It is tragic what happened the other day in the Bucegi Mountains, and our thoughts are with the family and loved ones of the young girl who lost her life in a bear attack. We all want to understand what triggered the behavior of that bear, what we can do to prevent such tragedies, and what is the best solution for people to stay safe when walking in the mountains while allowing nature to follow its peaceful course.

Foundation Conservation Carpathia implements a complex program in the southern Făgăraș Mountains that focuses on the relationship between people and bears. We focus our efforts on conflict prevention, on intervention when bears get too close to villages, and on compensating people when our efforts do not bear fruit. We are also monitoring the dynamics of the bear population in our project area and trying to understand the behaviour of this species, especially of problem individuals. Unfortunately, there are still many unknowns, and we need to involve more stakeholders, but we are sharing what we know.

• The proximity of bears to humans: Causes include the restriction and alteration of natural habitats by humans, possible dependence on additional human-provided food, reduced availability of natural food sources – whether forest fruits and seeds or the highly fluctuating availability of wild boar carcasses affected by African swine fever. In some years, there may be a very high mortality rate with many carcasses, while in the following years, numbers decrease as few boars survive.
• Increased competition for food in a population with a positive population trend.
• Forest disturbance from logging and off-road activities with ATVs, motorcycles, and cars.
• Climate change, with warm winters leading to bears no longer hibernating but foraging for food, and springs with late snows followed by scorching summers.
• Sources of attraction in and around local communities, such as rubbish not emptied on time, slaughterhouse waste left on the outskirts of villages, and abandoned orchards driving bears closer to inhabited spaces and people.
• Bear habituation, an increasingly present phenomenon: some bears have become accustomed to the presence of humans in the wild, tourist resorts, along certain roads, and even in towns, leading to deviant behaviours.

The Solution

• Prevention is key to reducing bear conflicts. In the communities where we are present, we provide households and farmers with electric fences. We have installed an animal waste collection point in the commune of Rucăr, where we have collected around 40 tons of slaughtering waste from local people, as the community is a traditional livestock farming area. Most of this waste would otherwise have been dumped near the village, representing a major attraction for bears. We’re also investing in research and testing real-time alert systems (alarms) to keep bears away from settlements and people’s property.
• Intervention: On the five game reserves we manage, we intervene for problem bears using rapid intervention teams and night patrols to keep bears at a distance. From 2019 to date, we have removed six bears that were causing recurring damage in villages. It is extremely important to remove bears that have developed deviant behaviours. Besides posing a danger to people, these bears also reduce public acceptance of the bear population as a whole. At the same time, this should not be a false argument for shooting bears that pose no danger to humans, as justification for trophy hunting.
• Compensation is crucial to maintaining a balance of coexistence. Even with a small number of bears, there will be damage, so there is a great need to establish an effective compensation system to complement state compensation, which is often delayed. One farmer is raising sheep and cows, which we offer in exchange to those who have had livestock attacked by bears. We believe there is room for improvement in the compensation system, requiring everyone’s involvement to make this happen.

These are the measures we are putting in place, and we believe they are essential for our coexistence with this species. We have adapted our approaches, given up on some, and are trying others, proof that there is no perfect solution for maintaining balance, but it is a continuous learning process.

Bears that have become accustomed to human presence, sit by the side of roads, come into localities, and feed on garbage or in people’s stables are a problem. We believe any measures to reduce the bear population should focus particularly on these bears.

Unfortunately, nobody knows the exact bear population in Romania or how many individuals the habitat can support. Genetic monitoring of bears over an area of 120,000 ha in the Făgăraș, Piatra Craiului, Iezer-Păpușa, and Leaota Mountains, carried out over six years from 2017 to 2022, identified a cumulative total of 504 bears (289 males and 215 females). Over these years, we observed population dynamics: only 20% of the bears identified in 2017 were detected again in 2022; the rest were new individuals. Local population density increased from 18.6 bears/100 km² in 2017 (95% CI = 18.3-21.9) to 23.8 bears/100 km² in 2022 (95% CI = 22.3-31.7). The number of problem bears and bear damage fluctuates from year to year and is not directly proportional to bear density increases. Most problem bears are male, and many only occasionally cause damage in villages. However, some learn that food is readily available in villages and specialise in anthropogenic food, terrorising local communities if prevention and intervention strategies are not in place.

We distance ourselves clearly from extreme views expressed in recent days, whether suggesting that the main tragedy was the shooting of the bear or advocating for a radical reduction of the bear population. While emotions are understandably high, we believe it is vital to implement policies based on facts and reality. Solutions must include prevention, maintaining as many natural areas as possible for this species, intervention measures, and targeted education to resolve conflicts in the short term.