WCC's Family Walk

Free Family Event to Celebrate New York’s Wild Heritage!  August 13

Learn More

ACTION & AWARENESS CENTER

Help protect wolves and their environment now! Legislative awareness campaigns

Northeast Wolf Coalition Learn More

Visit us

Our education programs never fail to impress children and adults alike! They fill up quickly so please register today. Check out the WCC Calendar
Click here for more info about our programs

Managing Wolves by the Numbers

Under the endangered species regulations governing gray wolf recovery, states must monitor wolf numbers and file annual status reports on wolf populations and packs on an annual basis. Federal authorities review the reports to ensure wolves are being properly managed above minimum standards to avoid relisting wolves as an endangered species. Evidence across the country, and now from neighboring British Columbia, suggest that the current process of counting wolves (which guides wolf management) may not be accurate.

Due to claims that monitoring wolves via radio collars, aerial observations and trapping can be an expensive task, many states have implemented a “patch occupancy model” for counting wolves. The occupancy model depends exclusively on hunter surveys to determine wolf populations and wolf locations.  This information, combined with prey base estimates and landscape data, become the formula for predicting  the  probability of wolves in a given area.  This newer method might be less expensive, however, it is our understanding that it has not undergone rigorous scientific peer review for wolves, and is at best a guesstimate based exclusively on hunter experience in the field.

In Montana, the patch occupancy model estimates the wolf population 25-35 percent higher than the verified minimum counts led by state agencies.  For instance, population modeling for Montana’s wolves in 2012—where actual counts verified a minimum of 625 wolves and 147 packs—predicted that 804 wolves and 165 packs inhabited the state.

It is neither scientifically sound nor ethical to base critical decisions about public “harvest” on statistical predictions and not hard data.

Should we be managing wolves by the numbers at all?

By Wolf Conservation Center’s Diane Bentivegna

As we learned from Dr. Gordon Haber’s 43 years of wolf research in the book “Among Wolves,” written with Marybeth Holleman, when it comes to wolves, it’s not about numbers. It’s about its pack. A wolf is a wolf when it’s part of an intact, unexploited group capable of complex cooperative behaviors and unique traditions. If a pack is left unexploited, it will develop its own traditions for hunting, pup-rearing, and social behaviors that are finely tuned to its precise environment.

Wolves should not be managed by the simplistic models most commonly used by today’s hunter-dominated wildlife agencies. The notion that we can “harvest” a fixed percentage of an existing wolf population that corresponds to natural mortality rates and still maintain a viable population misses the point.

You can’t manage wolves by the numbers. You can’t just count the numbers of wolves over a particular area and decide whether it’s a “healthy” population. That’s because the functional unit of wolves is the pack. If we leave wolves alone, they will manage their own numbers in concert with their environment. And, if we leave wolves alone, we will be the ones to benefit – for the presence of wolves brings natural balance to ecosystems.

This entry was posted in News and tagged , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

2 Responses to Managing Wolves by the Numbers

  1. I believe if the government and all such agency and human just leave the wolves alone It would be more beneficial. They had been doing good way back until humans interfered. we took over their territory, build our homes,malls drill oil or gas.Now we want to destroy them why they are only trying to survive.we have killed enough of them they need to be protected. they will help with the ecosystem. there has to be mating pairs in order for packs to continue. Its really impossible to use numbers to count wolves because there have been so many killed I want them to be left alone and be free to run as it was intended for them to do

  2. Dana Bisbee says:

    They should not be monitored by numbers or hunters. Hunters will say there are more than there really is so they can hunt them. Where I live in the state of Washington, North about thirty miles rangers from Stevens County killed four wolves. Now me as a tax payer would like to know why! Was it because of a ranchers stupid cows?

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Contact Us

We love hearing from you! Get in touch

live-cam-wildearth2Keep an eye on our critically endangered wolves as well as Ambassador wolves Atka, Alawa and Zephyr. Enjoy - and please let us know if you see anything interesting.

Great Nonprofits

Amazon Wishlist

Check out our wishlist on Amazon.com..... It's a great way to help support us!

Shop & Help Wolves

When you shop via AmazonSmile, Amazon will make a donation to the Wolf Conservation Center!

Shop now

amazon smile

WCC on Facebook

WCC e-Cards

Show your family and friends how much you care by sending them a WCC e-card.   Learn More

Music to our Ears

Singer/songwriter Steve Jackson is donating a dollar from each purchase of his new CD "Goodnight Moon" to the Wolf Conservation Center. This CD is available to download by clicking here.

If interested in ordering a hard copy, you can contact Steve by going to his website at
www.acousticdistortion.com