The spatial distribution of species is the basis of almost all aspects of biodiversity management, including protecting rare species, monitoring invasive species, identifying biodiversity hotspots, and delineating valuable protected areas (Franklin, 2010). Species distribution might vary with resources. While the consequent change of species distribution might in turn cause the change of resources (Cardinale et al., 2012; Keil et al., 2015; Jarzyna and Jetz, 2017; Kopatz et al., 2021). Apex predators play an irreplaceable effect on ecosystem stability (Schmitz, 2008; Rodríguez-Lozano et al., 2015; Antiqueira et al., 2018). Bears are top predators and omnivores, feeding on various types of food, including berries, plant roots, nuts, insects, ungulates, and dead animals. As a scavenger, bears feed on decaying food (especially animal carcasses), which can control the spread of diseases and pests (Aguilera-Alcalá et al., 2020). It not only scavenging but also promotes material circulation (Moleon et al., 2014). Bears are an effective seed disperser for some plants, of which swallowing and expelling can improve the seed germination rate (Enders and Vander Wall, 2012; Koike et al., 2012; García-Rodríguez et al., 2021). However, bears play an essential role in the whole land ecosystem. The conflict between this large carnivore and humans is a common problem, especially When both occur in close proximity or share a common space. For example, although the Sanjiangyuan is vast and sparsely populated, more and more bears have visited human settlements, causing losses of life and property to local herders (Dai et al., 2020). In turn, railway, road, garbage, and recreational activities threaten bears’ survival (Morales-González et al., 2020). Therefore, studying spatial distribution is beneficial to improving the conservation and management of bears and preventing human-bear conflicts.

According to IUCN (Garshelis and Steinmetz, 2020) the habitat of Asiatic black bears (ABB,Ursus thibetanus) is reportedly fragmented, and a declining population trend has been observed. The increasingly intense resource (e.g., timber and mining) utilization and the expansion of man-made facilities (e.g., railways and roads) has led to fragmentation and deterioration of forested habitat, which may become population barriers, the formation of isolated populations, or even disappearance (Gregório et al., 2020; Hooker et al., 2020; Lázaro et al., 2020; Kopatz et al., 2021; Saura, 2021). Fragmentation of the habitat can lead to a decrease in the niche width of top predators, or even the collapse of the entire system (Layman et al., 2007). As typical forest-dwelling animals, the decline of the habitat quality brings threats to the survival of ABBs. We can understand the status of ABB’s habitat and protect ABB more effectively by understanding the distribution of ABB and its driving factors.

The northeast region of China is the main distribution area of ABBs. And the forest ecosystem is their primary habitat (Reid et al., 1991; Ma and Hu, 1994). In the 1980s, timber, highways, railways, and a rapidly increasing human population led to the fragmentation of forest habitats. In addition, the development of the live bear bile harvesting industry severely threatened the wild population. In the past, the population was estimated mainly based on interviews from residents, management administrations, and transect surveys (Ma et al., 1998; Piao et al., 2012). Because individuals are challenging to track, we estimate population change indirectly through the monitoring of the change of population distribution range (i.e., presence-absence; Pollock, 2006). Effective ABB monitoring is critical and especially useful for relevant wildlife management action plans.

The east of Jilin Province is the habitat of endangered Amur tiger (Panthera tigris altaica). The Chinese government has focused the monitoring on protecting the Amur tiger, neglecting ABB. We choose Jilin Province of China as the research area since past wildlife surveys suggest that bears are distributed across the province. Our research objectives are as follows: (1) We map the distribution of ABBs across the province to provide a reference for monitoring future population trends. (2) What are the driving factors for the distribution pattern? (3) We estimate the trend of ABBs population change and attitudes toward ABBs conservation. We hope our result will be incorporated into future conservation planning.

We made a detailed distribution map (Figure 5) for the ABBs in the eastern mountainous area from the research, which is the most accurate until now. In the past, more than 20 years ago, only the county level was taken as the minimum research unit for ABBs. It also cannot accurately describe the factors affecting the distribution of ABBs, of which the data was collected by mainly interviewing without on-the-spot verification, leading to possible errors (Zou and Ma, 1997). The area of the county-level administrative units varies greatly from 1,142.65 to 9,016 km², hence it is actually of little significance and relevance for the conservation planning of ABBs. In comparison, our study is more practical for the planning of suitable habitat protection. Our method is based on a random sampling of 27 combinations of three factors that affect the distribution of ABBs. The survey grids are set according to research purposes instead of administrative boundaries. The results provide a reference for the current distribution and a basis for the protection of suitable habitats in Jilin Province. We suggest that similar surveys should be conducted on a five-year basis and attention should be continuously paid to the changes of the distribution of ABBs, especially in areas presently not covered by our survey (McShea et al., 2022).

Compared with DNA capture-recapture method (Miller et al., 1987; Whittington and Sawaya, 2015; Morehouse and Boyce, 2016; Murphy et al., 2017), the distribution range survey is more straightforward and cost-effective (Liu et al., 2009). It is also a more practical method for the grassroot conservation practitioners. According to our visits and field surveys, local residents are familiar with ABBs and their distribution changes. Therefore, we believe that future protection and management could rely on the local administration of forestry, and, more importantly, local residents.

The landfrom of western region of Jilin Province is mainly plains, except for some wetlands and grasslands, most of which are farmland. And the forest coverage rate there is less than 20%. We believe that such habitat is not suitable for the long-term survial of ABBs. Thus, we chose the eastern mountainous area for this research. The forest coverage rates in the 540 selected grids are all greater than 20%. our results suggests that forest coverage is the main factor affecting the existence of ABBs, which is consistent with the results of many studies that forest is indispensable for ABBs (Colton et al., 2021; Tomita and Hiura, 2021). Of course, the prediction results show that ABBs appear in 50.9% of the grids, not in the remaining nearly half of the grids, which we think might be related to the quality of the forest, especially available food (Clark et al., 1994; Costello and Sage, 1994). Hibernators like the black bears are faced with a particular need to consume large amounts of food and store fat before hibernation to provide energy overwinter (Farley and Robbins, 1995; Manchi and Swenson, 2005; Robbins et al., 2012). In order to hibernate and obtain high-quality food resources, black bears will choose migration to satisfy their food needs (Noyce and Garshelis, 2011). So the availability of food is very important. Previous studies have shown that logging destroys stand composition and reduces berry abundance, leading to a decrease in edible food for bears (Bergstedt and Milberg, 2001). Forest logging has a significant impact on the availability of food for bears. Commercial forestry shapes the distribution and abundance of food for bears and consequently affects bear foraging patterns (Hertel et al., 2016). Resources limit the choice of animal habitat. Female black bears have higher requirements for the spatial distribution of resources with moderate resource thresholds and low levels of resource depression (Mitchell and Powell, 2007). Food resources also affect black bear reproduction and offspring rearing (Noyce and Garshelis, 1994; Costello et al., 2009). Our results found that the distribution of ABBs is negatively correlated with the distance from the protected area, which shows that the reserve is the most suitable habitat for ABBs. The quality of habitat in the protected area is higher than that outside due to forbidding logging, strict management, regular patrol, and legislative protection (Watson et al., 2014). Therefore, habitat quality is closely related to the distribution of black bears, and restoring forest coverage rate and habitat quality is the prerequisite for protecting black bears.

Roads are one of the main factors that threaten bears’ survival (Jacobson et al., 2016), especially highways, which fragment the habitat and risk lives (death by animal collisions) (Find’o et al., 2019; Pollock, 2019). Our research results show that the ABBs avoid the main road, which is consistent with many studies. Black bears avoid roads with heavy traffic (Find’o et al., 2019). Major roads (highways and train tracks) connect big cities with heavy traffic, and railings on train tracks also hinder bear migration. However, the density of roads in the grid is positively correlated with the distribution. This result does not align with the current research trend (Bischof et al., 2017), but some studies show that ABBs may choose small roads (Duquette et al., 2017). Bears did not shy away from the unpaved roads, frequently crossing and moving around the unpaved roads (Graham et al., 2010; Stillfried et al., 2015). The roads in our study were mainly rural trails with less traffic and were used only in spring (planting) and autumn (harvesting),and the cumulative weighting of road density indicates the impact is low (0.227 m/km²). Since our survey grid area is large, the actual road density is very low in the grids. Furthermore, the roads in the grid are not evenly distributed, and most are small unpaved roads. Perhaps, the ABBs have more habitat choices in areas where the roads are scattered. Nevertheless, more fine-scale road and habitat data should be examined.

Water is one of the indispensible conditions for the survival of wild animals. Our result found that the distribution of ABBs is negatively correlated with the area of water in the grid, which does not indicate that water is not essential to ABBs. The mountainous areas in eastern Jilin Province are closer to the ocean, affected by the maritime climate, where there is plenty of precipitation in summer and snow in winter forming more forest creeks and puddles to provide enough water for bears. Therefore, the eastern mountainous area is not short of water. The water factor selected is the area of water resources in grid. Larger areas are generally rivers (e.g., Suifen River, Songhua River Basin, Dongliao River Basin, Yalu River, Tumen River) and lakes (e.g., Changbai Mountain Tianchi). The riparian are almost occupied by farmland, water conservancy project (reservoir), aquaculture (fish or frog ponds), roads, cities, and residential areas, which may have deterred the ABBs from visiting. Urbanization is likely to increase animal collisions and conflicts between humans and animals, which not only threatens the survival of animals but also is adverse to their habitats (Baruch-Mordo et al., 2014; Hung et al., 2017). Although the cities may provide food for them, their threat is increasing (Penteriani et al., 2018). Our results also show that ABBs avoid cities, but the cumulative weight of the factor is low, which may be caused by the small scale and low proportion of cities.

The coverage of shrubs is a positive factor for ABBs’ distribution. The berries in the shrubs are abundant and are the favorite food of bears in autumn (McLellan and McLellan, 2015). Therefore, the shrubs may be a positive driver of their distribution. The vegetation changes as the altitude increases. High-altitude areas are generally occupied by coniferous forests, alpine meadows, and bare lands, where there is less food resources for ABBs (Milakovic et al., 2012), resulting in a drop in the abundance of ABBs.

The local residents’ judgment on the presence of ABBs matches the results of our field investigations to demonstrate that people in this area are, to a large extent, aware of the distribution of ABBs. Among the interviewees who believe the population has declined, 82% live in the area without ABBs distribution, And only 18% live in ABB-distributed area, who are all over 35 years old. Interviewees who do not have a clear memory about the past ten years but often recall it 30 years ago when they were children and claim there were back then. They believe the population has decreased, but there is no accurate information about the population trend in the past ten years.

In “presence” areas, interviewees who believe the population has increased are 11.5 times more than those who hold the opposite opinion, demonstrating that the population has risen in “presence” areas in the past ten years. In addition, among the ten interviewees who considered it to have decreased, eight did not provide any judgment but were advised by others, which we did not regard as valid.

The main signs, as given by the interviewees, for the perceived increase in ABBs are, first, the number of traces in the distribution area has increased; second, news about ABBs harming local resident has increased; third, more images of ABBS were captured by camera traps.

Possible reasons for the increase in ABB maybe, first, the nationwide ban of guns in 1996; second, the implementation of wildlife protection laws, especially in Jilin Province, where hunting was banned in the 1990s; third, the total forest area has increased due to the implementation of The Natural Forest Protection Project, fourth, protected areas were established; fifth, after the ban on logging, the number of forestry workers has dramatically reduced, and even some areas are uninhabited, so overall human interference has dwindled.

As such, we believe that the local residents’ understanding of ABBs is relatively accurate. In areas with ABBs’ distribution, most people believe that the number of ABBs has increased, and they have given reasonable explanations. However, we found that most local resident dislike ABBs. The main reason is that they damage crops and livestock, and hurt and threaten people. We have also found that the presense of ABBs is an essential factor in determining attitudes. In recent years, there have been media reports of black bears hurting people in some areas, which has frightened many people. Therefore, we believe that the increase of ABB population or the expansion of their distribution may lead to intensified human-bear conflicts. Although humans may not pose a threat to ABBs since the current laws protects wild animals, the emergence of human-wildlife conflicts will inevitably lead to crop and livelihood losses and the resulting retaliation may thus pose a threat to ABBs. We propose that publicity campaigns and conservation education should be strengthened over time. The management of ABBs should be enhanced to reduce the risk of escalating human-bear conflicts (Kaczensky et al., 2004; Eklund et al., 2020; Oražem et al., 2021). Our result can provide a reference for future wildlife management planning and formulate an appropriate plan to monitor and deal with human-bear conflicts as soon as possible to better deal with the relationship between conservation and interests. Jilin Province started the Natural Forest Protection Project and restored grain plots to forested lands in the 1990s. At the same time, logging was banned entirely in 2015. We believe that, with time, the quality of the forest will gradually recover, which will lead to an expanding distribution of ABBs.

The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/supplementary material, further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding authors.

DH was mainly responsible for the field survey, data analysis, and manuscript writing. ZX was responsible for data analysis and manuscript revision. ZM supervised manuscript writing and helped with data analysis. RX was accountable for manuscript revision and field investigation coordination of various management departments. TL helped revise the manuscript. All authors contributed to the article and approved the submitted version.

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.

All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article, or claim that may be made by its manufacturer, is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.