ArticlePDF Available

American Black Bears Depredate American Alligator Nests in South Florida

Authors:

Abstract and Figures

Ursus americanus (American Black Bear) and Alligator mississippiensis (American Alligator) are sympatric in areas of Florida. During summer, alligators build nest mounds for eggs on freshwater shores, shallow marshes, and tree islands. Biologists have speculated that bears might prey upon alligator nests because of their opportunistic and generalist diet, though such predation in Florida has not been documented in peer-reviewed literature. Herein, we report 3 photographed events of American Black Bear predation on American Alligator nests in Everglades National Park, Big Cypress National Preserve, and Dinner Island Ranch Wildlife Management Area, FL. During each event, bears dug into alligator nests and consumed egg contents. The predation events varied in duration from 36minutes to nearly 5 hours. During 1 event, a female bear consumed alligator eggs alongside 2 cubs of the year. Future research might explore the extent and effect of nest predation on American Alligator populations and the benefits to American Black Bears.
Content may be subject to copyright.
American Black Bears Depredate American Alligator
Nests in South Florida
Authors: Doran-Myers, Darcy, Parry, Mark, McHugh, Sean M.,
McCollister, Matthew, Scheick, Brian K., et al.
Source: Southeastern Naturalist, 22(3)
Published By: Eagle Hill Institute
URL: https://doi.org/10.1656/058.022.0308
BioOne Complete (complete.BioOne.org) is a full-text database of 200 subscribed and open-access titles
in the biological, ecological, and environmental sciences published by nonprofit societies, associations,
museums, institutions, and presses.
Your use of this PDF, the BioOne Complete website, and all posted and associated content indicates your
acceptance of BioOne’s Terms of Use, available at www.bioone.org/terms-of-use.
Usage of BioOne Complete content is strictly limited to personal, educational, and non - commercial use.
Commercial inquiries or rights and permissions requests should be directed to the individual publisher as
copyright holder.
BioOne sees sustainable scholarly publishing as an inherently collaborative enterprise connecting authors, nonprofit
publishers, academic institutions, research libraries, and research funders in the common goal of maximizing access to
critical research.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
N58
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
American Black Bears Depredate American Alligator Nests in
South Florida
Darcy Doran-Myers1,*, Mark Parry2, Sean M. McHugh3, Matthew McCollister4,
Brian K. Scheick5, and Shelby Shiver5
Abstract - Ursus americanus (American Black Bear) and Alligator mississippiensis (American Al-
ligator) are sympatric in areas of Florida. During summer, alligators build nest mounds for eggs on
freshwater shores, shallow marshes, and tree islands. Biologists have speculated that bears might prey
upon alligator nests because of their opportunistic and generalist diet, though such predation in Florida
has not been documented in peer-reviewed literature. Herein, we report 3 photographed events of
American Black Bear predation on American Alligator nests in Everglades National Park, Big Cypress
National Preserve, and Dinner Island Ranch Wildlife Management Area, FL. During each event, bears
dug into alligator nests and consumed egg contents. The predation events varied in duration from 36
minutes to nearly 5 hours. During 1 event, a female bear consumed alligator eggs alongside 2 cubs of
the year. Future research might explore the extent and effect of nest predation on American Alligator
populations and the benets to American Black Bears.
Introduction. Historical ranges of Ursus americanus Pallas (American Black Bear,
hereinafter Bear) and Alligator mississippiensis (Daudin) (American Alligator, hereinafter
Alligator) covered much of the southeastern US (Hall 1981, Somma 2023). In Florida, both
species experienced drastic population declines during the 19th and 20th centuries (Dutton
et al. 2002, FWC 2019, Woodward and Moore 1995), reducing interspecic range overlap
and opportunities for interaction. By 1940, estimates of Bear abundance in the state were
reduced 97% from pre-European settlement levels (FWC 2019). At one point, Bears were
thought to occur in only 17% of Florida (GFC 1993). Abundance of Alligators was simi-
larly reduced, but they continued to range throughout the state (Dutton et al. 2002, USFWS
1975). Both species have since undergone population recoveries from the late-20th century
through present day (FWC 2019, Woodward and Elsey 2019, Woodward and Moore 1995).
Currently, Bears and Alligators co-occur in ~50% of the state (Scheick et al. 2023, Wood-
ward and Elsey 2019). During summer, female Alligators construct elevated nest mounds
in which they deposit eggs beneath a layer of vegetative debris (Woodward et al. 1989),
potentially providing an opportunity for predators like Bears to raid nests. Herein, we report
evidence of a predatory relationship between these 2 large-bodied, native Floridian species.
Prior studies concerning the diet of Bears in Florida used scat and stomach-content anal-
yses. Combined, these studies amount to 2711 Bear scats and 89 stomach-content samples
collected over 6 decades across the state (Dobey et al. 2005, Harlow 1961, Maehr 1996,
Maehr and Brady 1984, Maehr and Defazio 1985, Murphy et al. 2017, Roof 1997, Stratman
and Pelton 1999). Among these data was 1 report of Alligator egg consumption, noted by
Maehr and Defazio (1985); unfortunately, the location and other details were not included
with the record. Dobey et al. (2005) identied trace amounts of reptile eggs in Bear scat,
1Department of Wildlife Ecology and Conservation, University of Florida, Gainesville, FL 32611.
2South Florida Natural Resource Center, National Park Service, Homestead, FL 33034. 3Habitat and
Species Conservation, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Immokalee, FL 34142.
4National Park Service, Big Cypress National Preserve, Ochopee, FL 34141. 5Fish and Wildlife Re-
search Institute, Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, Gainesville, FL 32601. *Cor-
responding author - darcydoranmyers@gmail.com.
Manuscript Editor: David Steen
SOUTHEASTERN NATURALIST NOTES
2023 22(3):N58–N66
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
N59
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
but the authors did not identify the reptilian species. Importantly, stomach and scat content
studies cannot differentiate between predation and scavenging of Alligator nests. Bears can
scavenge nests already depredated by other wildlife such as Procyon lotor (L.) (Raccoon) or
Sus scrofa L. (Wild Hog). To date, there are no published reports of predation on Alligator
eggs by Bears in Florida.
Reports of Bears depredating Alligator eggs elsewhere are rare. Reese (1915:20) report-
ed that “... according to the statement of reliable hunters, Bears are very persistent searchers
for and eaters of Alligator eggs”, but no other details were provided. In Okefenokee Swamp
National Wildlife Refuge, GA (a historical stronghold for Bears and Alligators), biologists
monitoring Alligator nests reported Bear predation of nests on 3 occasions. Metzen (1977)
suspected Bear predation at 93% (88 of 95) of depredated nests but was unable to conrm
the predator species because of inherent difculties in eld identication. Using camera
traps, Hunt (1986) and Hunt and Ogden (1991) reported that 56% (9 of 16) and 73% (11
of 15) of depredated Alligator nests, respectively, were depredated by Bears. To the best of
our knowledge, these 2 reports are the only published, evidenced reports of Alligator nest
predation by Bears anywhere they occur in sympatry.
We report 3 observations of Bear predation on Alligator nests in southern Florida.
They represent the rst published records of such predation in Florida, building upon prior
records in Georgia (Hunt 1986, Hunt and Ogden 1991). Our observations provide new evi-
dence of a predatory relationship between 2 native Floridian species that have experienced
historical population declines and subsequent recovery.
Methods and observations. On 25 July 2018, National Park Service (NPS) biologist M.
Parry deployed a camera trap (Reconyx® Ultrare; Holmen, WI) in Everglades National
Park (NP), FL (Fig. 1), at an active Alligator nest containing 40 fertile eggs (counted pre-
predation). The nest was in close proximity to a tree island in a ooded area with an average
water depth of 19 cm (mean value of 4 depth measurements taken at cardinal directions
around nest). The nest was constructed primarily from Typha spp. (cattails) and Cladium
jamaicense Crantz (Sawgrass), and was partially shaded by Chrysobalanas icaco L. (Co-
coplum). Parry set the camera to capture 1 photo and one 30-second video upon motion
trigger with no delay between captures. On 1 August at 1412 h, an unmarked male Bear
was recorded on the camera (Fig. 2; also see Supplemental File 1, available online at http://
www.eaglehill.us/SENAonline/suppl-les/s22-3-S2849-Doran-Myers-s1, and for BioOne
subscribers, at https://www.doi.org/10.1656/S2849.s1). The Bear exhibited poor body con-
dition, with outlines of ribs, vertebrae, and pelvic bones visible under the skin and healed
injuries to the ears and snout. He dug into the nest with his front paws, then opened the rst
egg with his teeth at 1414 h. Over the course of 4 hours and 52 minutes spent at the nest,
the Bear consumed at least 38 eggs. We were unable to count those eggs the Bear appeared
to consume beyond the view of the camera. The Bear consumed at least 25 eggs between
1414 h and 1425 h. From 1425 h to 1847 h (4 hours, 22 minutes), the Bear rested on top of
the nest, alternating between standing, sitting, lying, sleeping, grooming, and snifng the
air. He did not leave the nest for any notable duration of time during this period. The Bear
again began digging at 1848 h and had consumed at least 13 additional eggs by 1900 h.
While searching the nest, he frequently pushed dirt away with his snout and occasionally
used his front claws to dig. He picked up each egg with his front teeth and lips then moved
the egg to his back molars to break the eggshell. Occasionally eggshells visibly dropped
from his mouth, but in most cases it was not clear if he consumed the shells along with the
egg contents. At 1904 h, he left the view of the camera and did not return to the site before
the camera was pulled on 16 August 2018, at which time biologists noted that no intact eggs
remained within the nest.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
N60
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
On 6 July 2022, NPS staff B. Mason and D. Lewis observed a Bear at the site of a
known Alligator nest in Big Cypress National Preserve, FL (Fig. 1). The nest was located
on the edge of a raised road ~1 m from their vehicle. The Bear had been ear-tagged as part
of research conducted by the Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC).
We identied the Bear from ear tags as 3-year-old male M165, captured within the Preserve
15 June 2022. FWC staff photographed the Bear and nest at 0828 h (Fig. 3). In the photo,
eggs were uncovered but intact. The Bear then ed into the vegetation lining the road. The
staff returned and took another photo of the nest at 0900 h in which eggshells from at least
3 newly broken eggs are visible. Several additional eggs were uncovered but intact. The
Bear was not photographed at that time but was observed digging into the nest when staff
approached. Staff observed the Bear at or near the nest every 15 minutes until ~1030 h, but
did not take more photos of the Bear or the nest. The next afternoon (7 July), staff deployed
a camera trap (Reconyx® PC900 Professional) at the Alligator nest. A female Bear (F167;
Figure 1. Map of 3 point locations (pink dots) where we observed Ursus americanus (American Black
Bear) predation on Alligator mississippiensis (American Alligator) nests within 3 South Florida natu-
ral areas (indicated by shades of green): Big Cypress National Preserve (NP), Dinner Island Ranch
Wildlife Management Area (WMA), and Everglades National Park (NP). The map extent is shown in
the inset map of Florida. Water bodies indicated in blue.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
N61
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
Figure 3. An uncovered Alligator mississippiensis (American Alligator) nest (white arrow; base of
palm tree) and an Ursus americanus (American Black Bear; red arrow; partially hidden by vegeta-
tion to the right of palm tree) photographed just before the bear depredated the nest in Big Cypress
National Preserve, FL. Half an hour later, the same nest was photographed with several broken eggs.
Photograph © NPS staff B. Mason and D. Lewis.
Figure 2. An Ursus americanus (American Black Bear) in Everglades National Park, FL, pulls an
Alligator mississippiensis (American Alligator) egg from a nest. The bear consumed at least 38 eggs
over nearly 5 hours, causing total clutch loss.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
N62
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
12–14 years old, GPS-collared and ear tagged by FWC on 19 June 2022) visited the site on
9 July at 1608 h, M165 returned on 9 July at 2050 h, and an unmarked male Bear visited
the site on 10 July at 2211 h. We did not observe egg consumption during any of these Bear
visits. Staff removed the camera on 14 July 2022, at which time biologists noted that no
intact eggs remained.
On 20 July 2022, FWC biologist S.M. McHugh deployed a camera trap (Stealth Cam®
DS4K-Ultimate; Irving, TX) at an active Alligator nest within Dinner Island Ranch Wildlife
Management Area (WMA), FL (Fig. 1). The camera was set to record a 30-second video upon
motion trigger with a 2-second delay between videos. On 9 August at 1627 h, the nesting Al-
ligator left the view of the camera. On 11 August at 0415 h, a Lynx rufus (Schreber) (Bobcat)
investigated the nest but did not disturb it. On 11 August at 1921 h, the camera recorded an
unmarked adult female Bear and 2 cubs of the year (~6 months old) at the site (Fig. 4; also
see Supplemental File 2, available online http://www.eaglehill.us/SENAonline/suppl-les/
s22-3-S2849-Doran-Myers-s2, and for BioOne subscribers, at https://www.doi.org/10.1656/
S2849.s2). All 3 Bears appeared to be in good condition, other than the adult female missing
her left eye. Upon arriving at the nest, the adult female dug into the top of the nest with her
front paws for ~2 minutes and uncovered the rst egg at 1924 h. By 1925 h, both cubs were
consuming eggs alongside the adult female. Together, the adult and 2 cubs consumed at least
17 eggs over the 36 minutes the camera recorded them. However, we were unable to count
all eggs because the Bears appeared to consume some eggs hidden behind obstructions or
with their backs turned to the camera. While searching the nest, the adult female frequently
dug into nest material and rolled eggs toward herself with her front paws. She cracked the
eggs with her front teeth and canines and then licked the egg contents from the ground. She
sometimes consumed the eggshells, other times discarding them. The cubs frequently licked
egg contents from those eggs that the adult female had already broken open. However, in 1
video a cub independently broke and consumed one egg. At 1949 h, the cubs began investi-
gating and moving the camera trap such that any egg consumption in subsequent videos was
Figure 4. A female Ursus americanus (American Black Bear) and 2 cubs of the year consume an egg
from an Alligator mississippiensis (American Alligator) nest in Dinner Island Ranch Wildlife Manage-
ment Area, FL. The bears consumed at least 17 eggs from this nest in 36 minutes.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
N63
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
unclear. The camera last recorded the Bears at 1957 h. All 3 Bears returned the next morning,
12 August at 0517 h, and again investigated the nest and camera. Because the Bears moved the
camera the day before, it is unclear from the videos if the Bears consumed more eggs before
leaving the site at 0525 h (after 8 minutes at the nest). On 13 August at 0428 h, an adult Alliga-
tor, possibly the nesting mother, approached but did not stop at the nest or exhibit any obvious
reaction to the egg loss. The Bears did not return before the camera was pulled on 18 August,
and biologists did not inspect the nest for intact eggs.
Discussion. We do not believe that Bear predation of Alligator nests is a new phe-
nomenon (Hunt 1986, Hunt and Ogden 1991, Reese 1915), but that it was likely very rare
in Florida for many decades because of population declines in both species. The greater
abundances of both species (FWC 2019, Woodward and Elsey 2019, Woodward and Moore
1995) and the overlap in range (Scheick et al. 2023, Woodward and Elsey 2019) may have
increased the frequency of interspecic interactions.
Alligators typically lay between 30 and 50 eggs per nest (Woodward and Elsey 2019).
Ugarte (2006) reported average clutch size in Everglades NP from 1985 to 2005 as 26 eggs.
During our Everglades NP observation, the Bear consumed at least 38 of the 40 previously
counted eggs, suggesting near-total or total clutch loss. Remaining eggs in a partially de-
stroyed nest commonly succumb to rot introduced by neighboring broken eggs, sunlight
exposure, or lethal temperatures (Everglades NP, Homestead, FL, unpubl. data). During this
event, NPS biologists conducted another egg count 2 weeks post-predation and found zero
intact eggs, conrming total clutch loss. Monitoring of nests should continue to provide
insight on the number of remaining eggs, if any, that successfully hatch after a Bear depre-
dates an Alligator nest.
FWC predicts Bear abundance to continue increasing in much of Florida (FWC 2019),
suggesting that the loss of Alligator eggs to predation might increase in areas of species range
overlap. Any changes in nest survival, in combination with additional threats such as climate
change (Ryberg and Lawing 2018), should be included in Alligator demographic models.
For example, in Everglades NP, long-term annual nesting studies indicate recent increases in
nest-predation events occurring alongside increases in Bear observations (Dalrymple 2001,
Scheick et al. 2023, Ugarte 2006). Kushlan and Jacobsen (1990) reported that between 1975
and 2005, 6.6% of Alligator eggs (not clutches) were depredated annually in Everglades NP,
and nesting data in the same region from 1985 to 2017 indicates an annual mean of 2% of
clutches lost due to predation, with the greatest value being 10% in 1994 (Dalrymple 2001;
Everglades NP, Homestead, FL, unpubl. data; Ugarte 2006 ). Predation by Bears was rst sus-
pected in 2018 and 2019 based on eld observations, including tracks and scat. During these
years, surveyors observed nest predation in 3% (n = 3) and 7% (n = 6) of nests, respectively.
However, in 2021 and 2022, 17% (n = 22) and 22% (n = 19), respectively, of nests containing
eggs were depredated, exceeding ooding as the primary cause of nest failure for the rst time
since records were kept (Everglades NP, Homestead, FL, unpubl. data). Managers suspected
Bears were the predator in the vast majority of these instances (Everglades NP, Homestead,
FL, unpubl. data). For those cases in which Bears were suspected, no viable eggs were left
within the nest, equating to total clutch loss (Everglades NP, Homestead, FL, unpubl. data).
Further monitoring to conclusively determine the predator species might conrm that Bears
are one of the main causes of increased clutch loss.
Although parental defense occurs in most crocodilian species including Alligators
(Kushlan and Kushlan 1980, Somaweera et al. 2013), we did not observe parental defense
during any of the predation events. In the Dinner Island Ranch WMA observations described
above, biologists reported that during each visit the adult female Alligator was present near
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
N64
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
the nest but did not display defensive or aggressive behaviors. In the Everglades NP ob-
servation reported here, the Bear seemed to be relaxed enough to sleep on top of the nest
mid-predation. Parental defense improves nest success for crocodilians but sometimes does
not occur in areas with few or no nest predators (e.g., Australia; Somaweera et al. 2013).
Because Bears were likely a rare nest predator in the state for much of the 20th century,
perhaps enough time has passed such that adaptive behaviors to defend nests from Bears
have been lost. Alternatively, the lack of parental defense that we observed might simply be
due to chance, especially considering our small sample size (n = 3 observations). Continued
observations of Alligator nests would ensure biologists have a better understanding of the
behavioral adaptations of nesting Alligators in response to predation risk.
The opportunistic, generalist diet of Bears indicates that Bears likely prey upon similar
ground nests when presented with the opportunity and/or after developing a search image
for nests. The threatened Crocodylus acutus (Cuvier) (American Crocodile) coexists with
Alligators in South Florida and, although nesting ecology differs between the species (Maz-
zotti et al. 2022), could also be vulnerable to nest predation as Bear range expands within
the region (Scheick et al. 2023). In South Florida, one historical account described observ-
ing a Bear “dig the eggs out of a [American] crocodile nest and eat them” (Moore 1953:68).
The invasive Python molurus bivittatus Kuhl (Burmese Python) creates ground nests con-
taining several dozen eggs of large size, similar to Alligator nests. As Bear and Burmese
Python ranges expand and overlap in Florida (Guzy et al. 2023, Scheick et al. 2023), Bears
might depredate python nests. Bears have additionally been documented depredating bird
(Bjorndal 2020, Danielson et al. 1997, Dyson et al. 2020) and turtle (Lovich et al. 2014)
ground nests.
Bears nutritionally benet from consuming Alligator eggs. The underweight male in
Everglades NP and the lactating female in Dinner Island Ranch WMA are among those indi-
viduals that stand to benet the most from consuming this seasonally available, high-energy
resource. Bears’ ability to exploit new and varied foods allows them to live in diverse
habitats from arctic Canada to central Mexico (Scheick and McCown 2014). In a quickly
changing Florida landscape full of non-native foods like Schinus terebinthifolius Raddi
(Brazilian Peppertree) and anthropogenic food resources such as garbage, Alligator eggs
represent a nutritious, native food resource that will not contribute to persistent ecological
issues such as food conditioning, human–Bear conict, or seed dispersal of invasive plants.
Herein we report the rst published evidence that Bear predation on Alligator nests is
occurring in Florida, adding to the Georgia-based literature reported by Hunt and Ogden
(1991) and Hunt (1986). We also demonstrate that camera traps are a powerful tool in inves-
tigating this interspecic relationship. We suggest continued monitoring of Alligator nests
and similar egg-laying species’ nests to identify nest predators, and we suggest research ex-
ploring the costs and benets of this relationship for each species. As abundances and ranges
of large-bodied predators in Florida recover after decades of reduction, we predict to see a
return of relationships that existed before European colonization and predator persecution.
Acknowledgments. We thank Biological Technician D. Harrawood at Dinner Island Ranch WMA
who originally found the nest and reported it to area biologists. We also thank NPS staff B. Mason
and D. Lewis for sharing their photos in Big Cypress National Preserve. D. Steen and 2 anonymous
reviewers provided helpful reviews that improved this note.
Literature Cited
Bjorndale, K.A. 2020. Signicance of anecdotes for historical perspective: Black Bear predation on
sea turtle eggs. Endangered Species Research 43:353–357.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
N65
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
Dalrymple, G.H. 2001. American Alligator nesting and reproductive success in Everglades National
Park: An analysis of the systematic reconnaissance ight data (SRF) from 1985–1998. Everglades
National Park, Homestead, FL. 42 pp.
Danielson, W.R., R.M. DeGraaf, and T.K. Fuller. 1997. Rural and suburban forest edges: Effect on
egg predators and nest-predation rates. Landscape and Urban Planning 3:25–36.
Dobey, S., D.V. Masters, B.K. Scheick, J.D. Clark, M.R. Pelton, and M.E. Sunquist. 2005. Ecology
of Florida Black Bears in the Okefenokee Osceola ecosystem. Wildlife Monographs 158:1–41.
Dutton, H.J., A.M. Brunell, D.A. Carbonneau, L.J. Hord, S.G. Stiegler, C.H. Visscher, J.H. White,
and A.R. Woodward. 2002. Florida’s alligator management program: An update 1987 to 2001.
Pp. 23–30, In Crocodiles: Proceedings of the 16th Meeting of the Crocodile Specialist Group at
the Species Survival Commission of the IUCN, Gainesville, Florida, October 2002. International
Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland, Switzerland. 419 pp.
Dyson, M.E., S.M. Slattery, and B.C. Fedy. 2020. Nest predators of ducks in the boreal forest. Wildlife
Society Bulletin 44(3):631–639.
Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission (FWC). 2019. Florida Black Bear management
plan. Tallahassee, FL. 190 pp.
Florida Game and Freshwater Fish Commission (GFC). 1993. Management of the Black Bear in
Florida: A staff report to the Commissioners. Tallahassee, FL. 63 pp.
Guzy, J.C., B.G. Falk, B.J. Smith, J.D. Willson, R.N. Reed, N.G. Aumen, M.L. Avery, I.A. Bartoszek,
et al. 2023. Burmese Pythons in Florida: A synthesis of biology, impacts, and management tools.
NeoBiota 80:1–119.
Hall, E.R. 1981. The Mammals of North America. 2nd Edition. John Wiley and Sons, New York, NY.
1181 pp.
Harlow, R.F. 1961. Characteristics and status of Florida Black Bear. Transactions of the North Ameri-
can Wildlife and Natural Resources Conference 26:481–495.
Hunt, R.H. 1986. Predation of alligator nests in Okefenokee Swamp National Wildlife Refuge, Geor-
gia, USA. Pp. 74–78, In of Crocodiles 8th Meeting 1986. Proceedings of the 8th Working Meeting
of the Crocodile Specialist Group, International Union for the Conservation of Nature, Gland,
Switzerland. 192 pp.
Hunt, R.H., and J.J. Ogden. 1991. Selected aspects of the nesting ecology of American Alligators in
the Okefenokee Swamp. Journal of Herpetology 25(4):448–453.
Kushlan, J.A., and T. Jacobsen. 1990. Environmental variability and reproductive success of Ever-
glades alligators. Journal of Herpetology 24(2):176–184.
Kushlan J.A., and M.S. Kushlan. 1980. Function of nest attendance in the American Alligator. Her-
petologica 36(1):27–32.
Lovich, J.E., D. Delaney, J. Briggs, M. Agha, M. Austin, and J. Reese. 2014. Black Bears (Ursus
americanus) as a novel potential predator of Agassiz’s Desert Tortoises (Gopherus agassizii) at a
California wind-energy facility. Bulletin, Southern California Academy of Sciences 113(1):34–41.
Maehr, D.S. 1996. Comparative ecology of Bobcat, Black Bear, and Florida Panther in South Florida.
Bulletin of the Florida Museum of Natural History 40:1–176
Maehr, D.S., and J.R. Brady. 1984. Food habits of Florida Black Bears. Journal of Wildlife Manage-
ment 48(1):230–235.
Maehr, D.S., and J.T. Defazio. 1985. Foods of Black Bears in Florida. Florida Field Naturalist
13:8–12.
Mazzotti, F.J., S.A. Balaguera-Reina, L.A. Brandt, V. Briggs-González, M. Cherkiss, S. Farris, and A.
Godahewa. 2022. Natural and anthropogenic factors inuencing nesting ecology of the American
Crocodile in Florida. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 10:904576.
Metzen, W.D. 1977. Nesting ecology of alligators on the Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge. Pp.
29–32, In Proceedings of the Annual Conference of the Southeastern Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies. https://seafwa.org.
Moore, J.C. 1953. A mound on a key in Florida Bay. Everglades Natural History Journal 1(2):66-75.
Murphy, S.M., W.A. Ulrey, J.M. Guthrie, D.S. Maehr, W.G. Abrahamson, S.C. Maehr, and J.J. Cox.
2017. Food habits of a small Florida Black Bear population in an endangered ecosystem. Ursus
28(1):92–104.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
Southeastern Naturalist Notes
2023 Vol. 22, No. 3
N66
D. Doran-Myers, M. Parry, S.M. McHugh, M. McCollister, B.K. Scheick, and S. Shiver
Reese, A.M. 1915. The Alligator and Its Allies. G.P. Putnam’s Sons, The Knickerbocker Press, New
York, NY. 358 pp.
Roof, J.C. 1997. Black Bear food habits in the Lower Wekiva River Basin of Central Florida. Florida
Field Naturalist 25(3):92–97.
Ryberg, W.A., and A.M. Lawing. 2018. Genetic consequences and management implications of cli-
mate change for the American Alligator (Alligator mississippiensis). Pp. 123–153, In S.E. Henke
and C.B. Eversole (Eds.). American Alligators: Habitats, Behaviors, and Threats. Nova Science
Publishers, Inc., Hauppauge, NY. 421 pp.
Scheick, B.K., and W. McCown. 2014. Geographic distribution of American Black Bears in North
America. Ursus 25(1):24–33.
Scheick, B.K., M.A. Barrett, and D. Doran-Myers. 2023. Change in Black Bear range and distribu-
tion in Florida using two decadal datasets from 2001–2020. Journal of Wildlife Management
87(4):e22394.
Somaweera, R., M. Brien and R. Shine. 2013. The role of predation in shaping crocodilian natural
history. Herpetological Monographs 27(1):23–51.
Somma, L.A. 2023. Alligator mississippiensis Daudin, 1802. US Geological Survey, Nonindigenous
Aquatic Species Database, Gainesville, FL. Available online at https://nas.er.usgs.gov/queries/
FactSheet.aspx?SpeciesID=221. Accessed 31 March 2023.
Stratman, M.R., and M.R. Pelton. 1999. Feeding ecology of Black Bears in Northwest Florida. Florida
Field Naturalist 27(3):95–102.
Ugarte, C.A. 2006. Long term (1985–2005) spatial and temporal patterns of alligator nesting in Ever-
glades National Park, FL, USA. Final Report. School of Natural Resources and the Environment,
University of Florida, Gainesville, FL. 73 pp.
US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). 1975. Proposal to Reclassify the American Alligator. To be
codied at 50 CFR Part 17. Federal Register 40(131):28712–28720.
Woodward, A.R., and R.M. Elsey. 2019. American Alligator, Alligator mississippiensis. In S.C.
Manolis and C. Stevenson (Eds.). Crocodiles: Status Survey and Conservation Action Plan. 4th
Edition. Crocodile Specialist Group, Darwin, Australia.
Woodward, A.R. and C.T Moore. 1995. American Alligators in Florida. Pp. 127–129, In E.T. LaRoe,
G.S. Farris, C.E. Puckett, P.D. Doran, and M.J. Mac (Eds.). Our Living Resources: A Report to
the Nation on Distribution, Abundance, and Health of US Plants, Animals, and Ecosystems. US
Department of the Interior, National Biological Service, Washington, DC. 548 pp.
Woodward, A.R., M.L. Jennings, and H.F. Percival. 1989. Egg collecting and hatch rates of American
alligator eggs in Florida. Wildlife Society Bulletin 17:124-130.
Downloaded From: https://bioone.org/journals/Southeastern-Naturalist on 15 Sep 2023
Terms of Use: https://bioone.org/terms-of-useAccess provided by University of Florida
ResearchGate has not been able to resolve any citations for this publication.
Article
Full-text available
Burmese pythons (Python molurus bivittatus) are native to southeastern Asia, however, there is an established invasive population inhabiting much of southern Florida throughout the Greater Everglades Ecosystem. Pythons have severely impacted native species and ecosystems in Florida and represent one of the most intractable invasive-species management issues across the globe. The difficulty stems from a unique combination of inaccessible habitat and the cryptic and resilient nature of pythons that thrive in the subtropical environment of southern Florida, rendering them extremely challenging to detect. Here we provide a comprehensive review and synthesis of the science relevant to managing invasive Burmese pythons. We describe existing control tools and review challenges to productive research, identifying key knowledge gaps that would improve future research and decision making for python control.
Article
Full-text available
Nesting ecology of American crocodiles (Crocodylus acutus) in Florida has been both positively and negatively influenced by anthropogenic and natural factors since the species was placed on the federally endangered species list in 1975. This includes a shift in nesting sites and an expansion of nesting to anthropogenic habitat. Using a 50-year record of monitoring data (1970-2020), we assessed factors influencing nesting ecology (number of nests, nest morphology, success rate, and habitat use) from a total of 3,013 nests recorded across South Florida. We detected a change in nesting success rate, increasing from 61% in the 1970’s to near 90% since 2010. Our hot spot analysis illustrates that nesting sites in northeastern Florida Bay and Flamingo/Cape Sable (Everglades National Park) were important for American crocodiles. Anthropogenic habitats, such as canals provided vital habitat nesting in areas such as Flamingo/Cape Sable (Everglades National Park), Turkey Point Power Plant, and Crocodile Lake National Wildlife Refuge for the current Florida population. Environmental parameters suspected to affect nesting success have shown an increasing trend over the past 50 years and minimum temperature and rainfall, during the summer season, are correlated with increased nesting success and temporal variation across South Florida. The adaptive capacity that American crocodiles exhibited in Florida gave the species advantages to face changes in climate and landscape over the last 50 years, however, it does not imply that the adaptive capacity of the species to face these changes (evolutionary potential) cannot reach a limit if changes continue. Here, we document C. acutus nesting ecology population responses to ecosystem restoration efforts in Florida; and further demonstrate the value of protecting and restoring habitat to support recovery of listed species.
Article
Full-text available
In his April 2010 TED talk on the shifting baseline syndrome, Daniel Pauly warned us that ‘we transform the world, but we don’t remember it.’ This lapse is the greatest obstacle to understanding and restoring the structure and function of ecosystems transformed by anthropogenic effects over past centuries or even over the past few decades. Historical anecdotes can be a powerful tool to address gaps in our knowledge of the past. I present a case study to demonstrate the use of anecdotes to reveal the extensive predation by black bears Ursus americanus on sea turtle eggs in Florida, USA. Until the late 1800s, bears were major predators on eggs deposited by the large sea turtle aggregations nesting on the east coast of Florida. However, this past source of mortality, and the resulting substantial transport of nutrients from marine to terrestrial habitats via the bears, are largely unknown today. By the early 1900s, the great influx of humans to the east coast of Florida quickly decimated the bear populations by hunting and habitat degradation. Without historical anecdotes, knowledge of the extensive predation by black bears on sea turtle eggs in Florida would have been lost.
Article
Full-text available
The Highlands–Glades subpopulation (HGS) of Florida, USA, black bears (Ursus americanus floridanus) is small, genetically depauperate, and resides primarily within the endangered Lake Wales Ridge ecosystem, which has lost >85% of native habitat to land development. Habitat loss can reduce availability of critical natural foods and cause bears to increase reliance on anthropogenic foods (i.e., human-sourced); lands supporting the HGS are expected to lose >50% of remaining Florida black bear habitat in coming decades. We used scat analysis to describe seasonal food habits, investigate potential dietary responses to food shortages, and inform habitat conservation and human–bear conflict management. Florida black bears in the HGS mostly relied on native soft and hard mast and invertebrates, which are all available in endangered scrub habitat communities. Corn dispensed at hunter-operated feeding stations was a dominant food item in scats; and other alternative foods, such as citrus fruit and white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus), were found in summer-collected scats when soft mast should have been prevailing. Results indicate bears may respond to soft mast shortages caused by mast failures or habitat loss by consuming anthropogenic foods (e.g., corn, deer chow, citrus fruit, and garbage), which could increase human–bear conflicts. Florida carpenter ants (Camponotus floridanus) appeared to provide a reliable compensatory food during such shortages, but they are arboreal and largely dependent on imperiled bear habitat for proliferation. We strongly suggest remnant scrub and other communities rich in soft and hard mast-producing flora be targeted for acquisition and protection to ensure persistence of Florida black bears in this diverse ecosystem. We also suggest non-lethal actions to mitigate bear habituation to anthropogenic foods be implemented to minimize human–bear conflicts and prevent unnecessary losses to the already small HGS. Our study should be repeated to investigate whether dietary shifts occur in response to impending habitat loss and to further inform population conservation, habitat protection, and conflict management.
Article
American black bears ( Ursus americanus ) in Florida have increased in abundance from historically low numbers and currently number >4,000 across 7 subpopulations. Biologists monitor the range of black bears to track their recovery for conservation and management efforts. We estimated geographic range of black bears in Florida for historical (2001–2010) and contemporary (2011–2020) periods using 12 sources of occurrence data collected from wildlife professionals and the public. We reduced data sets by subsampling protocols to account for localized spatiotemporal biases and for possible differences in sampling effort from increases in the human population between modeling periods. We developed models at 2 levels: a generalized boundary (range extent) and a more detailed delineation (occupied range). We developed range extent using a concave hull model and occupied range using kernel density estimation with a corresponding 97.5% isopleth. Between modeling periods, range extent increased by 13.4% and occupied range increased by 11.3%, with both range levels expanding and contracting in certain areas. The ranges indicated improved connectivity among bear subpopulations. We also produced a range map for research, management, and public use built upon contemporary data that partitioned the state into 4 levels representing the relative frequency of bear use (frequent, common, occasional, and rare). Range map levels at the occupied range, and especially frequent use areas, help focus bear research efforts (e.g., placement of hair corrals), management efforts (e.g., assess varying levels of risk to the public of bear conflicts), and conservation efforts (e.g., focusing habitat protection in areas with high use by bears).
Article
Nest predation is often the primary cause of nest failure for ducks throughout North America. Tremendous efforts have been made to identify predators responsible for nest predation to benefit the conservation and management of ducks. However, we are unaware of empirical evidence that identifies predators of duck nests in the boreal forest, which is an important breeding area. We used camera traps on real ( n = 53) and artificial nests ( n = 164) from 2016 to 2018 to identify predators of boreal duck nests near Utikuma Lake, Alberta, Canada. We identified 8 species of duck nest predators that ate or removed eggs from nests: American black bear ( Ursus americanus ), short‐tailed or least weasel ( Mustela spp.), Canada lynx ( Lynx canadensis ), coyote ( Canis latrans ), American marten ( Martes americana ), red squirrel ( Tamiasciurus hudsonicus ), common raven ( Corvus corax ), and red‐tailed hawk ( Buteo jamaicensis ). Despite a long history of duck‐nest predator research, our study confirmed previously undocumented nest predators of ducks from the boreal forest. The suite of nest predators was different from common prairie nest predators and we did not observe common prairie nest predators at our study area. Climate change and industrial development are altering predator–prey interactions, causing changes to wildlife communities in this region and our data provide an initial step in improving our understanding of boreal ducks. © 2020 The Wildlife Society.
Article
Hatch rates of Alligator mississippiensis eggs collected during early incubation were not affected when eggs were handled and transported carefully. Collection times should be based on nest availability and relative risk of natural losses. In Florida, to efficiently achieve a 50% removal rate while minimizing natural losses, collections should be conducted with ≥75% of clutches are laid. -from Authors
Article
Comparisons of food habits, habitat use, and movements revealed a low probability for competitive interactions among bobcat (Lynx rufus), Florida panther (Puma concolor coryi), and black bear (Ursus americanus) in South Florida. All three species preferred upland forests but consumed different foods and utilized the landscape in ways that resulted in ecological separation. Further, panthers exhibited crepuscular activity whereas black bears were predominantly diurnal. Diet, movements, and reproduction varied seasonally among species. Subadults of all three species demonstrated extensive dispersal abilities, but only male black bears were documented to have crossed the Caloosahatchee River, a potential landscape barrier that may restrict effective dispersal northward in bobcats and panthers. Because bobcat and black bear in South Florida occur at relatively high densities, anthropogenic changes to the landscape and sea level rise will affect them less severely than panther. The problems associated with the habitation of a naturally fragmented and patchy forest are exacerbated by the conversion of productive habitat types to types that avoided. Another factor that threatens the stability of ecological relations among this carnivore community is the range expansion of the coyote (Canis latrans) into South Florida. This canid is known to exhibit interference competition with bobcats, black bears, and panthers in other parts of North America. The diet of the coyote in Florida may overlap with the diets of the three native carnivores by at least 38 percent and as much as 64 percent. The highest concentrations of black bears and panthers in South Florida coincide with an extensive forest, a landscape feature that accounts for only a small proportion of public land. Increasing forest fragmentation from the Sarasota area southeastward suggests that most public lands are relatively unimportant to the two larger species. Because the demographics of even the smallest of these populations (panther) are shown to be typical of healthy populations, creative management, such as flexible reserve boundaries and the enlistment of private property owners in conservation efforts, may be of more immediate value than symptom-oriented management practices such as genetic introgression.