Invading white-tailed deer change wolf–caribou dynamics in northeastern Alberta

Human-caused habitat change has been implicated in current woodland caribou (Rangifer tarandus caribou) population declines across North America. Increased early seral habitat associated with industrial footprint can result in an increase in ungulate densities and subsequently those of their predator, wolves (Canis lupus). Higher wolf densities can result in increased encounters between wolves and caribou and consequently higher caribou mortality. We contrasted changes in moose (Alces alces) and deer (Odocoileus spp.) densities and assessed their effects on wolf–caribou dynamics in northeastern Alberta, Canada, pre (1994–1997) versus post (2005–2009) major industrial expansion in the region. Observable white-tailed deer (O. virginianus) increased 17.5-fold but moose remained unchanged. Wolf numbers also increased from approximately 6–11.5/1,000 km². Coincident with these changes, spatial overlap between wolf pack territories and caribou range was high relative to the mid-1990s. The high number of wolf locations in caribou range suggests that forays were not merely exploratory, but rather represented hunting forays and denning locations. Scat analysis indicated that wolf consumption of moose declined substantively during this time period, whereas use of deer increased markedly and deer replaced moose as the primary prey of wolves. Caribou increased 10-fold in the diet of wolves and caribou population trends in the region changed from stable to declining. Wolf use of beaver (Castor canadensis) increased since the mid-1990s. We suggest that recent declines in woodland caribou populations in the southerly extent of their range have occurred because high deer densities resulted in a numeric response by wolves and consequently higher incidental predation on caribou. Our results indicate that management actions to conserve caribou must now include deer in primary prey and wolf reduction programs. © 2010 The Wildlife Society     

Ecological factors drive differentiation in wolves from British Columbia

Aim Limited population structure is predicted for vagile, generalist species, such as the grey wolf (Canis lupus L.). Our aims were to study how genetic variability of grey wolves was distributed in an area comprising different habitats that lay within the potential dispersal range of an individual and to make inferences about the impact of ecology on population structure. Location British Columbia, Canada – which is characterized by a continuum of biogeoclimatic zones across which grey wolves are distributed – and adjacent areas in both Canada and Alaska, United States. Methods We obtained mitochondrial DNA control region sequences from grey wolves from across the province and integrated our genetic results with data on phenotype, behaviour and ecology (distance, habitat and prey composition). We also compared the genetic diversity and differentiation of British Columbia grey wolves with those of other North American wolf populations. Results We found strong genetic differentiation between adjacent populations of grey wolves from coastal and inland British Columbia. We show that the most likely factor explaining this differentiation is habitat discontinuity between the coastal and interior regions of British Columbia, as opposed to geographic distance or physical barriers to dispersal. We hypothesize that dispersing grey wolves select habitats similar to the one in which they were reared, and that this differentiation is maintained largely through behavioural mechanisms. Main conclusions The identification of strong genetic structure on a scale within the dispersing capabilities of an individual suggests that ecological factors are driving wolf differentiation in British Columbia. Coastal wolves are highly distinct and representative of a unique ecosystem, whereas inland British Columbia grey wolves are more similar to adjacent populations of wolves located in Alaska, Alberta and Northwest Territories. Given their unique ecological, morphological, behavioural and genetic characteristics, grey wolves of coastal British Columbia should be considered an Evolutionary Significant Unit (ESU) and, consequently, warrant special conservation status. If ecology can drive differentiation in a highly mobile generalist such as the grey wolf, ecology probably drives differentiation in many other species as well.     

Wolves,white‐tailed deer,and beaver: implications of seasonal prey switching for woodland caribou declines

Population increases of primary prey can negatively impact alternate prey populations via demographic and behavioural responses of a shared predator through apparent competition. Seasonal variation in prey selection patterns by predators also can affect secondary and incidental prey by reducing spatial separation. Global warming and landscape changes in Alberta's bitumen sands have resulted in prey enrichment, which is changing the large mammal predator–prey system and causing declines in woodland caribou Rangifer tarandus caribou populations. We assessed seasonal patterns of prey use and spatial selection by wolves Canis lupus in two woodland caribou ranges in northeastern Alberta, Canada, that have undergone prey enrichment following recent white‐tailed deer Odocoileus virginianus invasion. We determined whether risk of predation for caribou (incidental prey) and the proportion of wolf‐caused‐caribou mortalities varied with season. We found that wolves showed seasonal variation in primary prey use, with deer and beaver Castor canadensis being the most common prey items in wolf diet in winter and summer, respectively. These seasonal dietary patterns were reflected in seasonal wolf spatial resource selection and resulted in contrasting spatial relationships between wolves and caribou. During winter, wolf selection for areas used by deer maintained strong spatial separation between wolves and caribou, whereas wolf selection for areas used by beaver in summer increased the overlap with caribou. Changing patterns in wolf resource selection were reflected by caribou mortality patterns, with 76.2% of 42 adult female caribou mortalities occurring in summer. Understanding seasonal patterns of predation following prey enrichment in a multiprey system is essential when assessing the effect of predation on an incidental prey species. Our results support the conclusion that wolves are proximately responsible for woodland caribou population declines throughout much of their range.     

Optimal predator management for mountain sheep conservation depends on the strength of mesopredator release

Large predators often suppress ungulate population growth, but they may also suppress the abundance of smaller predators that prey on neonatal ungulates. Antagonistic interactions among predators may therefore need to be integrated into predator–prey models to effectively manage ungulate–predator systems. We present a modeling framework that examines the net impact of interacting predators on the population growth rate of shared prey, using interactions among wolves Canis lupus, coyotes Canis latrans and Dall sheep Ovis dalli dalli as a case study. Wolf control is currently employed on approximately 16 million ha in Alaska to increase the abundance of ungulates for human harvest. We hypothesized that the positive effects of wolf control on Dall sheep population growth could be counteracted by increased levels of predation by coyotes. Coyotes and Dall sheep adult females (ewes) and lambs were radiocollared in the Alaska Range from 1999–2005 to estimate fecundity, age‐specific survival rates, and causes of mortality in an area without wolf control. We used stage‐structured population models to simulate the net effect of wolf control on Dall sheep population growth (λ). Our models accounted for stage‐specific predation rates by wolves and coyotes, compensatory mortality, and the potential release of coyote populations due to wolf control. Wolves were the main predators of ewes, coyotes were the main predators of lambs, and wolves were the main source of mortality for coyotes. Population models predicted that wolf control could increase sheep λ by 4% per year in the absence of mesopredator release. However, if wolf control released coyote populations, our models predicted that sheep λ could decrease by up to 3% per year. These results highlight the importance of integrating antagonistic interactions among predators into predator–prey models, because the net effect of predator management on shared prey can depend critically on the strength of mesopredator release.     

Planning and Implementing a Reintroduction of Wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho

The Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery plan proposed reintroduction of Canis lupus (gray wolf) to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho as part of a wolf restoration plan for the northern Rocky Mountains of the United States. Strong opposition from some factions within the region forestalled the action for two decades. An environmental impact statement, conducted in 1992–1994 with extensive public input, culminated in a proposal to reintroduce wolves designated as “non-essential—experimental” under Section 10 (j) of the federal Endangered Species Act. This approach, approved by the Secretary of the Interior in 1994, provided for wolf restoration while allowing management flexibility to deal with concerns of the local public. A reintroduction plan was developed in the summer and fall of 1994. Acquiring, holding, transporting, and releasing suitable wolves for reintroduction presented a myriad of technical and logistical challenges that required effective planning and coordination by all participants. In January 1995, 29 wolves were captured in Alberta and transported to Yellowstone National Park (14) and central Idaho (15). Idaho wolves were freed immediately upon arrival; Yellowstone wolves (three family groups) were held in acclimation pens in the park until late March. Most Idaho wolves traveled extensively within the area intended for them, averaging 82 km net distance away from release sites after 5 months (range = 30–220 km), and three male-female pairs formed by July. After 5 months in the wild, at least 13 of 15 Idaho-released wolves were alive within the intended area, as were 13 of 14 Yellowstone wolves; one wolf was known to have been illegally killed in each area. No livestock were killed. Wolves released into Yellowstone Park continued to live as packs, stayed closer to their release sites (x = 22 km at end of June), and settled into home ranges; two packs produced a total of nine pups. The progress of the reintroduction program in its first year far exceeded expectations. Reintroductions of about 15 wolves to each area for 2–4 more years are scheduled, but the project may be shortened because of early successes. Future reintroduction planners can expect sociocultural issues to pervade the effort, but they can be optimistic that, from a biological standpoint, reintroduction of wolves has strong potential as a restoration technique.     

中国狼不同地理种群遗传多样性及系统进化分析

为了解中国狼不同地理种群遗传多样性及系统发育情况,从中国境内狼的主要分布区青海、新疆、内蒙古和吉林4个地区采集样品,用分子生物学技术手段成功地获得44个个体线粒体DNA控制区第一高变区(HVRⅠ)序列和40个线粒体Cyt b部分序列。线粒体控制区HVRⅠ共检测到51个变异位点,位点变异率为8.76%;线粒体Cyt b部分序列发现31个变异位点,位点变异率为5.33%,未见插入及缺失现象,变异类型全部为碱基置换。共定义了16个线粒体HVRⅠ单倍型,其中吉林与内蒙种群存在共享单倍型,估计这两地间种群亲缘关系较近。4个地理种群中新疆种群拥有较高的遗传多样性(0.94)。中国狼种群总体平均核苷酸多态性为2.27%,与世界其他国家地区相比,中国狼种群拥有相对较高的遗传多样性。通过线粒体HVRⅠ单倍型构建的系统进化树可以看出,中国狼在进化上分为2大支,其中位于青藏高原的青海种群独立为一支,推测其可能长期作为独立种群进化。基于青海种群与新疆,内蒙种群的线粒体Cyt b遗传距离,推测中国狼2个世系可能在更新世冰川时期青藏高原受地质作用急速隆起后出现分歧,分歧时间大约在1.1 MY前。     

Habitat variables associated with wolf (Canis lupus) distribution and abundance in northern Poland

Based on data collected during the National Wolf Census in 2000–01, we analysed the main habitat factors influencing the distribution and abundance of the wolf, Canis lupus, in northern Poland. The study region forms the western border of the continuous Eastern European range of wolves, although attempts at westward dispersal have been observed. Using Geographic Information System techniques, we measured nine habitat variables and three parameters related to wolf occurrence in 134 circular sample plots (radius 7 km, area 154 km² each). We compared 72 plots where wolves were recorded and 62 plots with no signs of wolf presence. Wolf plots were characterized by significantly higher forest cover, less fragmentation of forests, lower density of villages, towns, motorways, and railways than wolf‐free plots. We found a positive correlation between the sum of wolf observations in plots and forest cover. The number of domestic animals killed by wolves was higher in areas with higher indices of wolf abundance and lower forest area. In multiple regression analysis, four independent variables explained 59% of the variation in wolf distribution and abundance in northern Poland: straight‐line distance to continuous range of wolves in Eastern Europe; forest cover; forest fragmentation; and length of major motorways. We conclude that protection of wolves in Poland (since 1998) may not be an adequate conservation measure, especially because of the increasing density of highways and express motorways. Existing forest corridors should be protected and new ones should be restored to ensure long‐term conservation of wolves and allow range expansion into Western Europe.     

The Effects of Breeder Loss on Wolves

Abstract Managers of recovering wolf (Canis lupus) populations require knowledge regarding the potential impacts caused by the loss of territorial, breeding wolves when devising plans that aim to balance population goals with human concerns. Although ecologists have studied wolves extensively, we lack an understanding of this phenomenon as published records are sparse. Therefore, we pooled data (n = 134 cases) on 148 territorial breeding wolves (75 M and 73 F) from our research and published accounts to assess the impacts of breeder loss on wolf pup survival, reproduction, and territorial social groups. In 58 of 71 cases (84%), ≥1 pup survived, and the number or sex of remaining breeders (including multiple breeders) did not influence pup survival. Pups survived more frequently in groups of ≥6 wolves (90%) compared with smaller groups (68%). Auxiliary nonbreeders benefited pup survival, with pups surviving in 92% of cases where auxiliaries were present and 64% where they were absent. Logistic regression analysis indicated that the number of adult-sized wolves remaining after breeder loss, along with pup age, had the greatest influence on pup survival. Territorial wolves reproduced the following season in 47% of cases, and a greater proportion reproduced where one breeder had to be replaced (56%) versus cases where both breeders had to be replaced (9%). Group size was greater for wolves that reproduced the following season compared with those that did not reproduce. Large recolonizing (>75 wolves) and saturated wolf populations had similar times to breeder replacement and next reproduction, which was about half that for small recolonizing (≤75 wolves) populations. We found inverse relationships between recolonizing population size and time to breeder replacement (r= —0.37) and time to next reproduction (r= —0.36). Time to breeder replacement correlated strongly with time to next reproduction (r=0.97). Wolf social groups dissolved and abandoned their territories subsequent to breeder loss in 38% of cases. Where groups dissolved, wolves reestablished territories in 53% of cases, and neighboring wolves usurped territories in an additional 21% of cases. Fewer groups dissolved where breeders remained (26%) versus cases where breeders were absent (85%). Group size after breeder loss was smaller where groups dissolved versus cases where groups did not dissolve. To minimize negative impacts, we recommend that managers of recolonizing wolf populations limit lethal control to solitary individuals or territorial pairs where possible, because selective removal of pack members can be difficult. When reproductive packs are to be managed, we recommend that managers only remove wolves from reproductive packs when pups are ≥6 months old and packs contain ≥6 members (including ≥3 ad-sized wolves). Ideally, such packs should be close to neighboring packs and occur within larger (≥75 wolves) recolonizing populations.     

Efficient,Noninvasive Genetic Sampling for Monitoring Reintroduced Wolves

ABSTRACT Traditional methods of monitoring gray wolves (Canis lupus) are expensive and invasive and require extensive efforts to capture individual animals. Noninvasive genetic sampling (NGS) is an alternative method that can provide data to answer management questions and complement already-existing methods. In a 2-year study, we tested this approach for Idaho gray wolves in areas of known high and low wolf density. To focus sampling efforts across a large study area and increase our chances of detecting reproductive packs, we visited 964 areas with landscape characteristics similar to known wolf rendezvous sites. We collected scat or hair samples from 20% of sites and identified 122 wolves, using 8–9 microsatellite loci. We used the minimum count of wolves to accurately detect known differences in wolf density. Maximum likelihood and Bayesian single-session population estimators performed similarly and accurately estimated the population size, compared with a radiotelemetry population estimate, in both years, and an average of 1.7 captures per individual were necessary for achieving accurate population estimates. Subsampling scenarios revealed that both scat and hair samples were important for achieving accurate population estimates, but visiting 75% and 50% of the sites still gave reasonable estimates and reduced costs. Our research provides managers with an efficient and accurate method for monitoring high-density and low-density wolf populations in remote areas.     

Survival of Colonizing Wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains of the United States, 1982–2004

Abstract: After roughly a 60-year absence, wolves (Canis lupus) immigrated (1979) and were reintroduced (1995-1996) into the northern Rocky Mountains (NRM), USA, where wolves are protected under the Endangered Species Act. The wolf recovery goal is to restore an equitably distributed metapopulation of ≥30 breeding pairs and 300 wolves in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming, while minimizing damage to livestock; ultimately, the objective is to establish state-managed conservation programs for wolf populations in NRM. Previously, wolves were eradicated from the NRM because of excessive human killing. We used Andersen–Gill hazard models to assess biological, habitat, and anthropogenic factors contributing to current wolf mortality risk and whether federal protection was adequate to provide acceptably low hazards. We radiocollared 711 wolves in Idaho, Montana, and Wyoming (e.g., NRM region of the United States) from 1982 to 2004 and recorded 363 mortalities. Overall, annual survival rate of wolves in the recovery areas was 0.750 (95% CI = 0.728-0.772), which is generally considered adequate for wolf population sustainability and thereby allowed the NRM wolf population to increase. Contrary to our prediction, wolf mortality risk was higher in the northwest Montana (NWMT) recovery area, likely due to less abundant public land being secure wolf habitat compared to other recovery areas. In contrast, lower hazards in the Greater Yellowstone Area (GYA) and central Idaho (CID) likely were due to larger core areas that offered stronger wolf protection. We also found that wolves collared for damage management purposes (targeted sample) had substantially lower survival than those collared for monitoring purposes (representative sample) because most mortality was due to human factors (e.g., illegal take, control). This difference in survival underscores the importance of human-caused mortality in this recovering NRM population. Other factors contributing to increased mortality risk were pup and yearling age class, or dispersing status, which was related to younger age cohorts. When we included habitat variables in our analysis, we found that wolves having abundant agricultural and private land as well as livestock in their territory had higher mortality risk. Wolf survival was higher in areas with increased wolf density, implying that secure core habitat, particularly in GYA and CID, is important for wolf protection. We failed to detect changes in wolf hazards according to either gender or season. Maintaining wolves in NWMT will require greater attention to human harvest, conflict resolution, and illegal mortality than in either CID or GYA; however, if human access increases in the future in either of the latter 2 areas hazards to wolves also may increase. Indeed, because overall suitable habitat is more fragmented and the NRM has higher human access than many places where wolves roam freely and are subject to harvest (e.g., Canada and AK), monitoring of wolf vital rates, along with concomitant conservation and management strategies directed at wolves, their habitat, and humans, will be important for ensuring long-term viability of wolves in the region.     

Some Aspects of the Population Ecology of Wolves, Alaska

Information on Alaskan wolf populations was obtained from examinationof bounty records, 4,150 wolf radii and ulnae, 1,262 wolf carcasses,and from observations of wolves inhabiting an area of 20,000square miles where wolves were protected. Pregnant adult female wolves averaged 6.5 fetuses; two-year-oldfemales averaged 5.3 fetuses;female pups were not sexually mature. In Alaska, wolves conceive from late February through earlyApril but most females breed in March. Multiparous females breedearlier than first breeders. Multiparous females produce anaverage of 7.3 ova and 6.5 implanted fetuses. The loss of ovafrom ovulation to implantation is significant. Multiparous femalesproduce more ova than first breeders; the difference is highlysignificant. Mortality of pups rather than the lack of initial productionof pups is believed to be the reason for the observed variationsin the proportion of pups in wolf populations. Wolf packs includemembers in all categories of sex and age during the breedingseason. Size of the pack is an indicator of abundance. Wolves in an area where they were protected increased at anaverage rate of 20–30% per year during an 11-year period.     

Dispersal Behavior and the Connectivity Between Wolf Populations in Northern Europe

ABSTRACT The isolated gray wolf (Canis lupus) population of the Scandinavian Peninsular is suffering from inbreeding depression. We studied dispersal of 35 wolves fitted with very high frequency (20) or Global Positioning System—global system for mobile (15) radiocollars in the neighboring Finnish wolf population. The growing wolf population in Finland has high numbers of dispersing individuals that could potentially disperse into the Scandinavian population. About half (53%) of the dispersing wolves moved total distances that could have reached the Scandinavian population if they had been straight-line moves, but because of the irregular pattern of movements, we detected no wolves successfully dispersing to the Scandinavian population. Dispersal to the Scandinavian population was also limited by high mortality of wolves in reindeer (Rangifer tarandus) management areas and by dispersal to Bothnian Bay at times of the year when ice was not present. We suggest that when a small wolf population is separated from source populations by distance, barriers, and human exploitation, wildlife managers could promote the population's viability by limiting harvest in the peripheral areas or by introducing wolves from the source population.     

On the path to extinction: Inbreeding and admixture in a declining grey wolf population

Allee effects reduce the viability of small populations in many different ways, which act synergistically to lead populations towards extinction vortexes. The Sierra Morena wolf population, isolated in the south of the Iberian Peninsula and composed of just one or few packs for decades, represents a good example of how diverse threats act additively in very small populations. We sequenced the genome of one of the last wolves identified (and road‐killed) in Sierra Morena and that of another wolf in the Iberian Wolf Captive Breeding Program and compared them with other wolf and dog genomes from around the world (including two previously published genome sequences from northern Iberian wolves). The results showed relatively low overall genetic diversity in Iberian wolves, but diverse population histories including past introgression of dog genes. The Sierra Morena wolf had an extraordinarily high level of inbreeding and long runs of homozygosity, resulting from the long isolation. In addition, about one‐third of the genome was of dog origin. Despite the introgression of dog genes, heterozygosity remained low because of continued inbreeding after several hybridization events. The results thus illustrate the case of a small and isolated wolf population where the low population density may have favoured hybridization and introgression of dog alleles, but continued inbreeding may have resulted in large chromosomal fragments of wolf origin completely disappearing from the population, and being replaced by chromosomal fragments of dog origin. The latest population surveys suggest that this population may have gone extinct.     

Wolf Depredation on Domestic Animals in the Polish Carpathian Mountains

Abstract As wolves (Canis lupus) recover in Poland, their depredation on domestic animals is increasing, as have conflicts between wolves and farmers. From 1998 to 2004, I investigated spatial and temporal patterns of 591 verified incidents of wolf depredation in the eastern part of the Polish Carpathian Mountains. The wolf population I surveyed covered an estimated range of 4,993 km². Depredation occurred over 1,595 km² of that area. Sheep accounted for 84.8% of domestic animals killed by wolves. Depredation on sheep and number of sheep farms attacked by wolves increased between 1998 and 2004 (r² = 0.61, P = 0.04 and r² = 0.89, P = 0.02, respectively). The number of wolf attacks on sheep farms in a given year were negatively correlated to red deer (Cervus elaphus) population numbers (R² = 0.69, P = 0.02). The amount of depredation caused by each of the 4 monitored packs was best explained by farm density in their territories (R² = 0.59, P = 0.004). Number of attacks recorded on farms was positively correlated to distance from the farm to the pack's den and rendezvous sites (R² = 0.16, P = 0.04). Of depredation recorded in the 4 pack's territories I surveyed, 77% occurred in 4 farms with no or inadequate protection. I concluded that wolf depredation in the studied area is opportunistic. Wolf predation intensity is a function of decreasing abundance of red deer, the density of sheep farms, and proximity of farms to the summer activity centers of wolf packs, and it is facilitated by poor husbandry practices. These results can aid in preventing wolf depredation and provide a foundation for a wolf management plan.     

Wolf predation on moose and roe deer: chase distances and outcome of encounters

We examined chase distances of gray wolves Canis lupus Linnaeus, 1758 hunting moose Alces alces and roe deer Capreolus capreolus, and recorded details of encounters between wolves and prey on the Scandinavian Peninsula, 1997–2003. In total, 252 wolf attacks on moose and 64 attacks on roe deer were registered during 4200 km of snow tracking in 28 wolf territories. Average chase distances were 76 m for moose and 237 m for roe deer, a difference likely due to variation in body size and vigilance between prey species. A model including prey species, outcome of the attack, and snow depth explained 15–19% of the variation found in chase distances, with shorter chase distances associated with greater snow depth and with successful attacks on moose but not on roe deer. Wolf hunting success did not differ between prey species (moose 43%, roe deer 47%) but in 11% of the wolf attacks on moose at least one moose was injured but not killed, whereas no injured roe deer survived. Compared with most North American wolf studies chase distances were shorter, hunting success was greater, and fewer moose made a stand when attacked by wolves in our study. Differences in wolf encounters with moose and roe deer likely result from different anti-predator behaviour and predator-prey history between prey species.     

Testing Global Positioning System Telemetry to Study Wolf Predation on Deer Fawns

ABSTRACT We conducted a pilot study to test the usefulness of Global Positioning System (GPS) collars for investigating wolf (Canis lupus) predation on white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) fawns. Using GPS collars with short location-attempt intervals on 5 wolves and 5 deer during summers 2002–2004 in northeastern Minnesota, USA, demonstrated how this approach could provide new insights into wolf hunting behavior of fawns. For example, a wolf traveled ≥1.5–3.0 km and spent 20–22 hours in the immediate vicinity of known fawn kill sites and ≥0.7 km and 8.3 hours at scavenging sites. Wolf travel paths indicated that wolves intentionally traveled into deer summer ranges, traveled ≥0.7–4.2 km in such ranges, and spent <1–22 hours per visit. Each pair of 3 GPS-collared wolf pack members were located together for ≤6% of potential locations. From GPS collar data, we estimated that each deer summer range in a pack territory containing 5 wolves ≥1 year old and hunting individually would be visited by a wolf on average every 3–5 days. This approach holds great potential for investigating summer hunting behavior of wolves in areas where direct observation is impractical or impossible.     

Genetics and conservation of wolves Canis lupus in Europe

• 1 The wolf Canis lupus, the most widespread of the four species of large carnivores in Europe, after centuries of population decline and eradication, is now recovering in many countries. Wolves contribute to regulating prey–predator dynamics and interact with human activities, mainly livestock farming and ungulate hunting. Although wolves are protected in most European countries, illegal or incidental killing is widespread.
• 2 Wolf populations do not show any apparent phylogeographic structuring worldwide. Molecular and morphological studies of historical samples showed evidence of wolf ecomorph extinctions, coinciding with the great Pleistocene faunal turnover.
• 3 Extant populations show recurrent long‐range dispersal during cycles of expansion and recolonization. Demographically stable populations, in contrast, seem to be characterized by very limited gene flow.
• 4 Despite the potential for dispersal and ecological flexibility, landscape genetic approaches have demonstrated the existence of genetically distinct wolf populations, which originated through habitat and prey specializations.
• 5 Small isolated wolf populations may suffer from inbreeding depression, although selection for heterozygotes and the rescue effect can foster rapid population recovery. Population structure and dynamics is efficiently monitored by non‐invasive genetic methods, which are also useful to identify wolf × dogCanis lupus familiaris hybridization.
• 6 Despite technical advances and a better knowledge of wolf biology, wolf conservation is largely dependent on humans, and on the solution of conflicts with stakeholders.

     

Occurrence of black wolves in the Northern Apennines,Italy

The occurrence of black-coated individuals in wolfCanis lupus Linnaeus, 1758 populations is not surprising itself, but their presence in populations recovering from a severe numerical decline has been considered a possible sign of crossbreeding with the domestic dog. In the northern Apennines (Italy), black wolves occur at a non-negligible frequency. In a 3300 km² area, 22% of wolves observed and 23% of all dead wolves found were represented by animals with a completely black coat. One ‘black’ wolf belonging to the studied population was analysed by a set of microsatellite loci, and no trace of hybridization was found in its ancestry. This result induced us to consider the occurrence of a black phenotype in this area possibly derived from a natural combination of wolf alleles in coat colour determining genes, and not necessarily as the result of crossbreeding with the domestic form.     

Habitat selection by wolvesCanis lupus in the uplands and mountains of southern Poland

Using data from the National Wolf Census, carried out in Poland in 2000–2001, and GIS techniques we analysed habitat selection by wolvesCanis lupus Linnaeus, 1758 in uplands and mountains of southern Poland. We compared ten habitat variables and two parameters related to wolf abundance in 52 circular plots (154 km² each) with recorded wolves and 97 randomly selected plots with no signs of wolf presence. Wolf plots were characterized by higher elevation and closer location to the state border than wolf-free plots. Furthermore, wolf plots had higher forest cover, but smaller number of villages and towns and shorter railways and roads than plots without wolves. The best model explaining wolf distribution included forest cover, number of villages, length of roads and railway lines. Compared to northern Poland, the southern part of the country offers worse habitats for wolves due to significantly denser network of settlements and transportation routes.     

Population Viability, Nature Reserves, and the Outlook for Gray Wolf Conservation in North America

Theoretical work on population viability and extinction probabilities, empirical data from Canis lupus (gray wolf) populations, and expert opinion provide only general and conflicting conclusions about the number of wolves and the size of areas needed for conservation of wolf populations. There is no threshold population size or proven reserve design that guarantees long-term (century or more) survival for a gray wolf population. Most theoretical analyses of population viability have assumed a single, isolated population and lack of management intervention, neither of which is likely for wolves. Data on survival of actual wolf populations suggest greater resiliency than is indicated by theory. In our view, the previous theoretical treatments of population viability have not been appropriate to wolves, have contributed little to their conservation, and have created unnecessary dilemmas for wolf recovery programs by overstating the required population size. Nonetheless, viability as commonly understood may be problematic for small populations at the fringe of or outside the contiguous species range, unless they are part of a metapopulation. The capability of existing nature reserves to support viable wolf populations appears related to a variety of in situ circumstances, including size, shape and topography of the reserve; productivity, numbers, dispersion, and seasonal movement of prey; extent of poaching inside; degree of persecution outside; exposure to enzootica; attitudes of local people; and proximity to other wolf populations. We estimate that a population of 100 or more wolves and a reserve of several thousand square kilometers may be necessary to maintain a viable population in complete isolation, although 3000 km² or even 500–1000 km² may be adequate under favorable circumstances. In most cases, management intervention is probably necessary to assure the viability of relatively small, isolated populations. Because most reserves may be inadequate by themselves to ensure the long-term survival of wolf populations, favorable human attitudes toward the species and its management must be recognized as paramount, and cooperation of neighboring management jurisdictions will be increasingly important.