Bears foraging near human developments are often presumed to be responding to food shortage, but this explanation ignores social factors, in particular despotism in bears. We analyzed the age distribution and body condition index (BCI) of shot brown bears in relation to densities of bears and people, and whether the shot bears were killed by managers (i.e., problem bears; n = 149), in self‐defense (n = 51), or were hunter‐killed nonproblem bears (n = 1,896) during 1990–2010. We compared patterns between areas with (Slovenia) and without supplemental feeding (Sweden) of bears relative to 2 hypotheses. The food‐search/food‐competition hypothesis predicts that problem bears should have a higher BCI (e.g., exploiting easily accessible and/or nutritious human‐derived foods) or lower BCI (e.g., because of food shortage) than nonproblem bears, that BCI and human density should have a positive correlation, and problem bear occurrence and seasonal mean BCI of nonproblem bears should have a negative correlation (i.e., more problem bears during years of low food availability). Food competition among bears additionally predicts an inverse relationship between BCI and bear density. The safety‐search/naivety hypothesis (i.e., avoiding other bears or lack of human experience) predicts no relationship between BCI and human density, provided no dietary differences due to spatiotemporal habitat use among bears, no relationship between problem bear occurrence and seasonal mean BCI of nonproblem bears, and does not necessarily predict a difference between BCI for problem/nonproblem bears. If food competition or predation avoidance explained bear occurrence near settlements, we predicted younger problem than nonproblem bears and a negative correlation between age and human density. However, if only food search explained bear occurrence near settlements, we predicted no relation between age and problem or nonproblem bear status, or between age and human density. We found no difference in BCI or its variability between problem and nonproblem bears, no relation between BCI and human density, and no correlation between numbers of problem bears shot and seasonal mean BCI for either country. The peak of shot problem bears occurred from April to June in Slovenia and in June in Sweden (i.e., during the mating period when most intraspecific predation occurs and before fall hyperphagia). Problem bears were younger than nonproblem bears, and both problem and nonproblem bears were younger in areas of higher human density. These age differences, in combination with similarities in BCI between problem and nonproblem bears and lack of correlation between BCI and human density, suggested safety‐search and naïve dispersal to be the primary mechanisms responsible for bear occurrence near settlements. Younger bears are less competitive, more vulnerable to intraspecific predation, and lack human experience, compared to adults. Body condition was inversely related to the bear density index in Sweden, whereas we found no correlation in Slovenia, suggesting that supplemental feeding may have reduced food competition, in combination with high bear harvest rates. Bears shot in self‐defense were older and their BCI did not differ from that of nonproblem bears. Reasons other than food shortage apparently explained why most bears were involved in encounters with people or viewed as problematic near settlements in our study. © 2014 The Wildlife Society.

中文翻译：

---

专制行为或食物搜索可以解释欧洲棕熊问题的发生吗？

熊在人类发展区附近觅食通常被认为是对食物短缺的反应，但这种解释忽略了社会因素，特别是熊的专制。我们分析了射击棕熊的年龄分布和身体状况指数 (BCI) 与熊和人的密度的关系，以及射击熊是否被管理者（即问题熊；n  = 149）杀死，以进行自卫（n  = 51），或者是被猎人杀死的非问题熊（n = 1,896）在 1990-2010 年期间。我们比较了有（斯洛文尼亚）和没有补充喂养（瑞典）熊的地区之间的模式，相对于 2 个假设。食物搜索/食物竞争假说预测问题熊应该比非问题熊具有更高的 BCI（例如，开发易于获取和/或营养丰富的人源性食物）或更低的 BCI（例如，因为食物短缺），即 BCI和人类密度应该有正相关，问题熊的出现和非问题熊的季节性平均 BCI 应该有负相关（即，在食物供应不足的年份，更多的问题熊）。熊之间的食物竞争还预测了 BCI 和熊密度之间的反比关系。安全搜索/天真假设（即，避免其他熊或缺乏人类经验）预测 BCI 和人类密度之间没有关系，前提是没有由于熊之间的时空栖息地使用而导致的饮食差异，问题熊的发生与非问题熊的季节性平均 BCI 之间没有关系，并且不一定预测问题/非问题熊的 BCI 之间的差异。如果食物竞争或避免捕食解释了熊在定居点附近的发生，我们预测问题比没有问题的熊更年轻，并且年龄与人口密度之间呈负相关。然而，如果仅仅通过食物搜索来解释定居点附近熊的出现，我们预测年龄与问题或非问题熊状态之间或年龄与人类密度之间没有关系。我们发现问题和非问题熊之间的 BCI 或其可变性没有差异，BCI 与人口密度之间没有关系，而且这两个国家被射杀的问题熊数量与季节性平均 BCI 之间也没有相关性。斯洛文尼亚和瑞典的 4 月至 6 月出现射击问题熊的高峰期（即，在大多数种内捕食发生的交配期和秋季进食过多之前）。问题熊比非问题熊更年轻，在人类密度较高的地区，问题和非问题熊都更年轻。这些年龄差异，加上问题熊和非问题熊之间 BCI 的相似性以及 BCI 与人类密度之间缺乏相关性，表明安全搜索和幼稚的散布是导致定居点附近熊发生的主要机制。年幼的熊缺乏竞争力，更容易受到种内捕食，缺乏人类经验，与成年人相比。身体状况与瑞典的熊密度指数呈负相关，而我们在斯洛文尼亚没有发现相关性，这表明补充喂养可能减少了食物竞争，再加上高熊收获率。在自卫中被击中的熊年龄更大，他们的 BCI 与没有问题的熊没有区别。食物短缺以外的原因显然解释了为什么大多数熊会与人接触或在我们的研究中被视为靠近定居点的问题。© 2014 野生动物协会。在自卫中被击中的熊年龄更大，他们的 BCI 与没有问题的熊没有区别。食物短缺以外的原因显然解释了为什么大多数熊会与人接触或在我们的研究中被视为靠近定居点的问题。© 2014 野生动物协会。在自卫中被击中的熊年龄更大，他们的 BCI 与没有问题的熊没有区别。食物短缺以外的原因显然解释了为什么大多数熊会与人接触或在我们的研究中被视为靠近定居点的问题。© 2014 野生动物协会。