. 2011. State of the world's forests. Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations Rome.

Figueroa, J. 2008. Cacería del oso andino en el Perú. Centro Iberoamericano de la Biodiversidad, Universidad de Alicante, Alicante, España.

Figueroa, J. and Stucchi, M. 2008. El oso andino: Alcances sobre su historia natural, 1st edition. Asociación para la Investigación y la Conservación de la Biodiversidad-AICB, Lima, Perú.

García-Rangel, S. 2011. Ecology and conservation of the Andean bear in Venezuela. University of Cambridge.

García-Rangel, S. 2012. On Andean bear (Tremarctos ornatus) natural history and conservation. Mammal Review 42: 85-119.

Garshelis, D. L. 2004. Variation in ursid life histories: Is there an outlier? In: D. Lindburg and K. Baragona (eds), Giant pandas. Biology and conservation., pp. 53-73. University of California Press, Berkeley, California, USA.

Garshelis, D.L. 2009. Family Ursidae. In: D. E. Wilson and R. A. Mittermeier (eds), Handbook of the mammals of the world: Volume 1. Carnivores, pp. 448-497. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona, Spain.

Garshelis, D.L. 2011. Andean bear density and abundance estimates — How reliable and useful are they? Ursus 22: 47-64.

Goldstein, I. 1990. Distribución y hábitos alimentarios del oso frontino, Tremarctos ornatus en Venezuela. Universidad Simón Bolívar, Caracas, Venezuela.

Goldstein, I. 1991. Are spectacled bear’s tree nest feeding platforms or resting places? Mammalia 55: 433-434.

Goldstein, I. 1991. Spectacled bear predation and feeding behavior on livestock in Venezuela. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 26: 231-235.

Goldstein, I. 2002. Andean bear-cattle interactions and tree nest use in Bolivia and Venezuela. Ursus 13: 369-372.

Goldstein, I. and Salas, L. 1993. Foraging pattern on Puya sp. (Bromeliaceae) by Tremarctos ornatus (Ursidae) at Páramo El Tambor, Venezuela. Ecotrópicos 6: 24-29.

Goldstein I., Guerrero, V. and Moreno, R. 2007. Are there Andean bears in Panama? Poster presentation. Abstracts from the 18th International Conference on Bear Research and Management, pp. 169. Monterrey, Mexico.

Goldstein, I., Guerrero, V. and Moreno, R. 2008. Are there Andean bears in Panamá? Ursus 19: 185-189.

Goldstein, I., Paisley, S., Wallace, R., Jorgenson, J., Cuesta, F. and Castellanos, A. 2006. Bear-cattle conflicts: a review. Ursus 17: 8-15.

Graham, C.H.,Loiselle, B.A., Velásquez-Tibatá, J. and Cuesta, F. 2011. Modelos de distribución de especies y el desafio de pronosticar distribuciones futuras. In: S. K. Herzog, R. Martínez, P. M. Jørgensen, and H. Tiessen (eds), Climate change and biodiversity in the Tropical Andes. Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), pp. 426. Säo José dos Campos, and Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE), Paris, France.

Hansen M. C., Potapov P. V., Moore R., Hancher M., Turubanova S. A., Tyukavina A., Thau D., Stehman S. V., Goetz S. J., Loveland T. R., Kommareddy A., Egorov A., Chini L., Justice C. O., and Townshend J. R. G. 2013. High-Resolution Global Maps of 21st-Century Forest Cover Change. Available at: http://www.earthenginepartners.appspot.com/science-2013-global-forest. (Accessed: 2014).

Hardner, J. 2008. The problem of financing protected areas in the Andes-Amazon region. Conference on Economics and Conservation in the Tropics: A Strategic Dialogue. Citeseer.

Hershkovitz, P. 1957. On the possible occurrence of the spectacled bear, Tremarctos ornatus (F. Cuvier, 1825), in Panama. Saugetierk. Mitt. 5: 122-123

Hoffman, D., Oetting, I., Arnillas, C.A., and Ulloa, R. 2011. Cambio climático y áreas protegidas en los Andes Tropicales. In: S. K. Herzog, R. Martínez, P. M. Jørgensen, and H. Tiessen (eds), Climate change and biodiversity in the Tropical Andes. Inter-American Institute for Global Change Research (IAI), pp. 426. Säo José dos Campos, and Scientific Committee on Problems of the Environment (SCOPE), Paris, France.

Hoffmann, A.A., and Sgrò, C.M. 2011. Climate change and evolutionary adaptation. Nature 470: 479-485.

IPCC. 2013. Summary for Policymakers. Climate Change 2013: The Physical Science Basis. Contribution of Working Group I to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. Cambridge University Press, New York.

IUCN. 2017. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2017-3. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. (Accessed: 7 December 2017).

Jampel, C. 2016. Cattle-based livelihoods, changes in the taskscape, and human–bear conflict in the Ecuadorian Andes. Geoforum 69: 84-93.

Jorgenson, J. P. and Sandovala, S. 2005. Andean bear management needs and interactions with humans in Colombia. Ursus 16: 108-116.

Josse, C., Cuesta, F., Navarro, G., Barrena, V., Cabrera, E., Chacón-Moreno, E., Ferreira, W., Peralvo, M., Saito, J. and Tovar, A. 2009. Ecosistemas de los Andes del Norte y Centro. Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Perú y Venezuela. Secretaría General de la Comunidad Andina, Programa Regional ECOBONA-Intercooperation, CONDESAN-Proyecto Páramo Andino, Programa BioAndes, EcoCiencia, NatureServe, IAvH, LTA-UNALM, ICAE-ULA, CDC-UNALM, RUMBOL SRL, Lima.

Karanth, K.U., and Chellam, R. 2009. Carnivore conservation at the crossroads. Oryx 43: 1-2.

Kattan, G., Hernandez, O. L., Goldstein, I., Rojas, V., Murillo, O., Gomez, C., Restrepo, H. and Cuesta, F. 2004. Range fragmentation in the spectacled bear Tremarctos ornatus in the northern Andes. Oryx 38: 155-163.

Lameda Camacaro, I. 2011. Etnozoología del oso andino (Tremarctos ornatus) en el noroeste de Argentina y la Cordillera Andina de Venezuela. Universidad Nacional de Salta, Salta, Argentina.

Lawler, J. J., Shafer, S.L., White, D., Kareiva, P., Maurer, E.P., Blaustein, A.R., and P. J. Bartlein, P.J. 2009. Projected climate-induced faunal change in the Western Hemisphere. Ecology 90: 588-597.

Malcolm, J. R.; Liu, C.; Neilson, R. P.; Hansen, L.; Hannah, L. 2006. Global warming and extinctions of endemic species from biodiversity hotspots. Conservation Biology 20: 538-548.

McLellan, B., and Reiner, D. 1994. A review of bear evolution. International Conference on Bear Research and Management 9: 85-96.

Monsalve Dam, D., Sánchez-Mercado, A., Yerena, E., García-Rangel, S., and Torres, D. 2010. Efectividad de las áreas protegidas para la conservación del oso andino, Tremarctos ornatus, en los Andes suramericanos. In: R. De Oliveira-Miranda, J. Lessman, A. Rodríguez-Ferraro, and F. Rojas-Suárez (eds), Ciencia y conservación de especies amenazadas en Venezuela: Conservación basada en evidencias e intervenciones estratégicas, pp. 127-136. Provita, Caracas, Venezuela.

Morales, A. 2003. Evaluación de daños causados por vertebrados silvestres en maizales de Pajan, K’Apna y Wayrapata. Universidad Mayor de San Andrés.

Myers, N., Mittermeier, R.A., Mittermeier, C.G., Fonseca, G.A.B. and Kent, J. 2000. Biodiversity hotspots for conservation priorities. Nature 403:853-858.

Mysterud, A. 2013. Ungulate migration, plant phenology, and large carnivores: The times they are a-changin’. Ecology 94: 1257-1261.

Orejuela, J. and Jorgenson, J. 1999. Status and management of the Spectacled bear in Colombia. In: C. Servheen, S. Herrero and B. Peyton (eds), Bears. Status survey and conservation action plan, pp. 168-179. IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups, Gland Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Pacifici, M., Foden, W.B., Visconti, P., Watson, J.E.M., Butchart, S.H.M., Kovacs, K.M., Scheffers, B.R., Hole, D.G., Martin, T.G., Akçakaya, H.R., Corlett, R.T., Huntley, B., Bickford, D., Carr, J.A., Hoffmann, A.A., Midgley, G.F., Pearce-Kelly, P., Pearson, R.G., Williams, S.E., Willis, S.G., Young, B. and Rondinini, R. 2015. Assessing species vulnerability to climate change. Nature Climate Change 5(March 2015): 215-225.

Paisley, S. 2001. Andean bears and people in Apolobamba, Bolivia: culture, conflict and conservation. University of Kent.

Paisley, S. and Garshelis, D. L. 2006. Activity patterns and time budgets of Andean bears (Tremarctos ornatus) in the Apolobamba Range of Bolivia. Journal of Zoology (London) 268: 25-34.

Palminteri, S., Powell, G. and L. Naranjo, L. 2001. Visión de la biodiversidad de los Andes del Norte. World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Santiago de Cali, Colombia.

Peyton, B. 1980. Ecology, distribution, and food habits of spectacled bears, Tremarctos ornatus, in Peru. Journal of Mammalogy 61: 639-652.

Peyton, B. 1984. Spectacled bear habitat use in the Historical Sanctuary of Machu Picchu, Peru. University of Montana, Missoula, USA.

Peyton, B. 1987a. Criteria for assessing habitat quality of the spectacled bear in Machu Picchu, Peru. International Conference on Bear Research and Management 7: 135-143.

Peyton, B. 1987b. Habitat components of the spectacled bear in Machu Picchu, Peru. International Conference on Bear Research and Management 7: 127-133.

Peyton, B. 1999. Spectacled bear conservation action plan. In: C. Servheen, S. Herrero and B. Peyton (eds), Bears. Status survey and conservation action plan, pp. 157-164. IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Peyton, B., Yerena, E., Rumiz, D., Jorgenson, J. and Orejuela, J. 1998. Status of wild bears and policies for their management. Ursus 10: 87-100.

Portillo-Quintero, C., Larreal, J., Gonzalez, I., Sanchez, A. and Valbuena, C. 2012. Forest Cover and deforestation patterns in the northern Andes (Lake Maracaibo Basin): a synoptic assessment using MODIS and Landsat imagery. Applied Geography 35: 152-163.

Poveda, J. 1999. Interacciones ganado - oso andino Tremarctos ornatus (F. Cuvier, 1825) en límites de cinco municipios con el Parque Nacional Natural Chingaza: Una aproximación cartográfica. Pontificia Universidad Javeriana, Bogotá, Colombia.

Richardson, A. D., Keenan, T. F., Migliavacca, M., Ryu, Y., Sonnentag, O. and Toomey, M. 2013. Climate change, phenology, and phenological control of vegetation feedbacks to the climate system. Agricultural and Forest Meteorology 169: 156-173.

Ríos-Uzeda, B., Gómez, H. and Wallace, R. 2005. Habitat preferences of the Andean Bear (Tremarctos ornatus) in the Bolivian Andes. Journal of Zoology (London) 268: 271-278.

Ríos-Uzeda, B., Gómez, H. and Wallace, R. 2006. Habitat preferences of the Andean bear (Tremarctos ornatus) in the Bolivian Andes. Journal of Zoology 268: 271-278.

Ríos-Uzeda, B., Gómez, H. and Wallace, R. 2007. A preliminary density estimate for Andean bear using camera-trapping methods. Ursus 18: 124-128.

Rios-Uzeda, B., Gomez, H. and Wallace, R. B. 2007. First density estimation of spectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatos) using camera trapping methodologies. Ursus 18: 124-128.

Ríos-Uzeda, B., Villalpando, G., Palabral, O. and Álvarez, O. 2009. Dieta de oso andino en la región alta de Apolobamba y Madidi en el norte de La Paz, Bolivia. Ecología en Bolivia 44: 50-55.

Ripple, W. J., J. A. Estes, R. L. Beschta, C. C. Wilmers, E. G. Ritchie, M. Hebblewhite, J. Berger, B. Elmhagen, M. Letnic, M. P. Nelson, O. J. Schmitz, D. W. Smith, A. D. Wallach, and A. J. Wirsing. 2014. Status and ecological effects of the world’s largest carnivores. Science 343(6167).

Rivadeneria-Canedo, C. 2008. Estudio del oso andino (Tremarctos ornatus) como dispersor legítimo de semillas y elementos de su dieta en la región de Apolobamba-Bolivia. Ecología en Bolivia 43: 29-39.

Rodríguez, D., Cuesta, F., Goldstein, I., Bracho, A. E., Naranjo, L. G. and Hernandez, O. L. 2003. Ecoregional strategy for the conservation of the spectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatus) in the northern Andes. WWF Colombia, Fundación Wii, EcoCiencia, Wildlife Conservation Society, and Red Tremarctos.

Rodríguez-Rodríguez, E., and Cadena, A. 1991. Evaluación y uso del hábitat natural del oso andino Tremarctos ornatus (F. Cuveir, 1825) y un diagnóstico del estado actual de la subpoblación del Parque Nacional Natural de Las Orquídeas, Antioquia-Colombia. Bogotá, Colombia, Facultad de Ciencias, Departamento de Biología, Universidad Nacional de Colombia, Bogotá, Colombia.

Rosenthal, M. 1988. Spectacled bears - An overview of management practices. In: M. Rosenthal (ed.), Proceedings of the First International Symposium on the Spectacled bear, pp. 287-300. Lincoln Park Zoo, Chicago, Chicago.

Ruiz Garcia, M. 2003. Molecular population genetic analysis of the spectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatus) in the northern Andean area. Hereditas 138: 81-93.

Rumiz, D. I. and Salazar, J. 1999. Status and management of the Spectacled bear in Bolivia. In: C. Servheen, S. Herrero, and B. Peyton (eds), Bears. Status survey and conservation action plan, pp. 164-168. IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Sacco, T. and Van Valkenburgh, B. 2004. Ecomorphological indicators of feeding behaviour in the bears (Carnivora: Ursidae). Journal of Zoology (London) 263: 41-54.

Salesa, M., Siliceo, G., Antón, M., Abella, J., Montoya, P., and Morales, J. 2006. Anatomy of the “false thumb” of Tremarctos ornatus (Carnivora, Ursidae, Tremarctinae): Phylogenetic and functional implications. Estudios Geológicos 62: 389–394.

Sánchez-Mercado, A. 2008. Efecto de la estructura espacial en la persistencia de poblaciones fragmentadas: El oso andino (Tremarctos ornatus) en Venezuela como caso de estudio. Centro de Estudios Avanzados, Instituto Venezolano de Investigaciones Científicas, Caracas, Venezuela.

Sánchez-Mercado, A., Ferrer-Paris, J.R., García-Rangel, S., Yerena, E., Robertson, B.A., and Rodríguez-Clark, K.M. 2014. Combining threat and occurrence models to predict potential ecological traps for Andean bears in the Cordillera de Mérida, Venezuela. Animal Conservation.

Sánchez-Mercado, A., Ferrer-Paris, J.R., Yerena, E., García-Rangel, S. and Rodríguez-Clark, K.M. 2008. Factors affecting poaching risk to Vulnerable Andean bears Tremarctos ornatus in the Cordillera de Mérida, Venezuela: space, parks and people. Oryx 42: 437–447.

Sánchez-Mercado, A., Yerena, E., Monsalve Dam, D., García-Rangel, S. and Torres, D. 2010. Efectividad de las iniciativas de educación ambiental para la conservación del oso andino (Tremarctos ornatus) en la cordillera andina.In: R. De Oliveira-Miranda, J. Lessman, A. Rodríguez-Ferraro, and F. Rojas-Suárez (eds), pp. 137–146. Ciencia y conservación de especies amenazadas en Venezuela: Conservación basada en evidencias e intervenciones estratégicas, Provita, Caracas, Venezuela.

Saporiti, E. 1949. Contribución al conocimiento de la biología del oso de lentes. Anales de la Sociedad Científica Argentina 147: 3-12.

Sheridan, J.A., and Bickford, D. 2011. Shrinking body size as an ecological response to climate change. Nature Climate Change 1: 401–406.

Spady, T., Lindburg, D., and Durrant, B. 2007. Evolution of reproductive seasonality in bears. Mammal Review 37: 21–53.

Suarez, L. 1985. Hábitos alimentarios y distribución estacional del oso de anteojos Tremarctos ornatus, en el Páramo Suroriental del Volcan Antisana, Ecuador. Thesis, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Ecuador.

Suarez, L. 1988. Seasonal distribution and food habits of the spectacled bears Tremarctos ornatus in the highlands of Ecuador. Studies on Neotropical Fauna and Environment 23: 133-136.

Suarez, L. 1999. Status and management of the Spectacled bear in Ecuador. In: C. Servheen, S. Herrero and B. Peyton (eds), Bears. Status survey and conservation action plan, pp. 179-182. IUCN/SSC Bear and Polar Bear Specialist Groups, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK.

Surkin, J., Flores, M., Ledezma, J.C., Mariaca, M.R., Meneses, E., Pardo, N., Pastor, C., Paz, C. and Wong, G. 2010. Integrating protected areas and landscapes: Lessons from the Vilcabamba-Amboró conservation corridor (Bolivia-Perú). In: G. L. Worboys, W. Francis, and M. Lockwood (eds), Connectivity Conservation Management: A Global Guide, pp. 199–211. Earthscan, London, UK.

Svenning, J.C., and Condit, R. 2008. Ecology. Biodiversity in a warmer world. Science 322: 206-207.

Tewksbury, J.J., Huey, R.B. and Deutsch, C.A. 2008. Putting the heat on tropical animals. Science 230: 1296 -1297.

Torres, D. 2008. Caracterización de conflictos socio-espaciales entre la ganadería y los grandes mamíferos en el sector cuenca del río Nuestra Señora. Parque Nacional Sierra Nevada, Venezuela. Universidad de Los Andes, Mérida, Venezuela.

Tovar C, Arnillas C.A., Cuesta F., and Buytaert, W. 2013. Diverging Responses of Tropical Andean Biomes under Future Climate Conditions. PloS ONE 8(5).

Troya, V., Cuesta, F. and Peralvo, M. 2004. Food habits of Andean bears in the Oyacachi River Basin, Ecuador. Ursus 15: 57-60.

Urrutia R, and Vuille, M. 2009. Climate change projections for the tropical Andes using a regional climate model: Temperature and precipitation simulations for the end of the 21st century. Journal of Geophysical Research 14(D2).

Vargas, R. and Azurduy, C. 2006. Nuevos registros de distribución del oso Andino (Tremarctos ornatus) en el departamento de Tarija, el registro más austral en Bolivia. Mastozoología Neotropical 13(1): 137-142.

Velásquez-Tibatá, J., Salaman, P. and Graham, C.H. 2012. Effects of climate change on species distribution, community structure, and conservation of birds in protected areas in Colombia. Regional Environmental Change 13(2): 235-248.

Velez-Liendo, X. 2010. Conservation of Andean bears (Tremarctos ornatus) in a fragmented landscape – habitat models, potential distribution and patch connectivity. University of Antwerp, Antwerp, Belgium.

Velez–Liendo, X., Adriaensen, F. and Matthysen, E. 2014. Landscape assessment of habitat suitability and connectivity for Andean bears in the Bolivian Tropical Andes. Ursus 25(2): 172-187.

Velez-Liendo, X., and Paisley, S. 2010. Distribución, ecología y conservación de los mamíferos grandes y medianos de Bolivia. Ursidae, pp. 519-534. Centro de Ecología Difusión Simón I, Patiño, Santa Cruz de la Sierra, Bolivia.

Velez-Liendo, X., Ríos-Uzeda, B. and V. Albarracin, V. 2009. Ursidae. In: L. Aguirre, R. Aguayo, J. Balderrama, C. Cortéz, T. Tarifa, and P. Van Damme (eds), Libro Rojo de la Fauna Silvestre de Vertebrados de Bolivia. Ministerio de Desarrollo Rural, pp. 531-533. Agropecuario y Medio Ambiente, La Paz, Bolivia.

Velez, X. 1999. Caracterización y uso de hábitat por el oso Andino en la cuenca alta del Río San Jacinto, Cochabamba. Thesis, Universidad de San Simón.

Verboom, J., Foppen, R., Chardon, P., Opdam, P. and Luttikhuizen, P. 2001. Introducing the key patch approach for habitat networks with persistent populations: an example for marshland birds. Biological Conservation 100: 89-101.

Vina, A., and Cavelier, J. 1999. Deforestation rates (1938–1988) of tropical lowland forests on the Andean foothills of Colombia. Biotropica 31: 31-36.

Viteri, M.P. 2007. Conservation genetics of Andean bears (Tremarctos ornatus) in Northeastern Ecuador: Molecular tools, genetic diversity and population size. University of Idaho, Moscow, Idaho, USA.

Viteri, M. P., and Waits, L.P. 2009. Identifying polymorphic microsatellite loci for Andean bear research. Ursus 20: 102-108.

Yerena, E. 1994. Corredores ecológicos en los Andes de Venezuela. Fundación Polar, Caracas, Venezuela.

Yerena, E. 1998. Protected areas for the Andean bear in South America. Ursus 10: 101-106.

Yerena, E., and García-Rangel, S. 2010. The implementation of an interconnected system of protected areas in the Venezuelan Andes. In: G. L. Worboys, W. Francis, and M. Lockwood (eds), Connectivity Conservation Management: A Global Guide, pp. 233-244. Earthscan, London.

Yerena, E., Monsalve Dam, D., Torres, D., Sánchez, A., García-Rangel, S., Bracho, A., Martínez, Z. and Gómez, I. 2007. Plan de Acción para la Conservación del Oso Andino (Tremarctos ornatus) en Venezuela (2006-2016). Fundación AndígenA, FUDENA, Universidad Simón Bolívar, Mérida, Venezuela, Mérida, Venezuela.

Yerena, E., Padron, J., Vera, R., Martinez, Z. and Bigio, D. 2003. Building consensus on biological corridors in the Venezuela Andes. Mountain Research and Development 23: 215-218.

Young, K and Leon, B. 1999. Peru’s humid eastern montane forests: an overview of their physical settings, biological diversity, human use, and conservation needs. Center for research on the cultural and biological diversity of Andean rainforests (DIVA), Denmark.

Young, K. and León, B. 1999. Peru´s humid Eastern montane forests: An overview of their physical settings, biological diversity, human use and settlement, and conservation needs. Technical Report. DIVA.

Young, K. R. 1998. Deforestation in landscapes with humid forests in the Central Andes. Patterns and processes. In: K. S. Zimmerer and K. R. Young (eds), Nature’s Geography: New Lessons for Conservation in Developing Countries, pp. 75-99. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison, USA, Madison, USA.

Zukowski, B. and Ormsby, A. 2016. Andean bear livestock depredation and community perceptions in northern Ecuador. Human Dimensions of Wildlife 21: 111-126.


Citation: Velez-Liendo, X. & García-Rangel, S. 2017. Tremarctos ornatus. In: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2017: e.T22066A45034047. . Downloaded on 11 December 2017.
Disclaimer: To make use of this information, please check the <Terms of Use>.
Feedback: If you see any errors or have any questions or suggestions on what is shown on this page, please provide us with feedback so that we can correct or extend the information provided