The “Romance” of Owning a Wolf , page 4 A WorldWithout Carnivores, page 8 Wolf Control Controvers ies, page 11

A PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTERFALL 2003

A PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTERFALL 2003

3 From the Executive Director

14 International Wolf CenterNotes From Home

17 Tracking the Pack

18 Wolves of the World

21 As a Matter of Fact

22 Book Review

23 News and Notes

24 Personal Encounter

26 Wild Kids

28 A Look Beyond

FeaturesTHE QUARTERLY PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER

VOLUME 13, NO. 3 FALL 2003

On The Cover

Departments

Sher

ry Jo

kinen

Mike

Pos

sis, W

ild T

hing

Pho

togr

aphy

“Alpha, Alpha, Beta, Omega” by Mary RobersonMary enjoys the outdoors and was recentlyfeatured in Wildlife Art magazine and in Southwest Art magazine’s “Artist’s To Watch” section. To view and purchase additional artwork, visitwww.maryroberson.com, or call 208-788-3865.

A World Without Carnivores:Does Wolf Recovery Offer anAlternative?

Wolf recovery in the United States represents a stunningconservation success, but most other species of large carni-vores have fared poorly. What can we learn from wolf recoverythat would help efforts to conserve other large carnivores?

M i k e P h i l l i p s

The Romance of Having aWolf of Your Very Own

When Pat Tucker and Bruce Weide ended upowning a wolf, they embarked on a life of trav-eling ambassador wolf programs. The wolf hasadded a dimension to their lives unachievableotherwise. Has it been worth it?

P a t T u c k e r a n d B r u c e W e i d e

Wolf Control ControversiesWolves have been shaped by evolution to hunt and eat ungulates—

such hooved animals as caribou, elk, deer and moose. Hunters often blamewolves for what they perceive as inadequate ungulate populations. Is it goodpolicy to reduce wolf numbers to improve ungulate populations?

S t e v e G r o o m s

8

4Br

uce

Wei

de

11

Publications DirectorMary OrtizMagazine CoordinatorCarissa L.W. KnaackConsulting EditorMary KeirsteadTechnical Editor L. David MechGraphic DesignerTricia Hull

International Wolf (1089-683X) ispublished quarterly and copyrighted,2003, by the International Wolf Center,3300 Bass Lake Rd, Minneapolis, MN55429, USA. e-mail: mplspack@wolf.org.All rights reserved.

Publications agreement no. 1536338

Membership in the International WolfCenter includes a subscription toInternational Wolf magazine, free admissionto the Center, and discounts on programsand merchandise. • Lone Wolf member-ships are U.S. $30 • Wolf Pack $50 • Wolf Associate $100 • Wolf Sponsor $500 • Alpha Wolf $1000. Canada and othercountries, add U.S. $15 per year for airmail postage, $7 for surface postage.Contact the International Wolf Center,1396 Highway 169, Ely, MN 55731-8129,USA; e-mail: wolfinfo@wolf.org; phone: 1-800-ELY-WOLF

International Wolf is a forum for airingfacts, ideas and attitudes about wolf-related issues. Articles and materialsprinted in International Wolf do not necessarily reflect the viewpoint of theInternational Wolf Center or its board of directors.

International Wolf welcomes submissionsof personal adventures with wolves andwolf pho to graphs (especially black andwhite). Prior to submission of other types of manu scripts, address queries to Mary Ortiz, publications director.

International Wolf is printed entirely with soy ink on recycled and recyclablepaper (text pages contain 20% post-consumer waste, cover paper contains 10% post-consumer waste). We encourageyou to recycle this magazine.

PHOTOS: Unless otherwise noted, orobvious from the caption or article text,photos are of captive wolves.

2 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

Slanted comparisondoesn’t help wolvesThanks for your excellent publica-tion. I am a wolf center member anda wolf lover of 35 years.

While feeling great respect and a certain amount of kinship withthe wolf, I believe we must see the species clearly. That’s why I read with great interest LizHarper’s article in the Spring 2003International Wolf, “Are WolvesDangerous to Humans?” Well, theanswer has always been, “yes, theyare, to some varying degree.” I think the article shows that.

I have a problem with one of hercomparisons, however. It is anapples-to-oranges comparison. Afterciting the numbers and categoriesof wolf-human encounters, andwolf populations of 10,000 to20,000 in Europe, and 60,000 each in the former Soviet Unionand North America, she writes: “A person has a greater chance ofbeing killed by a dog, lightning, abee sting or a car collision with adeer than being injured by a wolf.”

That’s likely true, statistically,but is an ill-conceived comparison.Fact is, deer, dogs, automobiles,bees and lightning come into contactwith human population centers far more often than wolves. In mostwolf range, human populationremains sparse. The same obvi-ously is not true of most dog range.

For example, there have beenrare reports of wolf sightingsaround a few Minneapolis– St. Paulsuburbs. But there are millions of bees, hundreds or thousands ofannual lightning strikes, thousandsof dogs, deer and so on and so

on in the metropolitan area, and,by extension, most of the placespeople live.

So of course a person has agreater chance of mishap at thehands of the above-listed examplesthan at the hands of a wolf, becausethe average person lives in farcloser proximity to those examplesthan to wolves.

We love the wolf, but that is no excuse for sloppy thinking,which in the case of this slantedcomparison invites those on theother side to dismiss our wolf statements as emotional, subjectiveand poorly reasoned. n

Steve Foss Ely, Minnesota

Executive Director’s reply

Your letter in response to Liz Harper’sarticle is appreciated. It certainly is a good reminder for us not to use the tactics enemies of the wolf use todemonize it.

I would argue your point about thearticle slanting the comparison in therelative risks of deer, bees etc. and wolvesto humans because human populationcenters aren’t factored into the equation.If one were to look at the northern thirdof Minnesota, where the highest pop-ulation of wolves in the contiguous United States is located, where we havecities like Duluth, Virginia, and GrandRapids, and where we have millions of visitor days in the Superior NationalForest, the statement about a greaterchance of being killed by a dog, light-ening, deer etc. still applies. My point is that the statistics “work” regardless of whether we are talking human popu-lation centers or the heart of wolf range.

Walter M. Medwid

A Changing Landscape

With the announcement by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service earlier this year categorizing all gray wolf populations in the contiguous United States (with

the exception of the endangered Mexican wolf population in Arizona andNew Mexico) as “threatened” versus the more protected “endangered,” wolves take a great step closer to a very different world. And while wolves have always shown aremarkable adaptability to change, we humans will have a far more difficult adjustment.

The 30 years during which wolves have been protected by the Endangered SpeciesAct instilled in us a false sense that federal law would always protect wolves. Yet the

intent of the act has always been that after appropriate recovery measuresand confidence that viable populations of critical species existed and wouldcontinue to exist in the future, these species would be “delisted,” orremoved from the endangered species list. When the American alligatorand peregrine falcon were removed from the endangered species list, the change was largely accepted as a good thing, especially so in the caseof the peregrine, for which strong federal protection remains.

But as wolves come closer to delisting, there is a far different sentimentsince no such federal protections will remain once they are delisted.There is clearly apprehension about what that will actually mean whenindividual states initiate their own plans for managing wolves. By all

accounts more wolves will be killed, and the circumstances under which wolves willbe killed will be determined by the individual states’ management plans. The peopledoing the killing will no longer be agents of the federal government but rather privatecitizens or state employees. All those changes will test our sensibilities of what consti-tutes good public policy and a reasonable compromise among the various stakeholders.Fortunately, the Endangered Species Act provides for the federal government to makesure state management does not threaten wolf recovery.

Underlying all this is the good news that gray wolf populations in the western GreatLakes and Northern Rockies are doing well. But as long as they are doing well, conflictswith humans will undoubtedly increase. Some fear that unless we fund the “right”management programs, we run the risk of developing a backlash against wolves, forwhich they once paid so dearly.

We know that most Americans care deeply about the environment, and we knowtoo that that caring extends to wolves. We know that there will be some voices callingfor the eradication of wolves but also know that the public won’t tolerate extrememeasures in the way we deal with the inevitable wolf-human conflicts.

The one thing certain is that as we adjust to a changing landscape for wolves and humans,efforts to strengthen our education efforts on behalf of wolves can take no time off. n

From the Executive Director INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER

BOARD OF DIRECTORSNancy jo Tubbs

Chair

Dr. L. David MechVice Chair

Dr. Rolf O. PetersonSecretary

Paul B. AndersonTreasurer

Dr. Larry D. AndersonJulie Potts Close

Thomas T. DwightNancy Gibson

Hélène GrimaudCree Holtz

Cornelia HuttDean Johnson

Dr. Robert LaudMike Phillips

Dr. Robert ReamJeff Rennicke

Deborah ReynoldsJerry SandersPaul SchurkeTeri Williams

EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

Walter M. Medwid

MISSION

The International WolfCenter advances the survival

of wolf populations byteaching about wolves, their

relationship to wild lands andthe human role in their future.

Educational services and informational resources

are available at:

1396 Highway 169Ely, MN 55731-8129, USA

1-800-ELY-WOLF1-218-365-4695

e-mail address:wolfinfo@wolf.org

Web site: http://www.wolf.org

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 3

Walter Medwid

4 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

A modified climbing harness made for walking Koani. Note the wolf wrangling gear: gloves, 9/16-inch nylon tubular webbing and pepper spray clipped to the harness (at right).

Moments after a deer carcass was placed in Koani’s enclosure, she sends a clear message that she’s not about to share any of it.

Koani in her role as anambassador wolf with

the students of WiseRiver School in Montana

TheRomanceof Having

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 5

To begin with, we never dreamed of“owning” a wolf. Born in captivity

and socialized to humans from the ageof 2 weeks, 3-month-old Koani came tolive with us as part of an ABC docu-mentary about wolves we’d been hiredto consult on. For a variety of reasonswe ended up with a wolf. Feeling anobligation to give her life in captivitypurpose, we founded Wild Sentry andembarked on a life of traveling ambas-sador wolf programs. Twelve years,1,387 programs and 182,456 peoplelater, there’s no question that Koani hassucceeded in changing many heartsand minds, and that has kept usgoing through some tough andgrueling times.

Before embarking on reasons whyowning a wolf is not as romantic asyou may imagine, let me state

unequivocally that we love thisanimal. We love her as we would apsychopathic sibling who is in turncharming and frightening. We do not love her like a child or like ourdog, Indy. We love her like you might love an adult being from anotherplanet — an intelligent being, yetutterly lacking human moral values,and for whom you are entrusted withthe responsibility to protect from

humans and to protect humans from.We would not find it romantic tocage this alien or fasten a collararound its neck.

By acquiring a captive wolf onetakes on a legal and moral responsi-bility. The first and primary rule oflife with a wolf is that no socializedwolf can ever be allowed to rununleashed or initiate human contactwithout supervision by a qualifiedcaretaker. Wild wolves avoid humans.A captive wolf is less shy and there-fore more dangerous.

A captive wolf requires specialfencing — a fence 10 feet high with a3-foot skirt and an outer 8-foot fence.Each animal needs a minimum of a quarter acre. Psychologically stablewolves need a canine companion—preferably another wolf of the oppo-site sex. A dog is a poor substitute butbetter than nothing. However, if awolf and dog are kept together, don’tbe surprised to come home to a

mangled dog. Place more than twowolves in a pen and the chance forinjury increases. Wolves have theirown rules of engagement, and for avariety of reasons they may seriouslyinjure or kill a pen mate; this hasnothing to do with right versuswrong or like versus dislike.

Wolves need physical and mentalexercise. We walk Koani for one totwo hours in the morning and early

evening, because it mimics a wolf’screpuscular activity patterns. Thesewalks occur every day — includingChristmas morning, Super BowlSunday, or after a hard day of skiing.Walks keep Koani sane, and we take this responsibility seriously. She doesn’t, however, willingly walkat our side or at our pace. The leash,connected from Koani to our modi-fied climbing harness, keeps her fromattacking dogs or chasing livestock.Being attached to her is like beingattached to a 100-pound cat. Andwhile she enjoys these walks, we are constantly reminded that she’denjoy them more if we’d let her go.

When a strange dog is encoun-tered, we’re jerked, sometimes to theground, by 100 pounds of arousedmuscle. From Koani’s point of view, adog is a territorial intruder. Denyingcontact with the dog is our responsi-bility. Even though we outweighKoani by 40 pounds, she’s amazingly

strong and quick. Amomentary lapse in atten-tion can lead to the deathof a neighbor’s pet orworse. Though constant

vigilance may be good training for“living in the moment,” there arecheaper, less dangerous ways to worktoward Zen mastery than walking awolf.

While Koani enjoys the stimu-lating smells and sounds of walkingin a new place, transporting her there is hardly worth the energy or effort. Wolves don’t possess the“filtering” apparatus of dogs. Because

It’s happened again. Koani is loose. It’s always the same scenario: somehow she’s gotten out of the

pen or off the leash. She dances just out of reach, and I can see the gears in her brain turning: “What’s

first: Killing that dog down the road? How about those sheep in the pasture on top of the hill? Ooh,

look! What’s that little human doing in the driveway?” Before mayhem ensues, I wake up, and relief

floods through me. Twelve long years and no disasters. And that is what it’s like to live with a wolf.

Te x t a n d p h o t o s b y P A T T U C K E R and B R U C E W E I D E

a Wolf of YourVery Own

Koani is a nervous trav-eler, she must be confinedto a 4-by-6-foot kennel.The kennel doesn’t calmher, but it does preventher from jumping in our lap and attempting towrest the steering wheelaway when she sees an

approaching semi.And when herbowels loosenfrom stress, it’s in the kennelinstead of on theupholstery.

Wolves aresocial animals.Isolation in a penwithout stimula-tion is one of thecrueler fates forcaptive wolves.But before youallow a wolf intoyour house, putthe garbage up on

the refrigerator, place soap, food andany other substances that might smellinteresting in the closet, and exchangeheirloom furniture for junk from thesecondhand store. Koani is a goodwolf, but she’s a really bad dog. Sure,all dogs are destructive when they’repuppies, and there’ll be occasional“mistakes” on the carpet. You can,however, depend on the fact thatafter consistent training, your dogwon’t wreak havoc when left homealone. To accommodate Koani’s needfor social contact and to keep our

6 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

Above: Koani is on the cable run we clip her to when we stop for the night while on the road presenting Wild Sentry programs. The debris on theground is what is left of a pillow she got hold of.

Left: Loading Koani for a Wild Sentry program tour, or even to takeher on a hike in the mountains, is always a chore. In 12 years, she hasnever once entered the van willingly.

Below: Whendirected to get in a car, Indy(Koani’s dogcompanion)knew to get inthe car — Koanididn’t (maybeshe thought I said “on”).

Left: The first time we allowed Koani in the house, she jumpedon the table. Momentslater it toppled over.

Below: On occasion,when Koani is allowedin the living room, sheacts in an undoglikemanner, as exemplifiedby her behavior on the couch.

s

s

s

s

s

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 7

home intact, we dug a 40-foot tunnel from her pento a living room enclosure.

Then there are vacations. We’veyet to find wolf-sitters listed in theYellow Pages. Since the Wild Sentrystaff consists of two, we are in the same boat as private individualswhen it comes to activities thatrequire “going away.” Captive wolvesneed professional, as in expensive,care. In the 12 years we’ve lived withKoani, we’ve not been away togetherfor more than four nights in a row,and that has happened only twice.My nightmares of her running loosereally heat up when we’re away.

Why do we think we should beable to raise a wolf and other peopleshouldn’t? We don’t consider our-selves special. We just don’t thinkmost people would make the personaland professional sacrifices we’ve made.Really, we guess, we think most peopleare smarter. To give us credit though,it’s not that we wanted to make thesacrifices. Again, we never dreamedof “owning” a wolf. We had onechoice, and that was whether tobecome involved with the film project.Once we opted in, we started down a path of narrowing alternatives.

A decision to make a wolf part of your life is an “until death do us part” decision with euthanasia theonly way to opt out. Should life witha wolf prove more demanding thanexpected, leaving it consigned toperpetual boredom in a pen, shippingit off to a refuge for ex-pet wolves, or turning it loose are cowardly alternatives and, in the latter case,also illegal. Look before you leap, andonce you’ve leapt, be prepared to turnyour life upside down or admit your mistake and kill your “pet.”

Could it be that Koani is an espe-cially difficult wolf and that anothermight be easier to deal with? Possibly.

However, another might be moredifficult. Wolves are born with a widerange of personalities with traits thatdon’t become apparent until adult-hood. While environment makes adifference, it’s unrealistic to expect a wolf to fit into your life like a dog.

So are there any reasons to keepcaptive wolves? In the best of allpossible worlds we at Wild Sentrysay, “No.” Unfortunately, we don’tlive in that sort of world. Because of this, we do believe captive wolves can serve important educationalpurposes. However, for these animalsto fulfill an educational mission, they should only be part of not-for-profit organizations, exhibited byknowledgeable people, and in aprogram reviewed and sanctioned byprofessional educators and biologists.

Educators have an obligation tohelp their audiences understand thatno matter how large and natural-looking an enclosure appears, itcannot provide the space and stimu-lation to fulfill the prey drive andsocial interactions that wolves experience in the wild. Their sacrificeis justifiable only in that it sheds light on human ignorance. We owe it to wolves to keep their numbers incaptivity to a minimum. Remember,your desire to be “close” to wolves is not their desire. Responsible, sensi-tive people understand that cagingwildness is an oxymoron.

We realize that we’ve concentratedon the negative aspects of living with a wolf. That’s because part ofWild Sentry’s mission is to discouragepeople from obtaining wolves forpets. However, as we stated early on, we love Koani. She has added a

dimension to our lives that could not have been achieved otherwise.Has it been worth it? Neither of uscan speak for Koani. But we knowthat for us, the educational good she’sperformed is tinged with sadness.Not a day goes by but what we’remade aware of our shortcomingswhen it comes to providing Koaniwith the life of a wolf.

Wolves are wild animals that haveevolved over millions of years to takecare of themselves. Wolves don’t need us to provide them with food,shelter or companionship. What theyneed from us is to leave them spaceon this increasingly crowded planetso they can provide these things for themselves. If you love wolves,work to ensure that this dreamremains possible. n

For more information relating to captivewolves and hybrids as pets:

Go to www.wildsentry.org, navigate to the education page, and click on Can You Turn a Wolf Into a Dog?(also available for $2.00 in booklet form). Wild Sentry can be contacted atwolfwranglers@wildsentry.org, or P.O. Box 172, Hamilton, MT 59840.

Pat Tucker is a wildlife biologist, andBruce Weide is a writer and storyteller.Both have directed Wild Sentry: The Northern Rockies Ambassador Wolf Program for more than a decade.They recently received the NationalConservation Achievement Award for their educational work from theNational Wildlife Federation.

The authors thank Diane Boyd and MeganParker for their review of this article.

We owe it to wolves to keep their numbers in captivity to a minimum.

Remember, your desire to be “close” to wolves is not their desire.

After decades of work and tens of millions of dollars, one can assert that the gray

wolf has been recovered across thenorthern Midwest and the Northern RockyMountains. At the end of 2002, wolf pop-ulations there were distributed over about 5 percent of the species’ historic range andincluded about 4,000 animals. Notwithstandingspecific issues that fuel debate about the species’ future, wolf recovery represents astunning conservation success. Recently Ihave wondered if wolf recovery offers instruc-tion for conserving other large carnivores.

In the United States the progress in wolfrecovery is an anomaly; most other species oflarge carnivores have fared poorly. The grizzlybear has been eliminated from much of itshistoric range. The wolverine is extinct acrossthe Northeast and greatly reduced elsewhere.The mountain lion has a tenuous hold on habitats east of the Mississippi River. The lynxwas recently listed as threatened. The jaguar is absent from the Southwest. Long-termprospects for restoring wild populations of redwolves seem bleak. Even where suitablehabitat remains in the United States, proposalsto reintroduce large carnivores generate signif-icant and polemic resistance despite thesuccess of gray wolf reintroductions.

Much of the worldwide conservation move-ment is rooted in the United States, and therest of the world often looks there for leader-ship. U.S. institutions and individuals have promoted and funded international efforts toconserve large carnivores. Despite this, through-out the world many such species are faringpoorly. Fuller (1995) completed a review of 30 large carnivore species and found that 22were considered endangered by the UnitedStates or the World Conservation Union. Oursuccess with gray wolf recovery has apparentlynot catalyzed similar success with other largecarnivores.

So what can we learn from wolf recoverythat would help efforts to conserve other largecarnivores? Let’s measure it against severaltenets that I believe guide most successfulrecovery efforts.

Research and monitoring are criticallyimportant. For several decades wolves havebeen the focus of intensive research and monitoring. These efforts have yielded knowl-

A World Without

Carnivores

8 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

:

The grizzly bear has been eliminated from almostall of its historic range in the 48 contiguous states.

Jerr

y M

urra

y

edge that has served to counter outrageousclaims that were foisted upon the public by those who opposed wolf recovery.

A large-scale approach is desirable. Wolfrecovery efforts have been based, at least tacitly, on a large-scale or landscape approach.Recovery efforts in the Great Lakes region andthe Northern Rocky Mountains are based on the belief that spatially segregated pop-ulations occurring across a large landscape (e.g., Montana, Wyoming, and Idaho) require interchange with one another to ensure thelong-term genetic health of each.

Local human populations are important.Wolf recovery efforts have been built on recognition that the needs and concerns oflocal citizens are critically important. All wolfreintroduction projects have been conductedaccording to the provisions of section 10(j) ofthe Endangered Species Act (ESA). This sectionauthorizes the use of a nonessential/ experi-mental approach that allows management(including lethal control) of reintroducedanimals to be tailored to local sensibilities.

Controlled human use of the carnivorespecies should be an option once recoveryhas been achieved. For some time there hasbeen the expectation that once wolves recov-ered, then state agencies would allow recre-ational harvests. While such harvests mayappear to address public concerns about wolfmanagement, given the ecological robustnessof the species it is fair to question whethersuch harvests would ever be truly effective atlimiting wolf population size and distribution.

Cooperation across cultural, ideological and political boundaries is required. Becausewolf recovery has been connected to large landscapes, its history is replete with examplesof such cooperation. For example, a multi-agency field team is implementing the Mexicanwolf reintroduction effort. Moreover, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s Mexican wolfrecovery coordinator is working closely withtribal entities and the Mexican government.

Recovery efforts must continue until theecological effectiveness of the species is assuredover a significant portion of the species’historic range where suitable habitat exists.More wolves will have to be restored to moreplaces for wolf recovery to serve as instructionfor this tenet, which is probably the most chal-

Does WolfRecoveryOffer anAlternative?b y M I K E P H I L L I P S

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 9

At the end of 2002, wolf populations in thenorthern Midwest and the Northern Rocky

Mountains were distributed over about 5percent of the species’ historic range and

included about 4,000 animals.

Mike

Pos

sis, W

ild T

hing

Pho

togr

aphy

10 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

levels that may prove to be inadequatefor recovery as defined by the ESA.For example, in the Western DPS the Service intends to initiate thedelisting process immediately becausethe recovery objectives that weredeveloped primarily for Montana,Wyoming and Idaho have been met.Many consider it inappropriate for the Service to apply delisting criteriathat were developed primarily for athree-state region and according to the Service’s own scientific reviewwere only ever minimally acceptable,to the Western DPS, which includesall or portions of six states that werenever considered during recoveryplanning. Many conservationists willargue that recovering the gray wolf in such a manner is unwarranted andhas no basis in science or law.

These people will claim that thegoal of wolf recovery should not bethe restoration of arbitrary popula-tion targets for small portions of the species’ historic range. Rather, toconform to relevant legal and scien-tific standards, the goal should be the achievement of functional densi-ties of the species over a significantportion of suitable habitat within its historic range. To achieve this,they will argue, the Service needs torestore more wolves to more places.

There is at least one place ideallysuited for this purpose. Studies haverevealed that the Southern RockyMountains represent the bestremaining unoccupied wolf habitat.This region contains millions of acres of publicly owned wild landsfrom south-central Wyoming throughwestern Colorado to northern NewMexico. The region supports robustpopulations of native ungulates andcould easily support a self-sustainingpopulation of wolves. Not surpris-ingly, polls reveal that a majority ofregistered voters in Colorado and NewMexico support wolf restoration there.

If we are unable to restore the graywolf to a significant portion of the

species’ historic range where suitablehabitat exists, then one can concludethat wolf recovery offers scantinstruction to those striving to recoverother species of large carnivores. If we are unable to restore morewolves to more places, then weshould not expect others, usuallyworking with far fewer resources, to do better with the recovery ofother large carnivores.

Some of the poorest people in thepoorest countries are now making the greatest contribution to conservinglarge carnivores and biological diver-sity in general. For example, many of these poorer countries have setaside a much greater percentage ofprotected areas than the United Stateshas (4.5 percent), including Botswana(15 percent), Costa Rica (12 percent),Rwanda (12 percent), and the LaoP.D.R. (10 percent). Asians, Africansand Latin Americans are living dailywith tigers, leopards and jaguars. In contrast, many United States citi-zens resist the return of the wolf toeven our most remote regions.

We must do better. If we can’t,then wolf recovery will not serve asinstruction or inspiration to thoseworking to conserve other species oflarge carnivores. If that proves to bethe case, then we must accept someof the responsibility if populations oflarge carnivores elsewhere continueto decline and eventually vanish. n

Work cited:

Fuller, T. K. 1995. An international review of large carnivore conservationstatus. In Integrating People and Wildlifefor a Sustainable Future, edited by J. A. Bissonette and P. R. Krausman,410–12. Proceedings 1st InternationalWildlife Management Congress. TheWildlife Society, Bethesda, Maryland.

Mike Phillips is the Executive Director of the Turner Endangered Species Fund,in Bozeman, Montana.

lenging and important of all. It is herethat wolf recovery in the United Statesis proving to be uninspiring.

In response to the gray wolf’simproved conservation status, the U.S.Fish and Wildlife Service recently final-ized a vision for the future of wolfrecovery based on the concept of graywolf Distinct Population Segments(DPS), of which they recognized three:Eastern, Western, and Southwestern.Gray wolf DPSs are areas that support wolf populations, are some-what separated from one another, aresignificant to the overall conservationof the species, and are subject toslightly different recovery criteria. TheService’s vision is important because it represents their first effort to definetheir legal obligations to recover wolvesunder the ESA. The Service’s definitionof recovery is important becausefurther recovery activities will be difficult to implement once the speciesis removed from the list of endangeredand threatened wildlife (i.e., delisted).

For many, a shortcoming of theService’s vision is that throughout theEastern and Western DPSs, areas thatcontain expansive tracts of suitablebut unoccupied habitat, the Serviceintends to accept wolf population

Mike

Pos

sis, W

ild T

hing

Pho

togr

aphy

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 11

b y S T E V E G R O O M S

If wolves could live on a diet of mice,humans would tolerate them betterthan they do. But wolves have been

shaped by evolution to hunt and eatungulates—such hooved animals ascaribou, elk, deer and moose. Those areexactly the game animal species so manyhumans are passionate about hunting.

Some humans are not happy toshare that ungulate prey base withwolves. Game populations are rarelyabundant enough to please hunters,even in regions with no wolves.Where wolves are present, huntersfrequently blame them for what they perceive as inadequate ungulatepopulations.

Disappointed hunters sometimesdemand wolf control, the practice ofkilling wolves to enhance ungulatepopulations. Many state game agenciesand even such thoughtful gamemanagers as Aldo Leopold onceaccepted the need for wolf control toincrease populations of popularungulate species.

Wolf control is much morecontroversial today. In recent yearsAlaska has suffered from exception-

ally acrimonious wolf control wars. If wolf numbers continue to increasein the Rocky Mountain region,hunters there might request wolfcontrol to boost ungulate popula-tions in Idaho, Montana orWyoming. Wolf advocates will vigor-ously oppose such proposals.

Is it good policy to reducewolf numbers to improveungulate populations?That simple question,unfortunately, has nosimple answer.

Critics of wolvesdescribe them askilling machineswith the ability to decimate game

populations. For example, a Web sitecurrently on the Internet compareswolves to piranhas. The site’s authorclaims wolves kill for “lust,” assertingthat wolves will destroy “every avail-able animal” before turning cannibal-istic and devouring each other.

Is it good policy to reduce wolf numbers to improve ungulate populations? That simple question, unfortunately, has no simple answer.

Wolf Control Controversies

Wolf Control Controversies

Some humans are not happyto share the ungulate preybase with wolves.

Lynn

and

Don

na R

oger

s, w

ww.

bear

study

.org

12 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

the quality of the browse, which thenaffects the health of the moose herd.The Isle Royale experience suggeststhat weather, habitat quality andpredation combine in complicatedways to change wolf and moosepopulations.

Predator-prey relationships areeven more complex everywhere else.Isle Royale moose contend with only a single predator, whereas ungulates in Alaska are eaten by wolves, blackbears, brown bears and humans.Multi-predator ecological systems aredifficult to study and tricky to manage.

Research in Alaska suggests thatcombined wolf and bear predation can limit ungulate populations tolevels significantly lower than thehabitat should be able to sustain.Predators sometimes suppress ungulatepopulations by taking high numbers of juvenile ungulates, especiallymoose and caribou calves. Alaska’smanagers describe some imperiledungulate populations as being caught

in a “predator pit” that pins them atlow levels for many years.

Wolves can even contribute to theextirpation of local ungulate popula-tions, as was shown by a study inMinnesota’s Superior National Forest.Deer survived for many years in aregion that had marginal habitat.Then a combination of wolf preda-tion and several successive severewinters eliminated the deer. Deer havenot returned to that area decadeslater, although it seems possible thatdeer would have disappeared fromsuch poor habitat sooner or later evenwithout wolf predation.

If predation can limit ungulatepopulations, is it possible to improvegame numbers by eliminating preda-tors? The answer is a qualified yes.Research in the Yukon and BritishColumbia shows that killing wolvescan improve survival rates of juvenilecaribou and moose, leading to higheroverall populations. The increases are not automatic. In 11 tests of wolfcontrol in Alaska, higher game popu-lations occurred in only three cases.

Moreover, the effects of wolfcontrol do not seem to last long.Research in Alaska and Canadashows that after wolf control isstopped, ungulate mortality ratesreturn to pre-control levels. Alaska’smanagers have talked optimisticallyabout how temporary wolf controlcould result in a win-win situation,producing strong and stable popula-

Wolf advocates reply that predatorand prey species have evolved over themillennia to coexist. Indeed, the verynature of predator-prey relationshipsrequires parity; if either side held a big advantage, the relationship wouldcollapse. Vigorous ungulates canalmost always escape or fight offwolves. To a remarkable degree,wolves target compromised animals—those that are sick, injured, old or veryyoung. That leads to the comfortingobservation that by eliminating less fit ungulates, wolves enhance the genepool and improve the survival chancesfor fit individuals.

And yet the impacts of wolf preda-tion are not always so simple or benign.

The most-studied predator-preyrelationship is on Isle Royale, wherewolves and moose have coexistedwithout outside interference since1949. Researchers there have learnedthat weather events can affect thevulnerability of moose to wolves.Fluctuations in moose numbers affect

Where wolves are present, hunters frequently blame them for what theyperceive as inadequate ungulate populations.

Research in Alaska suggests that combined wolfand bear predation can limit ungulate populationsto levels significantly lower than the habitat shouldbe able to sustain. Predators sometimes suppressungulate populations by taking high numbers ofjuvenile ungulates, such as moose calves.Je

rry

Mur

ray

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 13

bears will not return until youngungulates have grown large enough toescape most predation.

Perhaps the main difficulty withwolf control is that it is necessary to kill a great many wolves to havemuch effect. The fertility and adapt-ability of wolves allow them toreplenish their numbers unless from28 to 50 percent or more of the fallpopulation is removed, year afteryear. That’s a lot of dead wolves.Killing that many wolves is difficultand increasingly controversial.

As with many controversies, bothsides might be right and wrong. Wolfpredation is not as universally benignas wolf advocates often believe, andin specific situations it can suppressungulate populations for many years.

Killing wolves can improve localungulate populations of particularinterest. But wolf control doesn’twork as well or for as long as fans ofwolf control have believed, and itcomes at a high price, not the least ofwhich is a great deal of bitter debate.

Wolf control might belong to thatcategory of appealingly simple reme-dies that don’t work as well as peoplehope they will but that seem to doenough temporary good to continueto be popular. The only thing for sureis that wolf control controversies arenot going away any time soon. n

Steve Grooms has been writing aboutwolf management since 1976. He is theauthor of the book The Return of theWolf, and serves on International Wolfmagazine’s advisory committee.

tions of both ungulates and wolves.In the real world, however, that theo-retical ideal has not been validated.

Advocates of wolf control haveargued that it brings stability topredator-prey systems, minimizing theboom-bust cycle. Achieving that kindof stability is not easy. And it is open to question whether stability is a desir-able goal, since the normal tendency ofnatural systems is for predator-preyrelationships to oscillate.

A curious feature of Alaskan wolfcontrol is the way predator controlhas targeted wolves although in somestudies predation by brown bears hadmore impact on young ungulates.Bears benefit from a cultural resis-tance to the sort of lethal control oftendirected at wolves. Alaskan managersare currently contemplating movingbears from areas of special concernduring the calving season, hoping the

Wolves have been shaped by evolution tohunt and eat ungulates, such as caribou.

Ungulates in Alaska are eaten by black bears (pictured),wolves, brown bears and humans.

Jerr

y M

urra

y

Wal

ter M

edw

id, I

nter

natio

nal W

olf C

ente

r

It’s hard to say whetherPenny and Corey Roeder

got more pleasure fromtheir adventure vacation at the International WolfCenter or from their presentation to friends backhome in Iowa. The Roederscame to Ely and the Centerat the end of January for a“Tracking the Pack” adven-ture vacation. Since then,wolves have been moreprominent in Penny’sthoughts. “We found outvery in-depth informationon wolves, information we wouldn’t have come byin our normal lives,” shesaid. As dog owners anddog lovers, they were particularly interested incomparing their animals’behaviors to wolf behavior.Corey said the vacationallowed them to “to gain an

appreciation of the majestyof the wolf, and of the environmental concerns,and just keeping this crea-ture around.”

Sharing that knowledgewith a group of 35 to 40Rotary club members inMaquoketa, Iowa, in Aprilallowed them to cement the perspectives gained inwolf country and to pass on insights to those wholive outside that world. Theexperiences at the Centerand their presentation tothe Rotary club will remainwith them a long time. “I think about what Ilearned, how wolvesconnect with our lives,”Penny said.

14 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER

Notes From Home

Wolves Fascinate Darren Bennett

A13-year-old with cystic fibrosis, Darren knows he will notlive to old age, but through the Make A Wish Foundation,

the Salt Lake City, Utah, boy finished a week’s wolf study at theInternational Wolf Center in March.

He and his family discovered facts about wolves duringlectures and discussion, from the air during a radio telemetryflight, and from the ground, where they howled at nearbywolf packs and observed their sign. It was an adventurevacation tailored to a family. And to a boy. “I knew somefacts, and I learned some,” said Darren.

The week drew together the family and the Center staff,allowing them to do what they do best for someone whoreally appreciated it. “We take a lot away from this, too,”said Assistant Director Gretchen Diessner.

Center intern Jess Edberg was the family’s guide. Shecame away changed by the experience. “It made me realizehow short life really is,” she said.

Diessner said the experience she and the staff hadworking with the Make A Wish Foundation was surprisingand pleasant. “Working with Make A Wish has been kind ofincredible,” she said.

Thirteen-year-old Darren Bennett and his family learned a lot about wolves during their week at the International Wolf Center. From the left, front row: father Darren Bennett, Darren Jr. and Cathy;back row, Drew, Alexandria, Christy and Audry.

Passing on the Lessons

Penny and Corey Roedershared their experienceson a “Tracking the Pack”adventure vacation withtheir friends back homein Iowa.

Stev

e Fo

ss

Early this year, theInternational Wolf

Center welcomed SylvainMacchi, a representative ofLes Loups du Gévaudan in south-central France.Macchi has been followingwolves and searching forwolf information sincereading an article in 1980.This was his third visit to the International WolfCenter since 1992. Everyday, Macchi walked manymiles of wolf country in the Ely area and was finallyrewarded. “I finally saw awild wolf in close range! It was a beautiful blackwolf!” he exclaimed.

Les Loups duGévaudan is an educational andrehabilitation parkwith approximately130 wolves fromMongolia, Poland,Siberia and Canada.Eighty Mongolianwolves weregiven to thepark by theBrigitte BardotFoundat ion

A White Wolf Wedding

Weddings, of course, are an expression of individualpersonalities. Most people marry in church, some in

courthouses, others in people’s homes or yards. But Jacenand Jennifer James of New Lenox, Illinois, weren’t havingany of the standard fare. The couple made their vows lastJanuary at the International Wolf Center, standing at thewindows in front of the wolf viewing center. Jacen andJennifer, landowners near Ely and inveterate kayakers, hikers

and snowshoers, decided such a wedding was perfect forthem. In fact, they had wanted to hold it outside in the snowbut deemed such an arrangement impractical.

In attendance were 50 family members and friendsscattered about the auditorium seats. Arctic wolves Malikand Shadow were there, too, outside the glass. The wolveswere active as the guests prepared for the ceremony and then settled down as the service began, with one wolf lounging on the greeting rock. Jacen and Jenniferhad group wedding pictures taken outside in front of the running wolf sculptures and treated the weddingparty to dogsledding in the woods. Jennifer believes everytrip the couple makes back to the Center will be a renewalof their vows. “Having the wedding at the Wolf Centeradds meaning to the commitment,” she said.

after being taken frompoachers. “There are about30,000 wolves in Mongoliaunder no protection,” notedMacchi. “The southernMongolian wolf is smallerthan the wolf in Minnesotaand more yellow red.” LesLoups du Gévaudan park isnamed after the “Beast ofGévaudan,” who killed over100 people from 1764 to1767. Originally thought tobe a wolf, it is now believedto have been a human withlarge dogs. For more infor-mation on the park, visitwww.loupsdugevaudan.com.

Thanks to Steve Foss for the preceding three Notes from Home.

Les Loups du Gévaudan Visits the Center

Les Loups duGévaudan insouth-centralFrance is aneducational andrehabilitation parkwith approxi-mately 130 wolvesfrom Mongolia,Poland, Siberiaand Canada.

Debo

rah

Suss

ex

Sylva

in M

acch

i

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 15

Sylva

in M

acch

i

16 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER

Contributors

Major DonorsConnie & Donald Benson Robert HalleyHill’s Pet Nutrition, Inc.Robert & Greta Gauthier Richard GouldLacey HunterDorie KleinJames Le BlancDave Mech/EnvironmentalLeadership Program, Inc. Sarah MorrisEdward NortonRick & Suzanne PepinJohn Ridenour

Theodore & Barbara SpauldingCharles StelznerGary StielowJoseph & Cynthia UrbanoCynthia WayburnSusanne WentzJoseph & Shirley WolfTrish Zapinski

In-Kind DonationsRobert ClarkRick KelleyJohn MarondeJerry SandersDale Westlund

Matching GiftsSusan Anderson & GMAC-RFC

Karen Davis & Compaq Matching GiftProgram

Thomas Gootz & Pfizer Foundation Matching Gifts Program

Rosemary Hughes &American Express

Steven Koivula & CNA Foundation

HonoraryIn Honor of Drew Brockett:Daniel Nakahara

In Honor of Homer & Cindy Hepworth:Jed Hepworth & Lee Schubert

MemorialIn Memory of Jean Marie Brisbois:Bill Conger

In Memory of Carrie:Gail Wolff

In Memory of Herb Lotz:J. Roderick & Nancy Adkins SmithCarol BehymerAnna Sophia JohnsonArt Lotz & familyMadhuri MansukhaniOffice & ProfessionalEmployeesArvind RajpalNeena SaxenaHardika Shah & Khyati ShahNaeem SiddiquiMariam & Paul SpearIman StratenusIsmat ThaverJuliana TionadaW. Matt Totten & familyWilliam & Jacquelynn UrbanKathy & Larry Van VelsorT. A. Werre

In Memory of Donna Palladino:Dr. Edward Scates

grand opening of the newfacility and the Wolves andHumans exhibit. For a fewyears visitors enjoyedwatching the pack dynamicsof these four littermates, butin 1998 Kiana passed away.Her death was not only a loss to the wolves but to thevisitors’ experiences and thedynamics of the pack. Thethree remaining litter-mates remained ondisplay, but plans weremade to add morewolves to the pack.

In 2000, a pair ofarctic pups, Shadowand Malik, were bornand joined the otherambassador wolves,creating the Center’slargest pack. As time wenton, these pups matured into strong, healthy adultswhile the 1993 litter of MacKenzie, Lucasand Lakota began toshow signs of age.The natural agingprocess reduced theirability to keep upand compete withthe younger wolves,so by the end of2002, all of the 1993l i t t e r h a d b e e nmoved to an adja-cent, more protectedenclosure to form theRetired Pack.

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 17

As the International WolfCenter celebrates the

10th anniversary of its flag-ship facility in Ely, it’s a greattime to review the changesthat have occurred in wolfpack dynamics.

The history of the ambas-sador wolves at the Centerdates back to 1989, when theCenter operated a summer-only exhibit in the U.S.Forest Service’s VoyageurVisitor Center. The displayincluded four wolves born in 1989: Raissa, Bausha,Ballazar and Jedadiah. Thesefour served the early educa-tional needs of the Centerand later moved on to otherexhibits. Some visitors mayremember the curator whoslept in the tent next to thewolf pen; yes, that was me.During the summer of 1989,1990 and 1991, my dogMaggie and I slept under the stars and even survivedan infestation of forest tentcaterpillars. This opportunityto camp out arose more out of necessity than desire.Nighttime security was anissue during the early yearsdue to a lack of a secondarychain-link fence.

In 1993, Lucas, Lakota,MacKenzie and Kiana wereborn and served as the firstyear-round wolf exhibit at theCenter, accompanied by the

Tracking the Pack

Ten Years and Making TracksT e x t a n d p h o t o s b y L o r i S c h m i d t , W o l f C u r a t o r , I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f C e n t e r

The Center willbe adding pups to the Exhibit Packduring summer2004 to join Malikand Shadow. Whoknows what thenew pack dynamicswill be? n

Jedadiah, a male fromthe 1989 litter, sleeps in a pine bed at thesummer-only exhibit atthe U.S. Forest Service’sVoyageur Visitor Center.

Born in 1993, MacKenzie and Lakota wereyoung pups when the Center opened its newyear-round educational facility.

Shadow and Malik were born on May 8, 2000, andjoined the other ambassador wolves during that fall.

Kiana was one of four littermateswho served as the first year-round

wolf exhibit at the Center.

18 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

and “endangered” in all of the rest of the lower 48 except Wyoming andmost of Montana and Idaho, wherewolves were reintroduced under aspecial rule —“experimental, non-essential”—that afforded them thesame protection as wolves now classified as “threatened.”

On paper the federal government’sreclassification of wolves is asweeping decision. However, theonly immediate effect of the re-classification is that it will be easier to kill wolves that attack livestock.Western livestock owners will nowoften be able to shoot wolves thatattack their livestock rather thanwaiting for the government to do it.

Ever since wolves were reintro-duced to central Idaho and GreaterYellowstone in 1995 as “experi-mental, non-essential populations,”livestock owners could shoot wolvesthat were attacking their livestock,but the naturally recolonized wolves of northwest Montana werealways “endangered.” In the Montanaendangered zone, only the govern-ment could lethally “control” wolves.

On the ground this seems to have been a distinction that made nodifference. The government aggres-sively killed northwest Montanawolves, while in the experimentalreintroduction area both the govern-ment and livestock owners legallykilled wolves. However, the totalpercentage of wolves killed was nohigher in the experimental areas than in the northwest Montana“endangered” area.

Wolves wandering into westernstates outside of Idaho, Montana and

W O LV E S I N T H E U N I T E D S TAT E S

Gray Wolf Downlisted to “Threatened”Throughout Most of the United Statesb y R a l p h M a u g h a n On March 18, 2003, the U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Serviceannounced its long expected

downlisting of wolves from “endan-gered” to “threatened” in most of the lower 48 states. (Wolves have no special federal classification inAlaska). Prior to this action the wolf was “threatened” in Minnesota

The U.S. Fish and WildlifeService’s reclassification keepsthe door open to a gray wolfreintroduction in southernColorado.

Mike

Pos

sis, W

ild T

hing

Pho

togr

aphy

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 19

Wyoming automatically gained“endangered” status, but, never-theless, the only two such wolvesofficially detected (one in Oregonand one in Utah) were returned by the government to Idaho orWyoming experimental popula-tion areas. Other wolves probablyexist outside of the experimentalpopulation areas but have notbeen officially noted. Still othershave been illegally or accidentallykilled in Utah and Oregon.

Under the new rule, most of theWest (except the Southwest) isincluded in the Western DistinctPopulation Segment (Western DPS).DPSs are populations more or lessdistinct from others. The Western DPSincludes all of Montana, Wyomingand Idaho, along with Washington,Oregon, California, Nevada, northernColorado and northern Utah. Onevictory was the addition of Nevadaand California to the Western DPS. No changes will be made to thecentral Idaho and Greater Yellowstoneexperimental populations.

Mexican wolves presently in theSouthwest will also remain classifiedas an experimental population. TheMexican wolf reintroduction programhas struggled because no Mexicanwolves remained in the wild. Thus,the reintroduced Mexican wolves hadto learn to contend with living in thewild without the benefit of wildparents. Moreover, the reintroductionrules limited the areas where wolvescould legally roam in Arizona andNew Mexico to artificial boundariesthat some people considered bizarre.No such limitations apply to theircousins in the Northern Rockies.

The new rules also create aSouthwestern DPS and an Eastern DPS.The Eastern DPS is controversialbecause it includes all of the East andall of the Midwest too. Wolves aredoing very well in the upper Midwest,but there is bitter disappointment that these states were lumped withthe eastern states in the new EasternDPS. Obviously the Midwest and theEast are different parts of the country.Wolf supporters had hoped for a wolfreintroduction in a truly Eastern DPS.

Opinions on the new SouthwesternDPS are mixed because some feel thatit represents de facto abandonment of the Mexican wolf. On the otherhand, the classificationkeeps the door open to agray wolf reintroductionin southern Colorado.Moreover, gray wolvesin the Southwestern DPSwill remain endangered,although no wolvespresently exist otherthan those in theMexican wolf experi-mental population.

The real test for theexisting wolf populations

Status of the gray wolf in the continentalUnited States

in Idaho, Montana and Wyoming willcome not with the reclassification but with the proposal to “delist” andturn them over to what appears to be hostile state management.

For additional information:

Visit the News & Events section of theInternational Wolf Center’s Web site athttp://www.wolf.org.

Ralph Maughan is the president of the Wolf Recovery Foundation and aprofessor of political science at IdahoState University, where he specializes in interest groups, parties, public opinion and wildlife politics.

Under the new federal rules, Mexican wolves in the Southwestwill remain classified as an experimental population.

Don

Zipp

ert

20 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

Timber wolves have been missingfrom the Northeast for over acentury, but Vermont farmer Eric

Paris isn’t complaining. “I have gottenalong real well without them,” he says. “Ican’t imagine what good wolves will do.”

Paris is not alone in his resistance to the return of the wolf. While manypeople would accept natural wolfrecovery, they firmly oppose a formalreintroduction program. In the hard-ball debate over wolf recovery, oppo-nents list the negative impacts on pets and livestock, tourism, huntingand trapping, and forest resource jobs.To the argument that wolves benefitecosystems by curbing the overpopu-lation of animals like beaver and deer,the detractors have a ready answer.

They insist the robusteastern coyote fills theniche left by the wolf.I t ’ s true, the opponentsadmit, that 26 millionacres of deep undis-turbed woods withabundant natural preystretch from New York’sAdirondack Mountainsthrough Vermont,New Hampshire andMaine. But most of it is private land.

They have a point.Some biologists andwildlife officials doubtwolf recovery would

succeed in a region lacking largetracks of federal land. For wolves tothrive, both private landowners andstate wild-life agencies would need to besupportive. However, both Maineand New Hampshire, states withlarge areas of suitable wolf habitat,have passed laws forbidding reintro-duction without the approval of thestate legislatures. In addition, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s recentdecision to downlist the wolf from“endangered” to “threatened” in theNortheast means less protection forwolves that might disperse into theregion from Canada.

Add to all that the question ofwhich wolf — red or gray—is themost appropriate species. Evidencebased on a Canadian genetic studysuggests that red wolves (Canis rufus)rather than gray wolves (Canis lupus)may have populated the Northeast a century ago. However, not all biologists accept the results of thisresearch. In addition, some expertspredict red wolves might hybridizewith coyotes and are less likely thangray wolves to prey on moose. Somescientists and wildlife managersbelieve a wolf from the Laurentideregion of Quebec is the best choicefor the region. This wolf is large

W O LV E S I N T H E N O R T H E A S T

“The Table Is Set”b y N e i l H u t t

The table is set for the wolf innorthern New England and itshould be no great surprise if

the guest appears. The question is whether we want to help him

find the dining room.

— John Harrigan, “Woods, Water and Wildlife,”

New Hampshire Union Leader and Sunday News, July 16, 2000

Wolf recovery in the Northeastfaces many obstacles, including the

question of which wolf—gray(above) or red (right)—is the mostappropriate species for the region.

An argument in favor of returning wolves tothe Northeast is that they benefit ecosystemsby curbing the overpopulation of animals likebeaver and deer.

Jerr

y M

urra

y

Mike

Pos

sis, W

ild T

hing

Pho

togr

aphy

Barro

n Cr

awfo

rd, U

.S. F

ish a

nd W

ildlif

e Se

rvice

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 21

enough to kill moose and may in fact have once lived in northernMaine as well as in Canada.

Those biologists may get theirwish. A small pack of wolves report-edly lives south of the St. LawrenceRiver in Quebec close to the Maineborder. If true, it appears that wolveshave once again defied the odds.Wolf experts have long believed the St. Lawrence Seaway, kept openall winter by icebreakers, is tooformidable an obstacle to dispersalfrom Canada’s main wolf populationand reduces chances of wolves establishing packs in New England.

But wolf advocates are optimistic.Michigan biologist Jim Hammill,who is conducting tracking work-shops in Maine, does not agree that it is impossible for wolves to findtheir way to the Northeast fromCanada. “Personally I wonder aboutthat,” he says. “These animals are just more capable than I ever wouldhave imagined many years ago.”

If Hammill is right, several environ-mental groups stand ready to ensurethat the wolves will be afforded some protection. Some organizationsare threatening to sue the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service over its decision.In addition, the groups have petitionedthe U.S. Department of the Interior to designate a new recovery region in Maine, Vermont, New Hampshireand New York and to designate thewolf there as endangered. n

The author acknowledges the followingsources of information:

www.boston.com, November 21, 2000.

Portland Press Herald Report in Maine,Today.com, October 29, 2001.

Neil Hutt is an educator andInternational Wolf Center board memberwho lives in Purcellville, Virginia.

No, the maned wolf is not considered to be a wolf. In fact, despite thename, maned wolves are not even closely related to wolves and are not in the genus Canis. The Latin name for the maned wolf is Chrysocyonbrachyurus. They live in the South American grasslands and scrub forests of Brazil, northern Argentina, Paraguay, eastern Bolivia and southeasternPeru and have long legs that allow them to see better in the tall grasses of the savannah. n

Is the maned wolf really a wolf?

In what year did theInternational Wolf Center’spresent building open?

New Question

CORRECTION

The photograph on page 23 of the Summer 2003 issue of InternationalWolf was mistakenly credited to Jerry Murray. The photograph was takenby Mike Possis, Wild Thing Photography.

Ralp

h Sc

hmod

e

22 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

written eachchapter, theoverall style is consistent, smooth and utterlydown-to-earth. Thematerial is thoughtfullyorganized, making for ease ofuse. The introduction, for example,contains a preliminary synopsis of eachchapter and shows how each onerelates to the others.

Laypersons will be pleased to findthat concepts are explained and givenmeaning within the greater context,thereby weaving, through science, atapestry of incredibly detailed infor-mation that really is more than thesum of its parts. Certainly, much ofthe data is highly technical, but thebook will appeal to both the generalpublic and the scientific communitybecause the complexities are balancedby clear explanations, occasionalanecdotal accounts and detailedgraphics in the form of photography,illustrations, graphs and charts.

Mech and Boitani have madeunvarnished objectivity a significantpart of their mission. Researchers,scientists, naturalists, students,conservationists, wolf enthusiasts,

agriculturists and even individualsharboring anti-wolf sentiment will be able to respect and use this workbecause of its scope and integrity.

For some, these might be thelaurels upon which to rest, butbeyond culminating years of work,this incredible book represents ajumping off point for all the workthat will follow. The authors provideinsight and answers, reference nearly2,000 sources of further information,and still acknowledge the many questions that remain and the needfor continued study and investiga-tion. What needs to be done next?Responsible, balanced conservation,providing for wolves and humansalike, tops the list. The authors “hope[to] promote a much better under-standing of the wolf and fosterecologically sound wolf management.Together, research, public under-standing, and proper managementshould help minimize the inevitableconflicts between wolves and humansand better the chances for wolfconservation worldwide.” n

Jakki Harbolick is a language arts andwriting teacher. She lives in Leesburg,Virginia, with her husband, Pete, andtheir two children.

Wolves: Behavior, Ecology and Conservationwill be released late this year. After its release,the book can be purchased at the InternationalWolf Center’s store online at www.wolf.org.

b y J a k k i H a r b o l i c k

Wolves: Behavior,Ecology andConservationL. David Mech and Luigi Boitani, editorsUniversity of Chicago Press, 2003

Anyone even remotely interested in wolf ecology, environmental science or conservation

dynamics will discover the ultimateresource in the eagerly anticipatedWolves: Behavior, Ecology andConservation. Edited by legendarybiologists L. David Mech and LuigiBoitani, this newest work is thedefining compilation of more thanforty years of meticulous research. Ina collaborative effort, twenty of theleading specialists in the field of wolf study share the authorialresponsibilities with Mech and Boitani.The result is an unprecedented scien-tific analysis of the wolf that couldserve as the model for any ethologicalinvestigation.

Sounding a bit dry? It’s not. In fact,Wolves is extraordinarily engaging.Although different authors have

West Gate

Dave

Mec

h

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f S p r i n g 2 0 0 3 23

WOLVES AND BISON are thesubject of a new book to be

released later this year. The BuffaloWolf: Predators, Prey and the Politics ofNature by Lu Carbyn will be publishedby Smithsonian Institution Press.

WOLF-LIVESTOCK CON-FLICTS in Minnesota almost

doubled in 2002 compared with2001. In 2002, 99 complaints wereverified at 86 farms, 155 wolves werecaptured, and 138 were euthanized.

WILD LANDS were endorsed by 71 percent of the public,

according to a Zogby Internationalpoll. Such a majority of Americans

believe that at least 10 percent of all U.S. land should be protected as wilderness.

WOLF BIOLOGIST Erik Zimen,author of several books and

articles on wolf behavior, passedaway on May 19, 2003. Dr. Zimenwas a founding member of the Wolf Specialist Group and remainedin the group through 1982.

NEBRASKA WOLF. A wolf shotnear Spaulding, Nebraska—

the first in 90 years — proved to haveoriginated in Minnesota, Wisconsin,or Michigan. Killed as a coyote onDecember 15, the animal weighedabout 100 pounds.

WISCONSIN WOLVES nearstate management goal of 350.

Before the 94 packs produced theirpups in spring 2003, the estimatedpopulation stood at 335 to 354. TheWisconsin wolf management plan callsfor maintaining the population at about350 outside of Indian reservations.

ISLE ROYALE WOLVES haveincreased slightly since last year,

according to Dr. Rolf Peterson. Thehighly inbred population now standsat 19 compared with 17 last year.Moose, the wolf ’s almost exclusiveprey on the Lake Superior island,decreased from 1,100 to about 900.

WOLVES KILL COUGAR. Apack of wolves in Yellowstone

National Park killed a female cougarin early April east of Mammoth Hot Springs. Biologists expect thatthe cougar’s two 4-month-old kittenswill starve to death as a result. n

THE ALPHALEGACY PROGRAMrecognizes the generosity and foresight of individualswho have included theInternational Wolf Center intheir wills or other estate plans.

To learn more about making a giftthrough this program, please contact Walter Medwid, Executive Director, International Wolf Center, 3300 Bass Lake Rd., #202Minneapolis, MN 55429

763-560-7374wmedwid@wolf .org

Your gift for wolves can

last beyond a lifetime.

Your gift for wolves can

last beyond a lifetime.Lynn

and

Don

na R

oger

s, w

ww.

bear

study

.org

24 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

of the bear. A strategically placedraised leg urination told me this wasthe breeding male of the pack. Thebear, looking a bit concerned,continued to feed while the wolfcircled at what it must have felt was asafe distance. After three minutes,Tuffy, as this wolf came to be known,lay down about 50 feet from the bearas though waiting his turn to feed.The bear wasn’t at all comfortablewith this and moved off, thankfullyaway from us. The wolf fed for fourminutes and then trotted back downthe hill, disappearing behind someshrubs.

This den, Aylmer Lake West, wasthe seventh of eight wolf homesitesthat research assistants Lorna Ruecheland Gudrun Pflueger helped meobserve in the central Canadiansubarctic during summer 2002. Wewere collecting data for my master’sthesis at the University of Alberta,which looks at several aspects oftundra wolf den ecology. We had seen a bear within a few hundred feetof another wolf homesite, but thisinteraction between the two preda-tors was the first we had witnessed.

We set our camp up 30 feet from a sandy beach on the western shore of Aylmer Lake, 3 miles from Tuffy’s

and 349’s rendezvous site.We had our sleeping tentsoff the beach becausebarren-ground grizzlies, theonly bear species on thetundra, walk along shore-lines looking for food, andit’s best to stay out of theirway. Nevertheless, becauseof the view, we did have ourcooking tent on the beachabout 300 feet from thesleeping tents. This tent is a

We finally found her. At the topof the hill we had justclimbed, the radio signal

from the collar on female wolf 349 wascoming in pretty well. We set up ourspotting scopes to scan the area belowbefore continuing because we didn’t wantthe wolves to see us and move before wehad a chance to get the data that we’dcome to the sub-arctic to collect. Twodays before, 349 and her pups hadmoved from the den where we’d beenobserving them, and we had beensearching ever since. We had hiked morethan 12 miles over open tundra, listeningfor her radio signal from the top of each

ridge we crossed. For the last 3 miles,we had heard the signal, faint at first,until we crested this last hill and werelooking down on a lake and streamset in a little valley about half a milewide. Somewhere down there was 349and, most likely, her pups.

As we set up the scopes, a non-collared wolf climbed the hill on thefar side of the valley. It was headingfor something large and brown, whichI first thought was a musk-ox thewolf was going to attack. But when I put my scope up, I saw that thebrown “thing” was a barren-groundgrizzly feeding on a caribou carcass.

We watched the wolfwalk seemingly unno-ticed behind the bearand suddenly bite it onthe rump. The bearturned on the wolf,which jumped out ofthe way and moved offa bit to one side butstayed within 100 feet

Of Wolves and Bears: Observations of a Tundra Wolf Pack and a Barren-ground Grizzlyb y P a u l F r a m e

A female arctic wolf and her pups.

Tuffy, a male arctic wolf, was observedharassing a barren-ground grizzly

feeding on a caribou carcass.

Paul

Fra

me

Paul

Fra

me

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 25

It seems this bear was an unofficial member of theAylmer Lake West pack,spending much of its timenear the wolves and theirkills. However, we’ll neverknow for sure if this was thecase. What we do know isthat a bear left tracks near the den and was seen near the rendezvous site feedingon a caribou likely killed by wolves. Both the bear and

wolves visited our camp on the samenight; however, we don’t know whatthe timing of each visit was. From thelast two sightings, it seemed the bearwas seeking out wolf homesites.

My thesis research is about wolvesand wolf homesites. However, withlittle studied wildlife populationssuch as this one, noteworthy obser-vations often come unexpectedly.These observations are anecdotal butwarrant further research on the rela-tionship between these two predatorsof the tundra. n

Paul Frame is currently working on a master’s degree at the University ofAlberta, in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada,in collaboration with the Government of the Northwest Territories, Departmentof Resources, Wildlife, and EconomicDevelopment. Previously he volunteeredfor the International Wolf Center andworked as a technician for Dr. L. DavidMech in Ely, Minnesota, and worked onthe Mexican Wolf Reintroduction and theNorthern Rockies Wolf Recovery Projectfor the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

10-foot-square screen enclo-sure that gives mealtime respitefrom the constant swarms ofmosquitoes and blackflies onthe tundra. Because there areno trees to hang food from, we kept it in bear-resistantcontainers stored near thecooking tent, well away fromthe sleeping area. Each of the52 mornings I woke up on thetundra, one of the first things I did was scan the area forbears. Usually the first place I checkedwas the food cache.

The morning after we watchedTuffy harass the bear, I scanned andsaw the screen tent collapsed on thebeach. Hmm, it could have been thewind, but the tent had withstoodstronger winds than had blown thatnight. I walked to the beach and foundfresh bear tracks 30 steps from mytent. The bear had walked right pastour beached boat, only hesitatingbriefly to investigate before contin-uing on to the screen tent. At thedowned and ripped tent, I observedwolf tracks on top of bear tracks. Both

had visited our food containers, whichwere undisturbed. From there, thetracks continued up the beach awayfrom camp. Each of the four previousnights at this camp, wolves had visitedus, as indicated by fresh tracks on the beach. However, this was the firsttime a bear had visited the camp. Thatit appeared uninterested in us while we slept was reassuring. However, our

sleeping through the visit made clearhow important keeping a clean campand following the guidelines for safetyin bear country are, for this bear couldhave been inside one of our tentsbefore we would have heard it.

I had known there was a bear in the area before it visited campbecause I had seen tracks near theden of 349. It is quite possible thebear that left tracks at the wolf den was the same bear I saw Tuffybite near the rendezvous site, andthat visited our camp. It may be that some of these grizzlies learn to followwolves to scavenge their kills, as the bears do in Yellowstone NationalPark. It makes good sense for a bear,since taking over a wolf kill providesa rich food source otherwise noteasily available. Additionally, a bearhanging around a wolf den may catcha pup to snack on.

We saw bears twice more whileobserving this wolf pack. We first saw the bear moving along a streamheading toward the rendezvous site,which was also our destination.When the bear winded us, it ran fastin the opposite direction. (We hadn’tshowered for a week, but I don’t thinkthis was the only reason the bear ran.) When we arrived at the site, wefound that the wolves had moved. We headed for the natal den to checkthe radio signal and found the wolvesthere. Later, as we returned to ourcamp, we saw the bear again, this timeheading toward the wolf den.

The cooking tent before it wasdowned and ripped by a bear.

Frame listens for 349’s radio signal on the tundra.

“A strategically placed raised leg urination told me this was the breeding male of the pack.”

Lorn

a Ru

eche

l

Paul

Fra

me

Paul

Fra

me

26 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

Imagine lying under the stars in your cozy sleeping bag near a crackling fire. You are just

turning in after a long day of hikingin the woods. The stream nearby is gurgling, and the peepers arechirping, but there is a chill in thefall air. You curl tighter in your

help them keep warm orcool while living in the wild.Fur is a great attribute thatnot only insulates wolvesbut also protects them.

Wolves possess twotypes of fur. The guard hairscover the surface of the fur layer and have twomain purposes. They helpprotect a wolf’s skin, andthey act as a raincoat. Themoisture from rain or snowhits the guard hairs andsheds off. Guard hairs actas a barrier for the othertype of fur, the underfur.The underfur layer does thesame job as our own winterparka. It insulates the wolfduring the long, coldwinter months. It startsgrowing in late summerand sheds in late spring sothe wolf can stay coolduring the summer.

When the weather is harsh,wolves don’t have a heated home togo into like we do—they have to findshelter in nature! During inclementweather wolves may find a stand offir trees to hunker down in and getout of the wind. On cold days theycurl up in a tight ball and cover theirfaces with their thick, fluffy tails tokeep the cold air out and body heatin. On a sunny winter day they mayfind a nice spot out of the wind tocatch the radiant heat from the sun’srays. Hot, buggy days may send awolf to the shady refuge of the forestor into a burrow to escape the bitinginsects common in summer. Cooling

Adapting to Your Environmentb y J e s s i c a E d b e r g , I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f C e n t e r I n t e r n

COATCOLDFALL

FREEZEGUARD HAIRINSULATION

SPRINGSUMMERWARMTH

WINTERUNDERFUR

W O R D F I N DSee if you can find the words listed below. Words may be vertical,horizontal, diagonal, forward or backward!

sleeping bag and turn toward the fire for warmth. How do wildanimals stay warm on brisk, fallnights without a fire or sleeping bag?How about during the long winternights soon to follow?

Wolves and other wild animalshave special adaptations or tools that

I n t e r n a t i o n a l W o l f F a l l 2 0 0 3 27

off in water is also a greatoption. To avoid the heat of the day, during summer wolvesmove more at night.

Wolves have adapted well to their environment. Theamount of fur they grow isregulated by where they live.

A wolf inhabiting North Carolinadoesn’t need as much underfur as awolf in Alaska. These adaptations aresimilar to our own. We humans havedeveloped clothes such as parkas,hats, mittens and boots for winter,and shorts, tank tops and sandals for summer—not to mention havinghouses with heating and air condi-tioning! What other adaptations canyou identify that help wolves survivea life in the wild? n

PERSON: Dr. Michael Nelson

JOB T ITLE AND DESCRIPTION:Wildlife Research Biologist. Responsiblefor conducting field research and gathering data, directing the experientialeducation of technicians (helpers),publishing the research conducted, and directing and maintaining the field headquarters.

TRAINING REQUIRED: Minimum of a master’s degree in a wildlife field withtraining in fieldwork. A Ph.D. is mostdesired for this position.

Michael Nelson is a wildlife researchbiologist for the U.S. GeologicalSurvey, working out of the KawishiwiField Laboratory near Ely, Minnesota.

SKILLS NEEDED TO DO THE JOB:Physical ability to work in the field(snowshoeing, snowmobiling, hiking,canoeing) and an awareness of limita-tions. Ability to adapt to technologicaladvances and learn new skills. Goodcommunication skills for working with the general public and givingpresentations and speeches.

ADVICE TO KIDS: Involve yourself in outdoor activities and studies of the natural world—rocks, plants andanimals. Ask questions about things innature, and go outside and investigate!

WOLFWORK

On cold days wolves curl up in a tight ball andcover their faces with their thick, fluffy tails tokeep the cold air out and body heat in.

Nan

cy S

chw

artz

, Int

erna

tiona

l Wol

f Cen

ter

Lynn

and

Don

na R

oger

s, w

ww.

bear

study

.org

28 F a l l 2 0 0 3 w w w . w o l f . o r g

non-game type of use that comeswith that money, the more changesthat we can see in wildlife manage-ment in general. Wolves should bethe pilot program.”

California business veteran andoutdoor enthusiast Barry Braden hasworked as volunteer field staff withDefenders of Wildlife’s Wolf Guardianprogram, and with the Nez Perce tribe in Idaho. From his perspective,“Fish and Game departments inMontana, Wyoming and Idahoneed to overhaul their missionstatements to emphasize abroader constituency, andinclude wildlife viewing andeco-tourism as revenue-producing objectives.” Hebacks a one-half-centtax on goods andservices in the commu-nities that benefit fromtravel to the greaterYellowstone ecosystem,as well as a trust fund

that would let wolf and outdoor enthu-siasts help pay for management costs.

Despite the broad range ofperspectives, a consensus seems to be within reach on how to fairly and appropriately cover the costs ofcontinued management, conserva-tion and recovery of wolves. As thisdialogue ensues, the wolf continuesto provide lessons in communication,problem-solving and workingtogether. n

Nancy Weiss is the Western Director of Species Conservation for Defenders of Wildlife.

Mike

Pos

sis, W

ild T

hing

Pho

togr

aphy

Who Should Pay for Wolf Recovery andConservation after Federal Delisting?b y N a n c y W e i s s

At some time in the future,the gray wolf will be delisted from the federal Endangered

Species Act, and wolf managementwill be turned over to individualstates. When this happens, who shouldpay for continued wolf management,conservation and recovery? Interviewsrevealed a broad—but not universal—view that costs should be shared bythe federal and state governments and private citizens who support wolfrestoration.

Montana State Senator Jim Elliotis blunt. “The states don’t have money,period. And they don’t have moneybecause, frankly, the federal govern-ment doesn’t give it to them. . . . Ifthey want us to ‘take in the washin’,’so to speak, I think that we shouldget paid for ‘the washin’.”

Jan Holder, a cattle rancher fromArizona, in the Mexican gray wolfrecovery zone, runs a predator-friendly beef operation. She suggestsshared costs, with the private portionfrom wolf supporters, since “thereisn’t as much support for this type ofprogram in a state like Arizona, whichis very agricultural and very rural.”

Wildlife ecologist Nathan Varleyhas lived in Yellowstone NationalPark his whole life and worked forthe park’s wolf reintroduction project.Varley sees a chance for innovativethinking. “[The wolf is] a good placeto start and get non-consumptiveusers into game management [that]can be applied to other species, caseby case. The more non-consumptive,