WildFact
›
Information Section
›
Terrestrial Wild Animals
›
Carnivorous and Omnivores Animals, Excluding Felids
›
Canids (Canidae) & Hyaenids (Hyaenidae)
Wolf (Canis lupus)
Wolf (Canis lupus)
|
Wolf (Canis lupus)
|
@Spalea It is wolf 755M and The "White Lady"
755M has his own documentary : "The Devil Dog of Yellowstone" posted by Truewildlife Thanks for sharing ! The oldest wolf to be exact was wolf 478F with a lifespan of 12.6 years. Edit : My bad the wolf on the previous post alongside the White Lady probably is wolf #712M  
Ronan Donovan: " Today, March 21st, marks the 25 year anniversary of the first wolves released into the wilds of Yellowstone National Park. It took decades of hard work by a passionate group of Conservationists, NGOs and politicians to make this restoration effort possible. Thank you for your efforts. Under the bipartisan supported Endangered Species Act, the gray wolf became protected in the lower-48 in 1974. The loss of Wilderness and Wildthings was felt across the nation at that time and the gray wolf was the final piece to restore the Yellowstone Ecosystem to its historic glory - before Europeans and market hunters/trappers changed the West forever. Today, Yellowstone's roughly 100 wolves represent one of the great restoration stories of the last century. I hope you all have the chance to one day hear a wild wolf pack howling in the distance. If you’re interested to learn more, there are dozens of books on the topic, but a few notable titles are : Decade of the Wolf, Of Wolves and Men, and American Wolf "
Idaho Kills 17 Wolves on Public Lands to Boost Elk Numbers for Human Hunters
Although Idaho Fish and Game (IDFG) primarily “manages” wolf populations using hunters and trappers, the agency also authorizes its “control actions” in areas where regulated killing is deemed as an insufficient tool to meet “management” goals. Idaho’s Lolo Elk Management Zone is in a remote area of the Clearwater National Forest. It’s a steep and rugged landscape that is difficult to access, especially in winter. Hunters and trappers have reported 24 wolves killed in the Lolo zone during the 2019 season. The current trapping season ends March 31 and the hunting season runs through June 30. IDFG officials just announced that the agency killed 17 more. Idaho killed these 17 wolves via its “Wolf Control Program” to boost the elk population for human hunters in the Lolo Elk Management Zone. According to IDFG, “The Lolo elk population declined drastically from its peak of about 16,000 elk 25 years ago to fewer than 1,000 elk in recent years. Fish and Game biologists estimated 2,000 elk in the zone when it was last surveyed in 2017. “ History tells us, however, that the Lolo elk population dropped to historically low levels before wolves were restored to the region in the mid-1990s. So, in an effort to boost elk numbers for human hunters, Idaho is scapegoating wolves and ignoring the many factors that affect elk population including human activities, weather, disease, and wildfire. Moreover, 97% of the “Lolo Elk Management Zone” is comprised of public lands. The public lands of the United States harbor some of the greatest resources of our nation and are owned by all Americans. This begs the question, should we allow the killing of wildlife on our public lands to benefit a small faction of hunters in Idaho? I did posted the food habits of Yellowstone Wolves based on the Yellowstone Wolf Project Annual Report (1995-2018)
- Bison killed by Wolf by year and % of all the wolf kills (1995-2018)
- Elk killed by Wolf by year and % of all the wolf kills (1995-2018)
- Moose killed by Wolf by year and % of all the wolf kills (1995-2018)
- Graphics that i made myself excluding elk and wolf for the year :
ENJOY !
Michele Bavassano: " "The long wait..." April 2017. I spent years dreaming of observing a wolf near my lens. I had seen wolves before, but never a moment like this. After many long waits, finally one of the biggest emotions of my life. "
  *This image is copyright of its original author Wild World India-A Tibetan or Himalayan Wolf are considered to be a sub-species of the Grey Wolf but may well be on their way to be declared a full species on their own. They have adapted to live in the extreme high altitude habitats of the Himalayas and the Tibetan Plateau. Along with the Snow Leopard, these Wolves are the top high-altitude predators.Image courtesy - Alexander Coke Smith on a WWI Trip to Ladakh in 2014 — at Ladakh, India.
Abstract:
The role of predation on the endangered blackbuck antelope (Antelope cervicapra) by the endangered Indian wolf (Canis lupus pallipes) in Velavadar National Park, Gujarat, India, was evaluated in terms of ratios of predator to prey. Food habits of wolves were determined from scat analysis and by direct observation. Consumption was estimated from unutilized portions of blackbuck kills. Wolves preyed primarily on blackbuck (88% biomass consumption), rodents, and hares (Lepus nigricollis). Wolves consumed 4.62 (S.E. 0.11) kg/wolf/kill and made kills at an interval of 3.5 (S.E. 0.5) days. Daily consumption by wolves was estimated at 1.33 kg/wolf. The number of blackbuck killed annually per wolf was estimated between 35 and 39. Between 142 to 158 blackbuck per wolf were considered essential to maintain a stable blackbuck population. Managing the grassland habitat by annual removal of the exotic shrub Prosopis juliflora, minimizing human disturbance to wolves at kills, and reducing predation on blackbuck by feral dogs were some ways to ensure continued viability of this wolf‐blackbuck system. Link to the study : JOURNAL ARTICLE Predation on Blackbuck by Wolves in Velavadar National Park, Gujarat, India Yadvendradev V. Jhala Conservation Biology Vol. 7, No. 4 (Dec., 1993), pp. 874-881  *This image is copyright of its original author Photo Credits : Sagar735
 *This image is copyright of its original author Indian Hare in Bandipur National Park, India [Credits to Sumeet Moghe]
Food Habits of Indian Wolf (Canis lupus pallipes) in Deccan Plateau of Maharashtra, India
Kamlesh Maurya
Bilal Habib
Satish Kumar
Abstract
Food habits of the Indian wolf, Canis lupus pallipes, were studied in Rehekhuri Blackbuck Sanctuary, Maharashtra, India during 2005. Prey items eaten by wolves were identified from scats. Most scats contain single prey item and minimum number of scats required to quantify the food habits of wolves was estimated to be 150-160. Proportion of biomass contributed by different prey species in the diet of wolves was calculated from their frequency of occurrence by using correction factor in equation Y= 0.0182X+0.217. Blackbuck contributed 25.90 kg, followed by sheep 11.62 kg, goat 8.99 kg, hare 1.19 kg and rodent 0.09 kg per 100 scats to the biomass. Majority of scats (95.1%) contained single prey item, while two (4.6%) or more prey items (0.3%) occurred rarely. Annual prey diversity in diet was estimated at 2.08 using Shannon-Weiner Index, with seasonal differences in the frequency of occurrence of different food items (G test statistic 30.2, df14, P <0.01). Reducing dependence of wolf on domestic livestock is a challenge for the managers to seek continuous survival of wolves in such human dominated landscape.  *This image is copyright of its original author Table 2- Prey represented in 303 scats of Rehekhuri Wolf Pack, Maharashtra, India during 2005, together with estimated biomass and number of prey consumed.
Link to the study : Food Habits of Indian Wolf (Canis lupus pallipes) in Deccan Plateau of Maharashtra, India Evidence is that wolves are protecting pronghorn with their hostility to coyotes
Yellowstone National Park
by RALPH MAUGHAN on JULY 26, 2012
Presence of wolves helps survival of pronghorn fawn, normally a major prey item for coyotes-
Wolves have a complicated relationship to their prey and to competing carnivores and omnivores such as bears. Simple statements such as every animal a wolf kills is one less for a hunter are fantasy. In reality wolves can directly or indirectly cause the populations of their prey to drop, remain steady or even increase as they exert their many effects on the environment and the environment influences their population size too (witness the big natural decline in the Yellowstone Park wolf population). The effects of wolves can also change over time in the same area depending on external events such as forest fires that influence their prey and wolves’ competitors.
Nevertheless, generalizations are possible and one of the more interesting ones is the tendency of wolves to benefit pronghorn antelope populations in places where pronghorn numbers are being suppressed by heavy coyote predation on the tiny pronghorn fawn. Neither wolves nor coyotes have any effect on adult pronghorn because they can’t catch them except in very rare circumstances.
First noticed at least a decade ago, there is considerable evidence that wolves are indirectly leading to an increase in pronghorn populations in both Yellowstone and Grand Teton National Parks.
Patrick Dawson has a lengthy article on wolves, coyotes, and pronghorn in WyoFile.
His article : Do Wolves help Pronghorn? Yellowstone Pronghorn find sanctuary in the Shadow of the Wolf. Here is the link to Ralph Maughan article : Evidence is that wolves are protecting pronghorn with their hostility to coyotes (July 26, 2012)  *This image is copyright of its original author Picture of Larry Mayer Quote:Several YouTube videos have been shot of coyotes and pronghorns interacting in Yellowstone National Park. Here is the Link to the interaction chronology (in pictures) of this pronghorn and coyote pictured above :
Wolf diet and prey selection in the South-Eastern Carpathian Mountains, Romania
Abstract The Romanian wolf population, one of the largest in Europe, occupies a total home-range of 154500 km2 and is spread across a variety of landscapes–from anthropized hills and plateaus to remote, densely forested mountains. However, this population is markedly understudied, and even basic knowledge of the species’ feeding habits is deficient. Wolf diet was assessed based on 236 scat samples collected between November 2013 and October 2014, by following pre-established transects (total length = 774 km). The study area (600 km2) is a multi-prey ecosystem in the southern sector of the Eastern Romanian Carpathians. Our results emphasize that more than 80% of the wolf diet is based on wild ungulates. The wild boar is clearly selected (D = 0.74) and is the most common species in the diet (Bio = 72%), while roe deer (Bio = 10%) and red deer (Bio = 5%) have a smaller contribution. Domestic species represented the second-largest prey category in both seasons. Among them, dog is a particularly important source of food (Bio 3.5–10.9%). Other domestic species (goat, sheep, horse) have marginal importance in the wolf diet and seasonal occurrence. Standardized niche breadths are low in both seasons (BAw = 0.07, BAs = 0.12), and a high degree of overlap in the resources used has been observed (Ôws = 0.99). Our study represents the first step towards understanding the wolf foraging behaviour in the Romanian Carpathians and is valuable to address the complex issues of wolf and wild ungulate population management and conservation.
*This image is copyright of its original author Table 1. Average body mass and total number of individuals of live prey items in the study area.
This article is peer-reviewed and is quality reading !
It is long and it is pretty interesting to read !
Predation by wolves (Canis lupus) on roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in north-eastern Apennine, Italy
Abstract
Predation by wolves Canis lupus on roe deer Capreolus capreolus was studied by scat analysis in five areas of the Province of Arezzo, north-eastern Tuscany, Italy. In the intensive study area (ISA) roe deer represented 19.1% of mean per cent volume (MPV) while in the other areas its use ranged between 10.9% and 53.4% of MPV. A low degree of variation was found in both annual and seasonal use of roe deer, although seasonal differences were more marked in those areas where roe deer use was lower. In ISA, roe deer was negatively selected among species: the Ivlev's electivity index ranged between −0.41 and −0.89. Analysing intra-specific selection, in ISA <1-year-old individuals were preferred by wolves, mainly during the fawns' first months of life. This trend was confirmed in the other areas, where fawns represented more than 50% of the relative number of roe deer prey. In ISA, the use of roe deer (as MPV) was not correlated with its density or with that of the main prey, wild boar, and in almost all the other areas no relation between use and density of roe deer was founded. However, in the one area where both roe deer density and use were the highest, these two variables seemed to exhibit a comparable trend. The use of roe deer was negatively correlated with the percentage of forest cover among all the study areas.
Here is a link to the full study : Predation by wolves (Canis Lupus) on roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) in north-eastern Apennine, Italy Wild boar (Sus scrofa) mortality by hunting and wolf (Canis lupus) predation: An example in northern Spain
Abstract and Figures
Over the last decades, wolf (Canis lupus) predation in northern Spain has focused on wild ungulates, even though livestock and other prey, such as other carnivores and small mammals, and garbage have been available. During 1994 and 1995, we studied the impact of wolf predation on wild boar Sus scrofa in four study areas in Asturias, Spain.
The diet of the wolf was assessed by scat collection and analysis (N = 106, 329, 372 and 649, respectively). The mortality of wild boar was deduced from density estimates and hunting records from the Nature Reserve of Somiedo. Wild boar represented 3-31% of the biomass of food found in the wolf scats in the study areas. We estimated that 75% of wild boars eaten were piglets. The wild boar mortality rate was estimated at 38% (146 dead individuals out of 385). Wolf predation was estimated to cause 12% of the mortality of wild boar and to affect 4.5% of the wild boar population. Hunting had a higher importance as a mortality factor than wolf predation (31 and 12%, respectively). Even though, a two-year study is insufficient to come to a final conclusion, our results suggest that wolf predation may have a low impact on young wild boar and that a hunting pressure of the size we found is unlikely to control the wild boar population.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Link to the study : Wild boar Sus scrofa mortality by hunting and wolf Canis lupus predation: An example in northern Spain *Note* : I Transferred this study from my own forum ! I like to share everything I find ! Prey choice and diet of wolves related to ungulate communities and wolf subpopulations in Poland
Authors :
WŁODZIMIERZ JE ̨DRZEJEWSKI
MAGDALENA NIEDZIAŁKOWSKA
MATTHEW W. HAYWARD
JACEK GOSZCZYN ́ SKI
BOGUMIŁA JE ̨DRZEJEWSKA
TOMASZ BOROWIK
KAMIL A. BARTON ́
SABINA NOWAK
JOANNA HARMUSZKIEWICZ
ANDRZEJ JUSZCZYK
TOMASZ KAŁAMARZ
AGNIESZKA KLOCH
JOANNA KONIUCH
KATARZYNA KOTIUK
ROBERT W. MYSŁAJEK
MONIKA NE ̨DZYN ́ SKA
ANNA OLCZYK
MARTA TELEON AND MARIUSZ WOJTULEWICZ
Ungulate prey of wolves in Poland [Section Results of the study] The community of wild-living ungulates was dominated by roe deer (68.9% of official numbers of ungulates and 49.4% of hunting harvest), wild boar (15.6% and 36.8%), and red deer (13.8% and 12.9%; Table 1).
Red deer (nearly 60% of ungulates killed) and roe deer (32.6%) dominated wolf diets, followed by wild boar and moose. Comparison of wolf prey with species structure of the ungulate community in Poland showed that red deer was a preferred species of prey, whereas wild boar was significantly avoided (Table 2).
Number in table 1 : Wolf Kills (n = number of individuals killed, % = proportion of total wolf kills) Red Deer : n = 1146, % = 59,9 % Roe Deer : n = 623, % = 32.6 % Wild Boar : n = 96, % = 5.0 % Moose : n = 40, % = 2.1 % Fallow Deer : n = 5, % = 0.3 % European bison : n = 2, % = 0.1 % Chamois : n = 1, % = 0<x<0.1 % Link to the study : Prey choice and diet of wolves related to ungulate communities and wolf subpopulations in Poland Predator-prey relationship of wolves and moose on Isle Royale
Briefing by: AccessScience Editors
Last reviewed: October 2018
DOI:https://doi.org/10.1036/1097-8542.BR1023181
One notable study of predator-prey relationships, specifically between wolves and moose, has been conducted on Isle Royale since the late 1950s. Isle Royale is the largest island in Lake Superior. It was established as a national park in the United States in 1940 and is a designated wilderness area, protected from development. As such, the animals that live on Isle Royale have provided researchers with a UNIQUE opportunity to study predator-prey interactions, especially because the isolation of this island has enabled scientists to avoid having to consider any immediate interference from humans. In particular, the observed relationship of wolves and moose on the island has enabled ecologists to determine fascinating aspects of intertwined animal population dynamics. Population dynamics—that is, changes in the sizes of populations of organisms through time—are often studied by conservationists and ecological researchers. In general, the interactions of predators and their prey play a chief role in explaining the population dynamics of numerous animal species. For example, predators affect the population dynamics of prey because an increase in the density of the predator population leads to increased predation on the prey and a consequent decrease in the prey's population growth rate. Conversely, an increase in the density of prey leads to more potential food for predators and a consequent increase in the predator's population growth rate. Therefore, a predator-prey interaction can be viewed as an antagonistic interaction, in which the population of one species has a negative effect on the population of a second, whereas the second has a positive effect on the first. The populations of wolves and moose on Isle Royale have fluctuated dramatically. The first moose arrived on the island in the early 1900s, possibly by swimming from the mainland or by "stocking" carried out by humans. The first wolves were a pair of animals that walked across an ice bridge from Ontario during a particularly cold winter in 1949. All of the subsequent wolves inhabiting the island descended from the initial pair, which led to population difficulties resulting from inbreeding. Investigators initially envisioned that a population equilibrium would have been reached between the predatory wolf and moose prey populations. However, this has not been observed. Instead, the wolf and moose populations have shifted antagonistically between high and low points. For example, the moose population (which was expected to hover around 1500 individuals) has ranged between 500 to 2500 since 1958, whereas the wolf population (which was expected to hover around 25 individuals) has fluctuated between 2 and 50. Scientists estimate that there are only 2 remaining wolves on Isle Royale. As a result, the numbers of moose on the island are increasing at a very rapid pace. Thus, conservationists fear that the growing moose population will eliminate the limited vegetation that they eat and need in order to survive, thereby leading to starvation of the animals. However, a continued presence of a genetically healthy wolf population on the island would provide a check on the booming moose numbers. Therefore, a new plan is being undertaken by the U.S. National Park Service to restock the wolf population. So far, 4 wolves (which have been equipped with GPS tracking collars) have been reintroduced on the island, with a further 20 to 30 individuals to come over the next few years. The goal is to re-establish a more satisfactory balance between the wolf and moose populations so that their precious dynamic relationship can be studied for future conservation projects.  *This image is copyright of its original author Credit: (John Luke/Getty Images)
Link : Predator-prey relationship of wolves and moose on Isle Royale This sentence of the above text is the key to understand why carnivores are important in nature. They [as any animal] have a "job" to do and help the ecosystem to reach equilibrium as mentioned in the text.
"Thus, conservationists fear that the growing moose population will eliminate the limited vegetation that they eat and need in order to survive, thereby leading to starvation of the animals."
*Note* : These last posts I made were from my forum : The Domain of the Wolf*. I share some but not all*
 |
| Users browsing this thread: |
| 3 Guest(s) |