Log in

I forgot my password

Latest topics
» their world-new canine rpg
Sat May 13, 2017 10:15 am by Guest

» The Packs Fates
Fri Mar 17, 2017 2:29 am by Guest

» Baraenor
Mon Mar 13, 2017 12:22 pm by Guest

» RPP [211]Starcliff Stable
Mon Mar 06, 2017 5:59 am by Jacques Ciscre

» [TSK] The Starcliff Kingdom
Mon Mar 06, 2017 3:40 am by Jacques Ciscre

» LTW Joining Thread ~NOT ACCEPTING~
Fri Mar 03, 2017 10:31 pm by Skady

» [LTW] Character Build & Design Rules
Fri Mar 03, 2017 8:35 pm by Skady

Top posting users this week


WOLVES: Common Misconceptions

View previous topic View next topic Go down

WOLVES: Common Misconceptions

Post by MoonShine on Sun Jul 20, 2014 12:54 am

[guide title="Common Wolf Misconceptions"]

[tit]Introduction[/tit]
[box]This original topic was create by Mahina/Talue on STP. ^^ (Post date: May 7, 2013)
[CITING text="I have this posted on SRP and I figured you guys could use it too. Hope you don't mind me posting here. =)" of="Mahina"]
An informative collaboration by *sulfide and =CynicalSerenade[/box]

Wolves have never attacked people before.:

[box]Has teeth, will bite! You cannot exclude captive wolves from this sort of statement. Any predatory animal can and will bite under the circumstances. There is plenty of documentation that shows wolves have indeed been known to attack humans, including the natives.[1] This is, of course, taking into account rabid, healthy, provoked and unprovoked wolves.[2] But the main focal point being that wolves HAVE attacked people before.[3] One of the most famous pieces of literature documenting wolf attacks is Wolves in Russia by Will N. Graves and Valerius Geist.[/box]
Okay, but there has never been a documented case of a healthy wolf killing a human in North America.:

[box]There are in fact two that recently happened over the past 6 years, Candice Berner and Kenton Carnegie. However, because wolfaboos like to believe that another animal was to blame, here is a quoted passage: "On March 7th, 1888 at New Rockford in the Dakota Territory as recorded in the Saint Paul Daily Globe, a man and his son were attacked, killed, and  eaten by a pack of wolves within yards of their home as the wife watched helpless from the window with an infant in her arms." This is but ONE example of a long list of known killings that have been chronicled in newspapers and other primary sources such as personal journals. When biologists say "there are no documented cases of.." they really mean there are no "documented" cases that meet THEIR criteria which excludes historical accounts.[4] So, while the wolves in this instance weren't tested for rabies, biologists cite rabid wolves working  as individuals with healthy wolves moving in packs. Stanley P. Young writes, "they went alone, roaming aimlessly about, lacking the motions of a hunting wolf, trotting along, at intervals making a circling movement, snapping at the tail or hind parts as they made the circle, keeping up a trot and repeating until lost sight of. When killed they showed marks of self-inflicted wounds."[5] This lends credence to the probability that these wolves were in fact healthy when they killed these two people, further proving that wolves have indeed killed people.  Val. Geist's document titled "When Do Wolves Become Dangerous to Humans?" explains more on why wolf attempts to kill humans basically becomes a clumsy attack due to this new type of prey selection.[6][/box]
So the wolves that killed Carnegie and Berner weren't rabid, but they were probably defending themselves or their pups!:

[box]Both Carnegie and Berner were partially eaten, and crime scene evidence indicated that they had been stalked, chased and repeatedly knocked over  before dying. This is consistent with wolves hunting prey, not defending territory or pups. As mentioned in the NINA document's Types of Wolf Attack, wolves acting defensively simply limit themselves to a few quick bites, and try to escape if possible.[7][/box]
Any so-called "wolf attack" cannot be proven, and was most likely made by someone's wolf-dog hybrid that they couldn't take care of and turned loose. Or maybe a bear. Or even a human using wolf parts to frame the wolf to give more of a reason to hunt them more.:

[box]Wolf attacks can be proven with eye-witness accounts. They can also be proven with DNA results taken from the bite wounds on the victim (this is because wolves kill by puncturing blood vessels and allowing their prey to die by massive blood loss while they eat them alive). While it is true that people release their wolf-dog hybrids in the wild, this does not mean that EVERY wolf attack that has ever happened was caused by someone's pet. When it comes to bears, knowing the difference in scat  and tracks comes in handy. Also their behavioral differences in how the  victim was mauled or killed. Rabid wolves do not eat their prey, as the  disease does not allow their stomach to hold food or water. When you look at both Candice Berner and Kenton Carnegie, both of them were killed and eaten alive.[8 ][/box]
Wolves do not kill for fun." / "Wolves only kill what they have to in order to survive.:

[box]I'm not sure "fun" is the correct term. Biologists use the term "surplus killing" or "excessive killing" in which wolves will kill more than what they can eat. This happens amongst many other carnivores as well, not just wolves. Sometimes wolves will leave entire carcasses, not  eating anything from them. This is mostly common of domesticated animals, such as livestock or pets.[9] In Idaho, a whole wolf pack was killed for wiping out 70 sheep, and not eating any of them.[10][/box]
Wolves improve ecosystems - without wolves, ecosystems would collapse. Look at the Yellowstone Pronghorn for example!:

[box]This is known as the "emotional hook". First, I just want to say that the  wolves in Yellowstone today are not the native subspecies that were once living there before, but before I get sidetracked, I want to just say how the wolf has nothing to do with the Pronghorn conservation. Human settlement has been detrimental to their migration, which is what this species requires in order to increase their numbers. Because they no longer have any migration routes and they are restricted to simply trekking up and down the National Park, it strips their recruitment levels because their lack of winter range. To add to this, coyotes mainly feed on their young - which is where the "hero wolf" comes into the picture, because the wolf has practically killed all wildlife in Yellowstone, but let's not get sidetracked again. The conservation of the Pronghorn relies solely on their migration routes.[11] Wolves are not keystone predators.[12][/box]
Wolves only kill the old, injured, and sick.:

[box]Wolves are opportunistic predators just like any carnivore. They have well been known to attack healthy prey just as much as sick prey (which is what they do in Yellowstone, along with bears - they kill elk calves,  which are perfectly HEALTHY animals). There has been an 80% reduction in elk herd numbers in Yellowstone. These numbers are not sufficient enough to feed the 200 wolves that live in the park. Throughout the 80 years in management, elk numbers have never been at carrying capacity. The elk herds there are locked in a predator pit so bad that they may not even recover.[13] The fact that wolves are not even helping aspen recover is a statement in and of itself.[14] They are also known for killing healthy dogs as well, but this is merely because they see dogs as competition.[15] Point being, however, that they do not just go for the old, injured, or sick. They strike when opportunity presents itself.[/box]
Wolves are endangered.:

[box]If you mean biologically, then to put it bluntly, no. Gray wolves have a  total world population of around 500,000.[16] If you are speaking of a specific area, say for example the U.S., then you are referring to a political sense. Biologically wolves are not endangered, nor have they ever been threatened with extinction.[17] Wolves are only politically endangered because environmental groups continue to sue the government for control of our land. There are also subspecies involved –  however, the ESA does not recognize these, which violates the Vertebrate Population Policy of the Service. It is also said that the entire North American continent is suitable wolf habitat, yet the government and environmentalists are trying ever-so-hard to force them in the lower 48 states claiming "they need to be here."[18][/box]
Then how do you explain the Mexican wolf, or the Red wolf?:

[box]The Mexican wolf was actually listed as extinct in the wild in the 70's when biologists removed the last five wolves from Mexico and kept them in captivity. It was from those five, including one female, that the 800 or so exist today. I say 800 because I am including the ones in captivity, not  just the wild. Yes, it is true that the ones that returned to the wild are declining due to poachers and they are currently listed as "critically endangered" now, but the main point is that those few remaining in the wild were reintroduced from captivity, therefore they cannot essentially go extinct since there are still 800 left.[19] When it comes to the Red wolf, there is a lot of controversy on the origins of the species. Some biologists think it is a hybrid[20], whereas others  believe it is a true taxon[21]. Regardless of the outcome, that shouldn't change whether it remains protected.[/box]
Wolves only account for >2% of livestock losses, therefore they do not pose a threat. Coyotes and domestic dogs kill more livestock  - should we hunt them instead?:

[box]You are not looking at this in perspective. Current total wolf population in the lower 48 states range anywhere from 5,000-10,000, due to the fact that both the Great Lakes and the Rockies share roughly a population of 5,000 wolves each and they are conservative minimums.[22][23] Now, what is the current total population of coyotes in the lower 48 states? It is hard to get an exact number because there are so many of them. The estimated population in South Dakota ranges from 70,000 to 75,000, or an average of nearly one coyote per square mile (2.56 sq. km).[24] That is just one state! As for domesticated dogs, there are around 72 million in the entire country.[25] Therefore, I would have to say that those two alone have the wolf outnumbered. No wonder the statistics get so misconstrued, not to mention how both dog and coyote live in places that the wolf cannot! One article finally shed  some light on the situation and showed how wolves were twenty-one times more likely to kill cattle than mountain lions, and how wolves were 170 times more likely to kill cattle than coyotes or black bears.[26][/box]
When you hunt wolves, you leave behind orphaned pups.:

[box]Wolf hunts, depending on state and geographic location, actually take place during November-December to prevent this. What were once wolf pups  are now yearlings and able to fend for themselves should hunters on happenstance kill the parent. There are rules and regulations that make hunting season purposely avoid the mating season when females are gravid.[27][28][/box]
It's the rancher's fault their livestock gets attacked. They should just build a fence.:

[box]Let me put it to you like this: if you can manage to get over or under it, so can a wolf. The fence would have to be 10ft high with chainlink guards on the bottom to prevent the wolves from digging to get in.[29] How about all the predator deterrents to date? Fladry lines (rags or flags tied at intervals on rope around your stock), range riders (the program that was funded by Defenders of Wildlife that went down the drain because the lack of funds), llamas (they work great for coyotes not so much on wolves), the list is long. These proactive methods have all failed to stop wolves from doing what they do best, none of them being proven to work 100% for all farms. This leads me to ask why is there a movement to stop public land grazing.[/box]
Wolves only kill livestock when there is nothing else to eat.:

[box]Availability in food has nothing to do with wolf depredation on livestock. In fact, just days after the Yellowstone introduction, an introduced wolf (B-13) killed a newborn calf on a ranch in Idaho.[30] A study was done to assess factors related to wolf depredation of cattle in fenced pastures in Montana and Idaho and the results were quite obvious. "Pastures where depredations occured were more likely to have elk present, were larger in size, had more cattle, and grazed cattle farther from residences than pastures without depredations." There was also no correlation between carcass disposal, calving times, breed of cattle, or distance where cattle grazed from the forest edge.[31][/box]
Wolf pairs are mates for life.:

[box]This is a nice, fuzzy idea, but it simply isn't true. Wolves, like most mammals of the animal kingdom, do not practice "serial monogamy". If a wolf dies, they will have no quarrels finding a new mate, and in areas where there is a high wolf density, such as the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, they have the most variations in their social structure when compared to other wolf packs in real life. For example, other wolves besides the top two breeding pair are allowed to mate for pups. Males have been noted to have more than one breeding female in his pack. Biologists have also seen in some wolf packs more than one male breed in a wolf pack as well as more than one female breeding. This increases the complexity of the pack structure. The reason for these opportunities is due to the close proximity of other wolves in the park. Another great example is a female leaving her pack to mate with either a rival pack male or a lone male and then rejoining her pack.[32] Wolves are also known for performing incest, which is actually sometimes the only thing they are able to do in order to survive. Great examples of this are the wolves of Ellesmere Island and Isle Royale where there is only one female in the whole family.[33][/box]
Wolves were worshiped by Native Americans.:

[box]You can't just say "all Native Americans" worshiped the wolves, because that obviously isn't true. Different clans had different cultures and views on life. That would be similar to saying "The Bald Eagle is respected by all Americans." Which is simply not true, as there are plenty of Americans who think the other animals that were up for vote (grizzly bear and turkey) are a much better choice. Such is the case with native American tribes... there are plenty out there that actually hunted and killed the wolf. Some even hated the wolf, as they believed the wolf was  the cause for bringing death to mankind. The Navajo is a brutal native American tribe known for animal abuse. They willingly kill wolves on their tribal grounds because they believe once they wear the pelts they turn into werewolves.[34] These are just but a few of native American folklore in which wolves are viewed as evil.[/box]


[tit]Sources[/tit]

Sources:

[box]
[1]:The Wolves of North America by Stanley P. Young and Edward A. Goldman (Part I)
Page 133: Ross Cox relates the heart-rending trails of the Indian widow of Pierre Dorrien, the famous guide and trapper. In endeavoring to elude massacring Indians and to protect her two babies while seeking aid and succor in the Walla Walla River country in 1813, she encountered a "band of prairie wolves," feeding on the bodies of her white friends but recently massacred. "The sound of her voice scared them, and they fled." Previous to viewing this scene, this Indian woman had cached her two babies in the woods some distance away. "Fearful that they [the wolves] might find their way to the spot in which she had deposited her previous charge, she hastened thither, and arrived just in time to save her children from three of those ferocious animals which were then approaching them" (Ibid., p. 254).

Page 138: Freuchen reports meeting an Eskimo woman at Iglulik in Greenland "who had several severe scars in her head and shoulder, said to be from a wolf which once attacked her when on her way to visit some neighbors two or three kilometers from where she lived. The wolf sprang up and first bit her in the shoulder, after which it had bitten her so fiercely that she fainted; this, however had scared the wolf away. This woman was unconscious when her people found her" (Freuchen, P., 1935b: 122). "A half-breed Eskimo with whom I traveled a thousand miles was undoubtedly torn to pieces and eaten. There was nothing about his tent but wolf tracks and blood. Mr. Court, Master of the Investigator, was attacked by two wolves. One, although wounded, crouched up to within three yards of him. One of Severdrup's men was attacked by a band of wolves. His companions returned to save his life." (Letter from Donald B. MacMillan, Provincetown, Mass., to E. A. Goldman, dated April 11, 1941. In files of Fish and Wildlife Services).

[2]:A Case History of Wolf-Human Encounters in Alaska and Canada by Mark E McNay
Page i: "39 cases contain elements of aggression among healthy wolves, 12 cases involve known or suspected rabid wolves, and 29 cases document fearless behavior among non-aggressive wolves. In 6 cases in which healthy wolves acted aggressively, the people were accompanied by dogs. Aggressive, non-rabid wolves bit people in 16 cases; none of those bites was life-threatening, but in 6 cases the bites were severe."

[3]:The Fear of Wolves: A Review of Wolf Attacks on Humans by the Norwegian Institute for Nature
Page 5: "In conclusion, we believe that there is good evidence that people have been killed by both healthy and rabid wolves during the last centuries. The incidence of attacks appears to have dropped dramatically during the 20th century. [...] Given the fact that wolves have posed a threat to human safety, it is easy to understand why we have a 'cultural fear' of wolves, which is then reinforced through stories and mythology."

[4]: Wolf Attacks on Humans by T. R. Mader
In order for an attack to be "documented", these unreasonable criteria must be met:
1. The wolf has to be killed, examined and found to be healthy (in order to prove a wolf was rabid, the head of the wolf must be removed, sent to a lab for testing and found to be rabid).
2. It must be proven that the wolf was never kept in captivity in its entire life.
3. There must be eyewitnesses to the attack.
4. The person must die from their wounds.
That is a "documented" attack. Those requirements for documentation negate all historical records!

[5]: The Wolves of North America by Stanley P. Young and Edward A. Goldman (Part I)
Page 159: Charles Aubrey writes, "Wolves affected with rabies were most often seen in the months of March and April. [T]hey went alone, roaming aimlessly about, lacking the motions of a hunting wolf, trotting along, at intervals making a circling movement, snapping at the tail or hind parts as they made the circle, keeping up a trot and repeating until lost sight of. When killed they showed marks of self inflicted wounds. The Indian dogs by their actions showed they knew mad wolves when they came into the camp by keeping from close contact with them, barking and yelping at them, closing in on them, and again retreating – herding them out of camp."

[6]: When Do Wolves Become Dangerous to Humans? by Dr. Valerius Geist
Page 4: "These initial attacks are clumsy, as the wolves have not yet learned how to take down efficiently the new prey. Persons attacked can often escape because of the clumsiness of the attacks. A mature, courageous man may beat off or strangulate an attacking wolf."

[7]: The Fear of Wolves: A Review of Wolf Attacks on Humans by the Norwegian Institute for Nature
Page 16: "There are historical and contemporary records of shepherds being bitten on the hand, arm or foot when they corner or confront a wolf trying to kill livestock or dogs, and try to kill it with a stick or hay fork. Other records exist of hunters digging out wolf pups from a den and being bitten by an adult wolf trying to defend the pups. These attacks can be interpreted as defensive bites by a scared and cornered animal. They generally consist of a single bite, usually to an extremity, and the wolf does no press the attack, but simply escapes if possible."

[8 ]: When Do Wolves Become Dangerous to Humans? by Dr. Valerius Geist
Page 16: "Predatory attacks appear to usually involve single wolves, or single packs, that learn to exploit humans as prey. In these cases the victims are usually directly attacked around the neck and face in a sustained manner. The bodies are often dragged away and consumed unless the wolves are disturbed. Although single incidents have occurred, these predatory attacks tend to cluster in space and time, and continue until the wolf is killed."

[9]: Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation edited by L. David Mech and Luigi Boitani
Page 144: "When prey are vulnerable and abundant, wolves, like other carnivores, kill often and may not completely consume the carcasses, a phenomenon known as 'surplus killing' (Kruuk 1972) or 'excessive killing' (Carbyn 1983b). The amount of each carcass wolves eat depends on how easy it is to kill prey at the time, but sometimes they leave entire carcasses (Pimlott et al. 1969; Mech and Frenzel 1971a; Peterson and Allen 1974; Bjarvall and Nilson 1976; Carbyn 1983b; Miller et al. 1985; DelGiudice 1998). […] All cases of surplus killing of wild prey reported for wolves have occurred during a few weeks in late winter or spring when snow was unusually deep. […] Presumably what happens when wolves kill more than they can immediately eat is that they respond normally to a situation that is drastically different than usual – prey are highly vulnerable, rather than being especially hard to catch. Programmed to kill whenever possible because it is rarely possible to kill, wolves automatically take advantage of an unusual opportunity."

[10]: Wolf pack wiped out for "surplus killing" by Zachary Smith
During the night of June 29, the nine wolves in the Cook pack took part in what biologists call a "surplus killing" north of McCall. They killed 70 sheep, far more than they could eat.

[11]: Pronghorn Conservation at National Parks Conservation Association
"In the early 19th century, pronghorn numbered between 30 and 60 million. European settlers almost hunted them to extinction, their numbers dropping to approximately 15,000 by 1915. […] There are close to 1 million pronghorn antelope in North America. […] The key to preserving Grand Teton's pronghorn lies in protecting their historic migration corridor between the park and their winter range to the south."

[12]: Wolves: Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation edited by L. David Mech and Luigi Boitani
Page 343: "Wolf conservation tends to focus discussions on the management of the animal, often with little regard for the rest of the environment in which a wolf population lives, but wolves are just one of the many elements of the environment, and their conservation is often best accomplished by managing several other components in a holistic approach. Wolves should be saved and managed as part of the whole context, not because they are singled out as a special species.

A central challenge that we will have to face as conservation proceeds into the coming decades is to revise the ways we sell conservation efforts. In the recent past, wolves were labeled a flagship species or an umbrella, indicator or keystone species, depending on what conservation market one was trying to penetrate. Some of the authors of the forgoing chapters may not agree, but we think arguments can be made that wolves do not necessarily deserve any of these labels.

A flagship species is an attraction to nearly all society's strata, but wolves are not welcomed by all factions of society. With a few rare exceptions, the rural world opposes wolves, so the animal's flagship role is restricted primarily to urbanites or to local areas. Wolves are certainly a powerful flagship species for the conservation movement, particularly that of affluent societies with strong lobbies in large cities, but a true flagship species should be able to move an entire society toward a goal.

Neither are wolves a good umbrella species (i.e., a species, usually high in the ecological pyramid, whose conservation necessarily fosters that of the rest of the chain) in that they can live well on a variety of food resources and in areas with an impoverished prey base.

Wolves are not a keystone species either, in that they are not essential for the presence of many other species (eg., herbivores flourish in areas devoid of wolves). And wolves are not necessarily good indicators of habitat quality or integrity because they are too generalist to be good indicators of the presence of a pristine trophic chain.

The above labels have been very useful in many circumstances and have contributed significantly to wolf recovery. They may still be useful in the future, but we should be aware that they are shortcuts to 'sell a product' rather than good scientific grounds on which to build conservation."

[13]: Click this link!

[14]: Are Wolves Saving Yellowstone's Aspen Trees from Elk? by ScienceDaily 2010
"The results were surprising and have led us to refute several previous claims regarding interactions among wolves, elk and aspen in Yellowstone," Kauffman said.

The tree rings showed that the period when aspen failed to regenerate (1892 to 1956) lasted more than 60 years, spanning periods with and without wolves by several decades. "We concluded from this that the failure of aspen to regenerate was caused by an increase in the number of elk following the disappearance of wolves in the 1920s rather than by a rapid behavioral shift to more browsing on aspen once wolves were gone from the park," said Kauffman.

Surveys of current conditions indicated that aspen in study stands exposed to elk browsing were not growing to heights necessary to make them invulnerable to elk. The only places where suckers survived to reach a height sufficient to avoid browsing were in the fenced-in areas. In addition, aspen stands identified as risky from the predation risk map were browsed just as often as aspen growing in less risky areas.

"This work is consistent with much of what researchers have learned from studying wolves and elk in Yellowstone," Kauffman said. "Elk certainly respond behaviorally to the predation risk posed by wolves, but those small alterations to feeding and moving across the landscape don't seem to add up to long-term benefits for aspen growing in areas risky to elk."

[15]: Dog Depredations by Wolves in 2011 in Wisconsin
20 dogs killed, 7 injured for the year 2011.

[16]: Click this link!

[17]: IUCN Red List of Threatened Species
Canis lupus is of Least Concern.

[18 ]: Smithsonian Study
Page 29: Under the 1996 Vertebrate Population Policy, a population that is physically (i.e., geographically) separated from other populations of the same taxon is distinct. If the significance criterion is met, the population could be considered for listing under the Act. The 1996 Policy does not specify whether physical separation is the result of natural geographic barriers or the result of landscape alterations that have rendered surrounding habitats unsuitable. [...] "Wolf research, as well as the expansion of wolf range over the last 2 decades, has shown that wolves can successfully occupy a wide range of habitats, and they are not dependent on wilderness areas for their survival... Virtually any area that has sufficient prey and adequate protection from human-caused mortality could be considered potential gray wolf habitat." [68 FR 15841]

[19]: USFWS Mexican Wolf Recovery Program

[20]: Mitochondrial DNA analysis implying extensive hybridization of the endangered red wolf Canis rufus by Wayne & Jenks
Abstract: "Thus, the red wolf is entirely a hybrid form or a distinct taxon that hybridized with coyotes and grey wolves over much of its previous geographical range. Our findings, however, do not argue against the continued protection of the red wolf."

[21]: DNA profiles of the eastern Canadian wolf and the red wolf provide evidence for a common evolutionary history independent of the gray wolf by Wilson et. Al
Abstract: "We suggest that both the red wolf and the eastern Canadian wolf evolved in North America sharing a common lineage with the coyote until 150,000-300,000 years ago. We propose that it retain its original species designation, Canis lycaon."

[22]: FWS Biologist Says Wolf Numbers Underestimated, Mech Says 3,000 Wolves Exist in ID, MT & WY – The Outdoorsman, May 2008 issue

[23]: Wolf.org
Total population for the Great Lakes (even though they are conservative minimums) equals 4,267.

[24]: State Mammal of South Dakota
The estimated population [of coyotes] in South Dakota ranges from 70,000 to 75,000, or an average of nearly one coyote per square mile (2.56 sq. km).

[25]: U.S. Pet Ownership & Demographics Sourcebook by American Vetrinary Medical Association
"There are more than 72 million pet dogs in the U.S."

[26]: Livestock losses put in perspective by Cat Urbigkit
The USDA-APHIS Idaho Wildlife Services' annual wolf activity report states: "Collinge (2008) compared reported numbers of livestock killed by wolves and other predators with the estimated statewide populations of the four species (coyotes, wolves, mountain lions and black bears) most often implicated in predation on livestock in Idaho. By determining the average number of livestock killed per each individual predator on the landscape, and comparing these figures among the four species, it turns out that individual wolves in Idaho are about 170 times more likely to kill cattle than are individual coyotes or black bears. Individual wolves were determined to be about 21 times more likely to kill cattle than were individual mountain lions."

[27]: Another Viewpoint: Why Hunting-Trapping is Best Plan to Manage Gray Wolf Populations by Jim Hammill
"I agree with Mech that the annual timeline for wolf hunts should coincide with the period of fur primeness and should avoid obviously gravid females."

[28]: Considerations for Developing Wolf Harvesting Regulations in the Contiguous United States by L. David Mech
"Maximizing public acceptance of wolf harvesting will be hard no matter what taking techniques are used. Nevertheless there are some considerations that can reduce public opposition. The primary consideration is to open the season only after most pups have reached adult size and are no longer readily identifiable as pups, usually about November. Killing animals that are obviously pups will invite much revulsion, even by sportsmen. Referring to these grown pups as 'young-of-the-year' would help, and not opening the season until November would minimize possible harvest of obvious pups. […] A similar consideration that can be made toward the end of any annual hunting or trapping season would be to end the season before fetuses in gravid females are obvious. In most northern states that would be by 1 March, which also coincides with when wolf fur has lost its prime. Allowing harvest through February, however, would assist with wolf control by increasing chances that gravid wolves would be taken."

[29]: Decade of the Wolf by Doug Smith & Gary Ferguson
Page 48: "Ten-foot-high runs of chain-link were capped by inward-leaning aprons, the corners of the enclosure rounded to guard against wolves climbing up and out. To keep the animals from digging out, four-foot-wide mats of chain-link were laid along the inside perimeter of the pens, staked down every four feet with long spikes of iron rebar."

Page 54-55: "One day in the pen, long after [Number] 29 was gone, I happened to look up and see a small tuft of hair hanging high on the chain-link. Suddenly I got it. Incredibly, he'd jumped up ten feet to the overhanging panel at the top of the enclosure, dangling there by this teeth, pawing the air like a monkey until he was finally able to find purchase and scramble out. It was a trick with serious consequences. The last time I handled 29 his canine teeth were all but gone, broken off to stubs during those inspired athletic moments hanging from the chain-link."

[30]: Wolf killing will never be solved by Candace Burns, High Country News, October 2, 1995 issue

[31]: Assessing factors related to wolf depredation of cattle in fenced pastures in Montana and Idaho – Wildlife Society Bulletin, Vol. 33, No. 4, Winter 2005

[32]: Wolf pack structure in Yellowstone National Park with wolf biologist, Doug Smith

[33]: Wolves: Behavior, Ecology and Conservation edited by L. David Mech and Luigi Boitani
Page 58: "The term 'plural breeding' is used by researchers studying cooperative breeding in other mammals (Solomon and French 1997) and is synonymous with the term 'multiple breeding'. [...] When the breeding female accepted a mate from within the family, a second pair also successfuly copulated (Peterson 1977, 80-84)."

Page 59: "However, on Isle Royale, where there is no choice, wolves do breed with their close relatives (Wayne et al. 1991)."

[34]: Neither God Nor Devil by Eva-Lena Rehnmark
Page 79: In Pawnee and Shoshone belief, the wolf introduces death upon the earth with a tornado he has stolen.

Page 81: The Navajo tribe believed that men disguised themselves as wolves to practice withcraft.
[/box]




[/guide]


Last edited by Strong on Mon Aug 17, 2015 12:57 pm; edited 1 time in total (Reason for editing : Título anterior: Common Wolf Misconceptions)

MoonShine
avatar

[RANK="Former Dominant Female STP" style="color:rgb(15, 189, 255);font-size: 16px;font-family: Amarante; padding-bottom: 7px;" img="http://i.imgur.com/OdPk7El.png"]
▪ Age : 6 Years
Posts : 613

Back to top Go down

View previous topic View next topic Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Notepad