Home > 2008

Project year: 2008

On this page, the latest bear rescue mission will be published.

Bear Trishka from Kazakhstan
On December 2nd 2024, Bears in Mind received an urgent message about a 22-year old female brown bear named Trishka. She was kept in a cage as a pet behind a house in Karaganda, Kazakhstan. The owner contacted us directly to ask if we could help and take Trishka, since she could no longer care for her bear. The bear was in her care ever since she was a cub, supposedly after her mother was killed by poachers.

We never turn down a bear, but knew it was going to be a race against the clock. The house and bear cage would be demolished in March 2025, the owner was going to leave the country and couldn’t take Trishka with her. Either we would rescue her in time or she might face euthanasia… So, we started immediately!

Firstly, securing a temporary new home for this beautiful bear. As we have been working closely with our friends at the Wildlife Rescue Center ‘Natuurhulpcentrum‘ in Belgium for a long time, it was quickly agreed Trishka could temporarily go to them and from there we would be able to take our time and find a good permanent home for her elsewhere.

Applying for the mandatory CITES Export and Import permits was next. This went surprisingly well and they were issued fast. In the meantime, to be able to import a bear into Belgium, Trishka needed to be vaccinated against Rabies and a subsequent serology test needed to be done. The results came in at the end of February, which were good so we could continue our mission!

In the meantime, the house of the owner of Trishka and the bear cage were demolished to start a large housing development project. It was agreed by the owner and the developer to have a small temporary cage built for Trishka, elsewhere, so the project was not delayed and we could continue preparing her for her relocation to Belgium.

Early April, we prepared our special bear transport crate to be send to Kazakhstan. Our partner Zoologistics at Schiphol Airport in Amsterdam sent the crate ahead of the transfer to Astana on the 12th of April.

On April 24, one day before Trishka arrived in Frankfurt, the green light has been given in Astana and all paperwork was in order. Special thanks to the hard work of Mr Qadyr Baimukhanov from the local agent Globalink in Kazakhstan and FlyFauna (who handled documents when Trishka arrived at Frankfurt DE in the EU).

On the morning of April 25 bear Trishka arrived at the Animal Lounge of Frankfurt Airport! We inspected her in the quarantine building and she was doing fine after such a long yourney. She was eager to get out of the crate of course! After several hours of vet checks and custom clearance, we could finally take her on the road to Belgium. The team of Bears in Mind and Natuurhulpcentrum arrived at the wildlife rescue center in Oudsbergen, Belgium around 17:00hrs. Trishka couldn’t wait to get out! Although many animals are careful and hesitant to get out of the relative safety of the transport cage, to move into the new enclosure, Trishka was out in seconds to explore her new surrounding!

Trishka will get a vet check soon and she will stay in mandatory quarantine for 3 months, because she has come from outside the EU. After that, she will move to her temporary outdoor enclosure at Natuurhulpcentrum. In the meantime, Bears in Mind will monitor her health and behaviour closely in order to look into the options for a permanent home later this year.

This mission turned out a great success, thanks to the hard work and dedication of all involved!

On August 3 2019, bears Medo & Buya were loaded onto a transport van which took them all the way from the small town of Vlahi in Bulgaria to the small town of Aprica in Northern Italy. It was a long but successful journey, where the bears were actually very calm throughout the trip.

On August the 4th they arrived in Aprica and were taken up the mountain to their new home. Their 10,000sq meter natural forested enclosure is part of an education centre for Alpine wildlife: https://www.parcorobievalt.com/centri-visitatori/osservatorio-eco-faunistico-alpino

During the next days both bears settled in nicely, each their own separate indoor enclosure. After several weeks of exploring the forested outdoor enclosure, the bears were finally reunited again!

They are doing very well and we hope that they will have many wonderful years to come!

Let’s take you back a bit…

Bear Medo was rescued from a circus in 2004 and via temporary keeping in Sofia Zoo, placed at the large carnivore centre in Vlahi in 2006. With financial help from Bears in Mind a special enclosure was built. The main purpose of housing the bear in Vlahi was educational, as living ambassador for his kind. The visitors of the Large Carnivore Education Centre which opened in Spring 2007, had the chance to see a bear in semi natural environment and to observe behaviour close to the natural. Visitors learned more about bears in the wild and the real needs of conserving the species. They received information about the purpose of having the bear there and about the LC centre. School groups which visited Medo, received special lectures about bears in the wild. Local people accepted the bear very positively, with big interest and Medo often received gifts like a big bag with apples (or other fruits), cabbage, tomatoes, etc. The Balkani Wildlife Society (BWS) team was very happy to see that, as it was important for Medo’s long term stay in the village.

In April 2014 bear Medo got a new neighbour: bear Buya from Kormisosh! Bears in Mind helped BWS financially to build a new enclosure for Buya. Once it was finished and all permits were in, Buya moved out of Kormisosh to her new home in Vlahi.

Unfortunately, due to the rough economic situation in Bulgaria and more specifically for NGOs like BWS, funds quickly dried up and the bears could no longer be kept in Vlahi. After Bears in Mind funded their care for another year, it was decided to find a new and safe home for Medo & Buya.

The problem of keeping bears in captivity has a two decades-long history in Georgia. The animals are kept predominantly for local and international tourists’ attraction in restaurants, petrol stations, monasteries, along and nearby the central highway that crosses the country horizontally (Batumi-Dedoplistskaro, approx. 800 km). The issue is linked to two major problems: contribution to wild population decline and inhumane treatment of animals. Many organizations (including Bears in Mind, SEED, NACRES, Tbilisi Zoo, some voluntary shelters, government of Georgia etc.) have been dealing with this problem since the collapse of Soviet Union. Remarkable success was achieved through the implementation of different concrete projects; however, the problem still exists (although not to the devastating degrees as it was observed in the 90s) and bears (predominantly cubs) still occur in captivity every spring. Most of them are still kept under deplorable conditions. In parallel, concerned organizations, at this moment, do not have credible monitoring data and it is not exactly known how many bears there are in (illegal) captivity throughout Georgia. Moreover, effective legislation of Georgia prescribes fines to an owner, confiscation of a bear and moving it to a shelter. Nevertheless, the limited capacity of shelters (including the national zoo) in conjunction to the low awareness of the population leads the government (also the judicial system) to be inactive and “close its eyes” to the problem.

Most of the bears in captivity have been registered in a central database. Several surveys on bears in captivity have been initiated over the years, where information about the bears and their owners was collected, following a specially prepared questionnaire. The bears’ owners received advice on improvement of food, living conditions, health and general care for bears. NACRES staff also checked whether the owner had a permit to keep the bear. This was very often not the case. Curiously, the owners did not use the bears to gain money from them. It is thought that the caged bears are kept as a status symbol. In 2007 three poorly kept bears that lived in a closed-down zoo near Tbilisi were taken to the Bear Forest in the Netherlands. This rescue operation generated a lot of nationwide media attention towards the problem, which put the captive bear issue back on the agenda. With the survey data, the next step was to implement the Captive Bear Action Plan. Furthermore, the development of a shelter for confiscated or rescued bears should be developed. Unfortunately, many of our joint efforts have thus far shown little success. Mostly because of the priorities within the government.

Since 2019, Bears in Mind cooperates with SEED in an awareness initiative, hoping to find lasting solutions for the problems related to captive bears in Georgia.

Between 2008-2011, Bears in Mind supported the project “Let’s Meet and Protect Bears- the Symbol of BiH Forests”, coordinated by Dr Nasir Sinanovic from the University of Sarajevo. The overall goal of this project was to create positive awareness and understanding about wild bears amongst the general public. The main problem and challenge is that there was very little scientific data on wild bears in BiH during those years. That’s why Bears in Mind thought it of importance that a pilot study was carried out and data was gathered in a central and specifically designed database. Bears in captivity were also registered in a special section. Various sources of information were used and people approached who were involved in bears somehow (so-called stakeholders): forestry officials, livestock herders, beekeepers, NGOs/GOs, hunters, mountaineer groups, tourist organizations, but also local people living in close proximity to bears. This way a general guesstimation could be made about the size of the population of bears living in BiH. Detailed information about human-bear conflict has also been gathered of bears raiding beehives, orchards and cornfields. The complete database has served as a solid base for brown bear management in BiH.

In India, habitat fragmentation and destruction is one of the main threats to bears, others being poaching for bile extraction (this has started in India according to a recent report), poaching for meat (rampant in some states) and human/animal conflict within or near the forest.

Public awareness
India is very progressive when it comes to bear education. Bears in Mind has supported the educational work of the local NGO Zoo Outreach Organisation (ZOO). Their education project reaches schools, zoos and museums. Back in the day, the problems with dancing bears in India are considerable. Several thousands of cubs, usually sloth bears, were been taken from their mothers and trained to be dancing bears. ZOO managed to make people aware of the suffering that is caused by this ancient, yet cruel tradition. Between 2002-2012 teaching packages were made with financial support of Bears in Mind. These packages consisted of all sorts of educational games, t-shirts, stickers and posters. More importantly, information about the way brown bears, sloth bears, Asiatic black bears and Sun bears in India were threatened, was included. India is the only country with four different bear species and it is therefore very important to protect them all.

ZOO Outreach Organization has been working with Bears in Mind for 10 years to improve the welfare of bears in India as well as their conservation in the wild. This has been done entirely with education, starting with a conservation education programme aimed at two groups; the visiting public (or organisations which educate them) and the zoo directors of zoos that have bears in their collection. 6,000 bear packets have been printed and ordered by 59 organisation and 8,000 posters have been printed and ordered by 56 different organizations.

In the 2000s, approximately 600 dancing bears were counted in India. By 2009 all were saved and relocated by Wildlife SOS, to their four dancing bear sanctuaries. This organization does not only save the bears, it also provided the former bear owners with an alternative livelihood. Bears in Mind supported Wildlife SOS in such projects.

Wildlife SOS dealt with the problem by addressing it at the source. As soon as an alert came in, about a dancing bear, the intervention team from Wildlife SOS and the responsible authorities rushed to the location. The bear was confiscated and the owner apprehended. Following this, a social program was started, in collaboration with the Indian government. The bear was the main source of income for these poor families of the Kalandar communities. Wildlife SOS helped the families to develop new means of income. The owner got 50,000 rupee for compensation, the children were sent to school and the owner was assisted in finding an alternative way to earn income for his family.

Since the end of 2009, no more bears danced the streets of India. Read more here:

Dancing Bears in India – Final Curtain

Sometimes Bears in Mind also funds non-bear projects. Like this study on wolverines in Norway, between 2003-2008. The results of this study show that wolverines prefer the high alpine regions, but are also attracted to the area below the treeline. In the crossing regions between high tundra and the lower forests the wolverine can find food in abundance. The flocks of sheep were a favourite target, but other (wild) prey was mainly eaten. In areas where wolves and wolverines live together, the wolverines feed on the elk carrion the wolves leave behind. Wolves came back in this region in the nineties. Several years later the wolverines arrived. Evidently the wolverines switched from eating elk (carrion and hunted) and small prey (hunted), to eating elk carrion exclusively. Wolverines are known as scavengers, but this varies according to the area they live in.

The analysis of the preferred habitat of wolf, lynx, bear and wolverine shows that these four species can live together. Each species uses the habitat in a different way. The wolverine prefers the higher areas while the wolf, lynx and bear are true forest dwellers. The lynx uses the lowest areas of the forest. Bears and wolves prefer to live somewhat higher up. Bears stay closest to the wolverines and were seen feeding on the same carcass on rare occasions.

A study documented 27 close encounters in 2003-2005, where harm to humans was reported in two cases harm to bears reported in six cases. More than 61% of the interviewees reported damage caused by bears to agricultural fields, beehives or livestock between 2003 and 2005. Villagers took precautions with differing levels of sophistication and effectiveness against damage caused by bears. Many locals used basic exclusion methods, like simple fences or metal sheets placed around tree trunks, but these were generally not very effective; 21% of the interviewees did not take any measures. Using current average values for damaged livestock and property, a minimum annual cost of about USD$20,000 is estimated for Yusufeli.

There is growing resentment among local villagers, who usually blame conservation authorities and may use illegal means to get rid of “problem bears”. Pressure from the hunting lobby to list the bear for trophy hunting, complicates the situation. Since the fundamental element for maintaining bears in any area is to control human-induced mortality, there is an urgent need to educate the rural public and introduce effective preventive measures to reduce the conflict. In this study funded by Bears in Mind between 2007-2008, it was done by interviewing farmers and villagers in the study area and developing different types of education materials to be distributed amongst locals in villages and schools. Various preventive measures were tested like electric fences around beehives, apiaries and the use of random-noise generators and placing beehives on elevated platforms. 

The study area of this project is focused on the arid ecosystem in the extreme southeastern part of the country. Historically, bears in the eastern part of Georgia used migration routes from the Great Caucasus (Lagodekhi Reserve) to the Lori Plateau (Vashlovani National Park). The population in Vashlovani was estimated at approximately 10 individuals and since the region between Lori Plateau and the Great Caucasus has a strong human presence, the migration route might be extremely limited or even no longer functional. This suggestion needs to be investigated by means of radio-telemetry studies. This is important because if there is no genetic exchange between the arid ecosystem and the Great Caucasus range, then the population of the Lori Plateau must be considered as critically endangered, which requires special conservation measures.

Status
Individual bears will be identified by photo-trapping in the study area and their daily activity will be studied. The home ranges of the bears will be defined through intensive monitoring by radio-tracking method. GPS locations will be taken from any bear signs (footprints, scat, marks, dug-up ground, dens and the location of individual bears). All data will be analyzed in GIS. Home ranges will be identified as well as overlapping areas between individual territories. The photo trapping has been very successful and different bears and other animals were photographed. NACRES have data from 3,700 trap/days and captured 65 bear pictures. They also collected approximately 354 pictures of other species, such as: wolf, leopard, lynx, jungle cat, wild boar, porcupine, wild cat, hare, badger and even eagle. Lynx, jungle cat and porcupine photos were most interesting because they were first time spotted on the photo in Georgia. Also two bears were radio-collared. One was unfortunately poached and the second one was collard during the summer of 2008.

NACRES is continually monitoring bears and other carnivores in Georgia through their conservation programs.

Partner:

NACRES

The most important management decisions are the actions that directly influence and regulate the population size. The bear population in Croatia has been continually growing since the 1950s, and is in a favourable conservation status, but the actual number is not known. Current estimate is around 1,000 individuals. Natural regulation would stabilize the population size at the habitat capacity level. As the bear habitat is also inhabited by humans, typically the capacity of the habitat is above the social capacity, i.e. above the point when the risk of conflict (damages and threats to human safety) is perceived as unacceptably high. Bears in Croatia may be hunted but hunting restrictions in the first half of the previous century helped the population to grow from less than 100 bears to the current numbers. According to the hunting guidelines, hunting of bears is managed through yearly quotas. However, at present the decision of quota size is made without an essential piece of information, namely the scientifically based population estimate. This is the source of various complaints: some people – assuming that there are too many bears- believe that the quota should be much higher, while others are against any quota claiming the bear population cannot sustain such losses. Hence, knowledge about the actual population size of the Brown bear population is an absolute prerequisite for gaining and maintaining public acceptance of the bear in Croatia.

The main and also innovative activity of this two-year project in 2006-2008 was to make a scientifically sound estimation of the total bear population size by using DNA extracted from bear scats and individual recognition of each bear. When the total population size is known, implementation of the management plan can be carried out further. Traditionally bear managers count the animals at feeding sites. This method tends to be biased but the genetic method and standardization of hunters’ counts allows for the calibration of traditional methods and the continuous insight into the population trend.

Results
The project was financed by the Dutch Ministry of Agriculture under the BBI-Matra program. There was an accurate estimate on the number of wild bears in Croatia; from DNA-analysis it was concluded that there were between 700 and 1,000 bears living in Croatia (at that time). The public attitude towards bears was measured by means of questionnaires.