Young black bear curiously examines a camera trap in a snowy forest
When winter blankets the landscape in snow, the wilderness transforms into a storybook written in tracks. Among the most intriguing are Bear Prints In The Snow, silent narratives left behind by these magnificent creatures. In regions where both black bears (Ursus americanus) and grizzly bears (Ursus arctos) roam, deciphering these prints becomes an exciting, albeit challenging, puzzle. While encountering a bear in national parks accustomed to human presence might be more common, venturing outside these protected zones often reveals only the subtle clues they leave behind – their tracks. Distinguishing between grizzly and black bear tracks, especially in the snow, can be tricky, and relying on a single characteristic often leads to misidentification. A comprehensive analysis of multiple features across several tracks is the most reliable approach to accurately identify bear prints in the snow.
The Pitfalls of Single-Feature Identification
Experience has taught wildlife trackers that focusing on just one aspect of a bear print in the snow can be misleading. Factors like snow consistency, the age of the track, and individual variations in a bear’s foot anatomy can render any single feature unreliable. Even within the same track trail, subtle changes in the snow surface can cause inconsistencies. Therefore, a holistic approach is crucial when attempting to differentiate between grizzly and black bear tracks in snowy conditions.
Unraveling Mystery Bear Tracks in Montana Snow
Recently, a captivating trail of bear prints in the snow was discovered in Montana, displaying an overstep walk pattern. This pattern, where hind tracks land ahead of the foretracks, offers an excellent opportunity for detailed analysis as it prevents overlapping and track obscuration.
Trail of bear tracks in snow, showcasing an overstep walk pattern, identified as likely grizzly tracks
Overstep walk pattern in bear prints in the snow found in Montana. The larger, oval print is the hind track, while the smaller one is the front track.
Upon close examination and meticulous measurements of three distinct sets of front and hind tracks, these mystery bear prints in the snow were initially identified as likely belonging to a grizzly bear. However, online discussions revealed differing opinions, prompting a more rigorous re-evaluation, akin to the curious inspection of the camera trap by the young bear in the opening image. While the initial assessment leaned towards grizzly, acknowledging the possibility of error and inviting further expert opinions remained essential.
Comparing with Known Black Bear Tracks in Snow
For a comparative perspective, photographs of confirmed black bear tracks in snow, captured by wildlife photographer Randy Robbins (explore his stunning work at Randy Robbins Photography), provide valuable insights. Randy Robbins directly observed the bear making these tracks, eliminating any ambiguity in their identification. These black bear tracks, also imprinted in wet snow, serve as an excellent benchmark for comparison against the mystery bear prints in the snow found in Montana.
Clear black bear tracks in wet snow, showcasing distinct features for comparison with grizzly tracks
Definitive black bear prints in the snow. The larger oval track is the hind print. Note the features for comparison with the mystery bear prints in the snow above.
Key Features for Distinguishing Bear Tracks in Snow
The identification of the mystery bear prints in the snow relied primarily on four key features: claw length, the 5th toe/interdigital pad rule, the presence of negative space, and overall track size. These features were then meticulously compared to those observed in Randy Robbins’ documented black bear tracks. Visual aids highlighting these features are provided at the end of this article for clearer understanding. These graphics are crucial for visualizing the subtle differences discussed below.
1. Claw Length in Bear Snow Prints
Grizzly bears typically exhibit longer and straighter claws on their front feet compared to black bears. This difference is attributed to their foraging habits, particularly root grubbing, as detailed in “Grizzly Bear Root Grubbing”. For many trackers, claw length is a primary distinguishing factor, often employing rules of thumb. Rezendes suggests comparing the claw length to the middle toe length on the front track. If the claw mark exceeds the toe length, it’s likely a grizzly. Conversely, if the claw mark is shorter, it’s more likely a black bear.
However, it’s crucial to acknowledge the limitations of this single feature. Rezendes himself noted that approximately 18% of Alaskan brown bears he tracked had claw lengths slightly shorter than their toe length. Similarly, Elbroch and McFarland caution against relying solely on claw length for definitive identification. Therefore, while informative, claw length should be considered alongside other characteristics.
In the mystery bear prints in the snow, the claw marks of the middle toe on all three front tracks are clearly visible and noticeably longer than the corresponding toes. (Refer to the graphics for visual confirmation). This observation aligns with grizzly bear characteristics. Claw marks in Randy’s black bear tracks are less distinct, and therefore not specifically labeled in the visual aids.
2. The 5th Toe / Interdigital Pad Rule for Front Bear Prints in Snow
This technique focuses on the arc formed by the toes of the front track and is exclusively applicable to front tracks. Its accuracy may be compromised when analyzing tracks in direct register patterns where hind tracks overlay front tracks.
Grizzly bear front toes tend to form a shallower arc, sometimes appearing almost linear. Black bear toe arcs, in contrast, are more pronounced. To assess this arc, visualize a line connecting the proximal edge of the outermost toe (toe #5) to the distal edge of the fused interdigital pad (akin to the human palm pad). This line is illustrated in green in the accompanying track photos.
In snowy or soft substrates, accurately determining the edges of toes and pads is crucial. Utilize the “minimum outline” approach, defining the outline at the deepest point of the track, as explained by TrackNature here.
Interpretation of the 5th toe rule is as follows:
- If more than half of the innermost toe (toe #1) extends beyond the line, it strongly suggests a grizzly bear.
- If the line bisects the toe, the result is inconclusive, necessitating the examination of other features.
- If more than half of the innermost toe falls behind the line, it points towards a black bear.
Applying this rule across multiple front tracks from the same animal is recommended, especially in ambiguous cases. In all three front mystery bear prints in the snow, over half of toe #1 extends beyond the line, suggesting grizzly, though not definitively. Acknowledging potential ambiguity, the evidence slightly favors grizzly, but leaves room for interpretation.
Visual comparison of the 5th Toe / Interdigital Pad Rule applied to black bear and grizzly bear tracks in snow
Applying the 5th Toe / Interdigital Pad Rule to a known black bear track (left) and a mystery bear print in the snow (right). The analysis suggests the mystery track is more likely from a grizzly.
3. Negative Space in Bear Tracks in Snow
Grizzly bears typically have less fur on the soles of their feet compared to black bears. Consequently, grizzly bear prints in the snow often exhibit less negative space. Toes may appear compressed, and negative space between the interdigital pad and heel pad might be absent. However, a crease between these pads may or may not be visible in the track.
Black bears, with more fur between their toes and a distinct wedge of fur in the “arch” between the interdigital and heel pads, often leave bear prints in the snow with more pronounced negative space. In ideal conditions, this wedge is clearly visible. However, substrate variations can affect its visibility. While two of the mystery hind tracks showed no clear wedge, one presented an ambiguous indentation that might be substrate irregularity rather than true negative space (see detailed photo descriptions later).
Elbroch and McFarland consider negative space a reliable distinguishing characteristic. Yet, due to substrate influence, it’s best used in conjunction with other features for accurate identification of bear prints in the snow.
4. Track Size of Bear Prints in Snow
Track size, while overlapping between species, becomes valuable when a track falls outside the typical size range for one species. For instance, the hind track length of the mystery bear prints in the snow exceeds the reported maximum size for black bear hind tracks in reputable tracking guides.
Elbroch and McFarland cite a maximum black bear hind track length of 8 and 7/8 inches, including claws. Rezendes reports a similar maximum of 7 and 3/4 inches, also including claws. The mystery hind tracks measured 9 and 1/4 and 9 and 1/2 inches, excluding claws, significantly surpassing the established black bear range, further supporting a grizzly identification.
5. Bonus Feature: Track Depth in Snow
Zoologist Vladimir Dinets highlighted another distinguishing feature: track depth. Due to their heavy shoulder musculature, grizzly bears tend to leave deeper front tracks compared to their hind tracks. This is not typical for black bears, who lack the prominent shoulder hump. In fact, during hyperphagia (period of excessive eating), a black bear’s hind tracks might be deeper due to the weight of their full belly.
Unfortunately, track depth comparison wasn’t considered when the mystery bear prints in the snow were initially found, and the photographs don’t definitively reveal depth differences. However, this valuable feature will be incorporated in future tracking endeavors.
Visual Guide to Bear Tracks in Snow Features
Mystery Bear Tracks in Snow with Feature Highlights
(Above) Montana mystery bear prints in the snow. Features such as long front claws, large hind track size, minimal negative space in the hind track’s “arch,” and the shallow toe arc in the front track suggest these are grizzly tracks.
Annotated image of grizzly bear tracks in snow highlighting key identification features
(Above) This pair of bear prints in the snow from the same trail reveals a potential negative space wedge in the hind track. However, the wedge extends to the interdigital pad’s edge, raising questions about substrate irregularity versus genuine negative space.
(Above) In this third pair of mystery bear prints in the snow, almost half of the innermost toe falls behind the green line, a somewhat ambiguous result. An indentation is present in the “arch” but less pronounced than the negative space wedge typical of black bear tracks.
Known Black Bear Tracks in Snow with Feature Highlights
Annotated image of black bear tracks in snow highlighting key identification features
(Above) Black bear prints in the snow. The light wedge between the heel and ball in the hind track corresponds to the fur wedge on a black bear’s foot. The innermost toe on the front track clearly falls behind the green line.
Conclusion: Diagnosing Bear Prints in Snow
Identifying bear prints in the snow involves probability rather than absolute certainty. Can we definitively say the mystery tracks are grizzly and not black bear? No. However, the collective track characteristics strongly lean towards grizzly:
If these Montana bear prints in the snow were indeed made by a black bear, it would be an exceptionally large individual with unusually long claws, a less pronounced toe arc, and potentially less foot fur than typical for its species. While not impossible, a normal-sized grizzly with typical claws and a slightly more pronounced toe arc is a more probable explanation.
Grizzly bear mother and cub in their natural habitat
Grizzly mother and cub. Note the prominent shoulder hump of the mother. This muscular build can cause deeper front tracks compared to hind tracks in grizzlies. Image from a trail camera video.
References
Elbroch, M. and C. McFarland. Mammals Tracks & Sign: A Guide to North American Mammals. 2nd Edition. Guilford, CT: Stackpole Books, 2019.
Rezendes, P. Tracking & the Art of Seeing: How to Read Animal Tracks and Sign. 2nd Edition. New York, NT: HarperCollins Publishers, 1999.
