Annual Arctic Wolf Pack Size Related to Arctic Hare Numbers

During the summers of 2000 through 2006, I counted arctic wolf (Canis lupus arctos) pups and adults in a pack, arctic hares (Lepus arcticus) along a 9 km index route in the area, and muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus) in a 250 km2 part of the area near Eureka (80° N, 86° W), Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, Canada. Adult wolf numbers did not correlate with muskox numbers, but they were positively related (r2 = 0.89; p < 0.01) to an arctic hare index. This is the first report relating wolf numbers to non-ungulate prey.Pendant les étés 2000 à 2006, j’ai compté les jeunes loups arctiques et les adultes (Canis lupus arctos) d’une bande, les lièvres arctiques (Lepus arcticus) le long d’une route indexée de 9 km dans la région, et les boeufs musqués (Ovibos moschatus) dans une zone de 250 km2 près d’Eureka (80° N, 86° O), sur l’île d’Ellesmere, au Nunavut, Canada. Le nombre de loups adultes ne corrélait pas avec le nombre de boeufs musqués, mais il était relié de manière positive (r2 = 0,89; p < 0,01) à un index de lièvres arctiques. Il s’agit du premier rapport établissant un lien entre le nombre de loups et des proies non ongulées

The Challenge and Opportunity of Recovering Wolf Populations

The gray wolf once inhabited a wide variety of habitats throughout most of the northern hemisphere north of 20°N latitude. Because the animal preyed on livestock and competed with humans for wild prey, it was extirpated from much of its range outside of wilderness areas. Environmental awareness in the late 1960s brought for the wolf legal protection, increased research, and favorable media coverage. The species has increased in both Europe and North America, is beginning to reoccupy semiwilderness and agricultural land, and is causing increased damage to livestock. Because of the wolfs high reproductive rate and long dispersal tendencies, the animal can recolonize many more areas. In most such areas control will be necessary, but the same public sentiments that promoted wolf recovery reject control. If wolf advocates could accept control by the public rather than by the government, wolves could live in far more places. Insistence on government control discourages some officials and government agencies from promoting recovery. The use of large- or small-scale zoning for wolf management may help resolve the issue. Public education is probably the most effective way to minimize the problem and maximize wolf recovery, but the effort must begin immediately. En su momento, el lobo gris habitó la mayor parte del hemisferio norte al norte de los 20° latitud norte, a lo largo de una gran variedad de hábitats. Este animal fue extirpado de la mayor parte de su rango de distribución en áreas no incluidas dentro de zones naturales debido a que predaba sobre ganado y competía con los humanos por presas silvestres. La concientización ambiental defines de los decada de los 60s trajo consigo la protección legal del lobo asi como también un aumento en la investigación cientifica y la cobertura favorable de los medios de difusión sobre esta especie. Esta especie ha aumentado en abundancia tanto en Europa como en América del Norte y esta comenzando a recolonizar tierras seminaturales y agricolas y esta causando un aumento en el daño al ganado. Debido a su alta tasa reproductiva y tendencias de dispersión a gran distancia, el lobo puede recolonizar muchas más áreas. El control de esta especie se hará necesario en la mayoría de tales áreas. Sin embargo, los mismos sentimientos públicos que promovieron la recuperación del lobo rechazan tal control. Los lobos podrían vivir en muchos más lugares si los defensores de los lobos pueden aceptar un control por parte del público antes que por parte del gobierno. La insistencia sobre un control gubernamental desalienta a algunos funcionarios y agencias gubernamentales de promover la recuperación del lobo. El uso de una zonificación en el manejo de los lobos, a gran o pequeña escala podria ayudar a resolver este problema La educación publica es probablemente el camino más efectivo para minimizar el problema y maximizar la recuperación de los lobos, pero la acción debe comenzar en forma inmediata

Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) Movements and Behavior Around a Kill Site and Implications for GPS Collar Studies

Global Positioning System (GPS) radio-collars are increasingly used to estimate Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) kill rates. In interpreting results from this technology, researchers make various assumptions about wolf behavior around kills, yet no detailed description of this behavior has been published. This article describes the behavior of six wolves in an area of constant daylight during 30 hours, from when the pack killed a Muskox (Ovibos moschatus) calf and yearling on Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, Canada, to when they abandoned the kill remains. Although this is only a single incident, it demonstrates one possible scenario of pack behavior around a kill. Combined with the literature, this observation supports placing a radio-collar on the breeding male to maximize finding kills via GPS collars and qualifying results depending on whatever other information is available about the collared wolf’s pack

A Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e) Delivers Live Prey to a Pup

A two-year-old sibling Gray Wolf (Canis lupus) carefully captured an Arctic Hare (Lepus arcticus) leveret alive on Ellesmere Island, Nunavut, Canada, and delivered it alive to a pup 28–33 days old. This appears to be the first observation of a Gray Wolf delivering live prey to a pup

The Scientific Classification of Wolves: \u3ci\u3eCanis lupus soupus\u3c/i\u3e

Gray wolf, timber wolf, red wolf, eastern wolf, brush wolf, arctic wolf, Mexican wolf, maned wolf, Ethiopian wolf, etc., etc. How many kinds of wolves are there? And what are the differences? This is a really good question, and the answer is getting more complicated all the time. Let us start by going back a few years to the way science looked at wolves more traditionally— before the days of the new field of molecular genetics. Molecular genetics examines the actual DNA of animals and tries to classify them according to genetic similarities. ... What does all this mean in terms of understanding basic wolf biology and behavior? Actually not much. The aphorism “a wolf is a wolf is a wolf” is highly appropriate in this regard to anyone except the taxonomist. Regardless of what they are called or what differences the current genetic testing shows, wolves throughout the world are pretty much the same in basic appearance and behavior. The strong implication here is that when it comes to the great majority of the wolf genome that codes for basic wolf appearance and behavior—the DNA that has not been tested—gray wolves are essentially all the same. As to the races or subspecies of gray wolves, or the proposed new species, time and much more study will tell. Meanwhile, the classification of wolves to most members of the public will remain a mystery and an enigma probably best embodied in the not-so-scientific name, Canis lupus soupus

Extinguishing a Learned Response in a Free-ranging Gray Wolf (\u3ci\u3eCanis lupus\u3c/i\u3e)

Learning and extinguishing learned behaviour (Thorn dike 1911; Skinner 1953) have been well studied in domestic dogs (Miklosi 2015). Some investigations of learning have been conducted with captive Gray Wolves (Canis lupus; Packard 2003; Frank 2011), including one study that included extinguishing learned behaviour (Cheney 1982). In addition, considerable research has been done comparing social learning be - tween dogs and captive wolves (Range and Viranyi 2013; Marshall-Pescini et al. 2015). However, to my knowledge, only Packard (2012) has studied learning in free-ranging wolves, and no one has investigated extinguishing a learned response in such wolves. The purpose of this study is to provide a detailed account of how I extinguished a learned response in a free-ranging wolf

Patuxent’s Long-Term Research on Wolves

The gray wolf (Canis lupus) was one of the first species placed on the Endangered Species List in 1967. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 legally protected the wolf along with other listed species. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (Patuxent) in Laurel, MD, began its Endangered Wildlife Program in 1966, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) biologist Ray Erickson was assigned to lead it. In 1973, I was transferred to the program from Region 3 of the USFWS, having been employed there since 1969 to study wolves in Minnesota. Endangered Species Act protection of the wolf fostered its quick population response, and wolf numbers began to increase in their reservoir in northeastern Minnesota and adjacent Canada and expand throughout northern Minnesota and eventually into Wisconsin and Michigan. In 2009, the number of wolves in Minnesota was approximately 3,000, and there were at least 1,500 in Wisconsin and Michigan. This chapter describes Patuxent’s wolf research, which continued into 1993 when Congress incorporated the USFWS’s Endangered Wildlife Research Program into the National Biological Survey (NBS). Eventually the NBS merged with the U.S. Geological Survey, and the long-term wolf research program was transferred to the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Through all the administrative changes, Patuxent’s wolf research project continued through the various agencies into the present (2016). The text that follows is modified from Mech (2009)

Managing Minnesota\u27s recovered wolves

The Minnesota wolf (Canis lupus) population was estimated by the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources at 2,450 during winter 1997-1998 and had increased at an average annual rate of 4.5°% since winter 1988-1989. The population may be removed from the federal endangered species list by 2002, and management would then return to the state. A federal recovery team recommended a population goal of 1,250-1,400 wolves for Minnesota, with none in the agricultural region. A plan approved by the Minnesota legislature, however, continues the protection of wolves, except for pet and livestock depredation control, for at least 5 years after delisting. I compare number of wolves of the 1997-1998 population that would have to be killed each year by humans for various types of control versus numbers if the population continued to expand. For the 1997-1998 population, those numbers are in addition to natural mortality, depredation control, and illegal and incidental take at least 1 10 wolves and probably many more to limit wolf range, 685-1,149 wolves for sustained yield, and 929-1,956 to reduce the population. Given conservative assumptions, continued livestock depredation control, and a 4.5% rate of population and range increase as occurred during the past decade, comparable figures for 2007 are at least 171 wolves to limit range expansion, 1,064-1,786 for sustained yield, and 1,444-3,042 to reduce the population. The trend in the population since 1997-1998 is unknown, but these numbers illustrate the magnitude of the potential problems that could arise in managing Minnesota\u27s wolves under various scenarios

Lack of Reproduction in Muskoxen and Arctic Hares Caused by Early Winter?

A lack of young muskoxen (Ovibos moschatus) and arctic hares (Lepus arcticus) in the Eureka area of Ellesmere Island, Northwest Territories (now Nunavut), Canada, was observed during summer 1998, in contrast to most other years since 1986. Evidence of malnourished muskoxen was also found. Early winter weather and a consequent 50% reduction of the 1997 summer replenishment period appeared to be the most likely cause, giving rise to a new hypothesis about conditions that might cause adverse demographic effects in arctic herbivores.Key words: arctic hare, Lepus arcticus, Ellesmere Island, malnutrition, muskox, Ovibos moschatus, population, reproduction, snow, weather, winter severityDurant l'été 1998, et ce, à la différence de la plupart des années depuis 1986, on a relevé un manque de jeunes boeufs musqués (Ovibos moschatus) et de lièvres arctiques (Lepus arcticus) dans la région d'Eureka de l'île d'Ellesmere (Territoires du Nord-Ouest [maintenant Nunavut], au Canada). On a aussi découvert des preuves de malnutrition chez le boeuf musqué. La cause la plus probable semble être un hiver hâtif et la baisse résultante de 50 p. cent de la période de restauration estivale en 1997, ce qui donne lieu à une nouvelle hypothèse sur les conditions qui pourraient avoir des répercussions démographiques nuisibles chez les herbivores de l'Arctique.Mots clés: lièvre arctique, Lepus arcticus, île d’Ellesmere, malnutrition, boeuf musqué, Ovibos moschatus, population, reproduction, neige, temps, rigueur de l’hive

Patuxent’s Long-Term Research on Wolves

The gray wolf (Canis lupus) was one of the first species placed on the Endangered Species List in 1967. The Endangered Species Act of 1973 legally protected the wolf along with other listed species. Patuxent Wildlife Research Center (Patuxent) in Laurel, MD, began its Endangered Wildlife Program in 1966, and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) biologist Ray Erickson was assigned to lead it. In 1973, I was transferred to the program from Region 3 of the USFWS, having been employed there since 1969 to study wolves in Minnesota. Endangered Species Act protection of the wolf fostered its quick population response, and wolf numbers began to increase in their reservoir in northeastern Minnesota and adjacent Canada and expand throughout northern Minnesota and eventually into Wisconsin and Michigan. In 2009, the number of wolves in Minnesota was approximately 3,000, and there were at least 1,500 in Wisconsin and Michigan. This chapter describes Patuxent’s wolf research, which continued into 1993 when Congress incorporated the USFWS’s Endangered Wildlife Research Program into the National Biological Survey (NBS). Eventually the NBS merged with the U.S. Geological Survey, and the long-term wolf research program was transferred to the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. Through all the administrative changes, Patuxent’s wolf research project continued through the various agencies into the present (2016). The text that follows is modified from Mech (2009)