Winter Habitat Use by Wolves, Canis lupus, in Relation to Forest Harvesting in West-central Alberta

Forested landscapes in west-central Alberta are facing increased pressures from forest harvesting and other land-use activities, which may alter the movements and distribution of Wolves and ungulates. Information on habitat use by Wolves in logged forests is scarce, potentially limiting effective land-use planning in the boreal forest. Nine Wolves, from four Wolf packs, were fitted with GPS radiocollars in the Rocky Mountain foothills, near Grande Cache, Alberta (2000-2001). We found Wolves did not use the landscape randomly, but rather exhibited a significant preference for non-forested natural habitats (shrubs, water), relative to their availability. Within forest habitats, Wolves used cutblocks proportionately more than unharvested forest and non-forested anthropogenic habitats (pipelines, clearings); however, selection of forest cutblocks was not statistically significant. We found no evidence that Wolves preferred or avoided forest cutblock edges. Wolf pack territories contained various levels of timber harvesting, but most areas were still in the early stages of harvest. Nevertheless, these areas have been allocated for large-scale harvesting. Understanding the potential responses of Wolves to rapidly changing landscape mosaics poses a significant challenge to researchers and managers, but such information is important to informing future land-management and conservation strategies for boreal forest Wolf-prey systems

Human Activity Differentially Redistributes Large Mammals in the Canadian Rockies National Parks

National parks are important for conservation of species such as wolves (Canis lupus) and elk (Cervus canadensis). However, topography, vegetation conditions, and anthropogenic infrastructure within parks may limit available habitat. Human activity on trails and roads may lead to indirect habitat loss, further limiting available habitat. Predators and prey may respond differentially to human activity, potentially disrupting ecological processes. However, research on such impacts to wildlife is incomplete, especially at fine spatial and temporal scales. Our research investigated the relationship between wolf and elk distribution and human activity using fine-scale Global Positioning System (GPS) wildlife telemetry locations and hourly human activity measures on trails and roads in Banff, Kootenay, and Yoho National Parks, Canada. We observed a complex interaction between the distance animals were located from trails and human activity level resulting in species adopting both mutual avoidance and differential response behaviors. In areas \u3c 50 m from trails human activity led to a mutual avoidance response by both wolves and elk. In areas 50 - 400 m from trails low levels of human activity led to differential responses; wolves avoided these areas, whereas elk appeared to use these areas as a predation refugia. These differential impacts on elk and wolves may have important implications for trophic dynamics. As human activity increased above two people/hour, areas 50 - 400 m from trails were mutually avoided by both species, resulting in the indirect loss of important montane habitat. If park managers are concerned with human impacts on wolves and elk, or on these species\u27 trophic interactions with other species, they can monitor locations near trails and roads and consider hourly changes of human activity levels in areas important to wildlife

References

Abrams, P. A. 2000. The evolution of predator-prey interactions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31:79-105. Abuladze, K. I. 1964. Osnovy Tsestodologii. Vol. IV. Teniatylentochnye gel\u27 minty zhivotnykh i cheloveka i vyzyvaevaniia. Nauka, Moscow. 530 pp. Achuff, P. L., and R. Petocz. 1988. Preliminary resource inventory of the Arjin Mountains Nature Reserve, Xinjiang, People\u27s Republic of China. World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, Switzerland. 78 pp. Ackerman, B. B., F. A. Leban, M. D. Samuel, and E. 0. Garton. 1990. User\u27s manual for program Home Range. 2d ed. Technical Report no. 15. Forestry, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station, University ofldaho, Moscow. Acorn, R. C., and M. J. Dorrance. 1990. Methods of investigating predation of livestock. Alberta Agriculture, Edmonton. 36 pp

References

Abrams, P. A. 2000. The evolution of predator-prey interactions. Annu. Rev. Ecol. Syst. 31:79-105. Abuladze, K. I. 1964. Osnovy Tsestodologii. Vol. IV. Teniatylentochnye gel\u27 minty zhivotnykh i cheloveka i vyzyvaevaniia. Nauka, Moscow. 530 pp. Achuff, P. L., and R. Petocz. 1988. Preliminary resource inventory of the Arjin Mountains Nature Reserve, Xinjiang, People\u27s Republic of China. World Wide Fund for Nature, Gland, Switzerland. 78 pp. Ackerman, B. B., F. A. Leban, M. D. Samuel, and E. 0. Garton. 1990. User\u27s manual for program Home Range. 2d ed. Technical Report no. 15. Forestry, Wildlife, and Range Experiment Station, University ofldaho, Moscow. Acorn, R. C., and M. J. Dorrance. 1990. Methods of investigating predation of livestock. Alberta Agriculture, Edmonton. 36 pp

The need for the management of wolves — an open letter

The Southern Mountain and Boreal Woodland Caribou are facing extinction from increased predation, predominantly wolves (Canis lupus) and coyotes (Canis latrans). These predators are increasing as moose (Alces alces) and deer (Odocoileus spp). expand their range north with climate change. Mitigation endeavors will not be sufficient; there are too many predators. The critical habitat for caribou is the low predation risk habitat they select at calving: It is not old growth forests and climax lichens. The southern boundary of caribou in North America is not based on the presence of lichens but on reduced mammalian diversity. Caribou are just as adaptable as other cervids in their use of broadleaf seed plant as forage. Without predator management these woodland caribou will go extinct in our life time

Utah Wolf Management Plan, Utah Division of Wildlife Resources Publication #: 05-17

This plan will guide management of wolves in Utah during an interim period from delisting until 2015, or until it is determined that wolves have established1 in Utah, or assumptions of the plan (political, social, biological, or legal) change. During this interim period, arriving wolves will be studied to determine where they are most likely to settle without conflict. The goal of this plan is to manage, study, and conserve wolves moving into Utah while avoiding conflicts with the wildlife management objectives of the Ute Indian Tribe; preventing livestock depredation; and protecting the investment made in wildlife in Utah

Population genetics, foraging ecology, and trophic relationships of grey wolves in central Saskatchewan

Habitat fragmentation and anthropogenic development influence the level of isolation and security in and around protected habitats affecting wolf movements and the distribution and abundance of their prey. In light of recent concern about the ecology of animals in protected areas, I initiated a research project to investigate the molecular and foraging ecology of grey wolves in and around Prince Albert National Park (PANP), Saskatchewan. Estimates of genetic diversity and population structure can be used as surrogates to detect effects of habitat degradation on wolves. Genetic diversity was high in these populations relative to other North American wolf populations. My results suggest that wolves in central Saskatchewan form a panmictic population, however there is some evidence showing partial isolation of one group of wolves within PANP. I speculate that the level of human activity such as road networks, hunting, and trapping act as dispersal impediments to this isolated group. Further, the genetic homogenization, indicating high population turnover, of wolf groups that use the periphery and adjacent areas of PANP may also contribute to the observed genetic subdivision. The partially isolated NW group, characterized by slightly lower diversity indices, low migration rates, and higher levels of allele fixation, indicated this group was a more stable social unit comprised of more related individuals.Knowledge of wolf food habits and how they change over time is a fundamental component to understanding wolf ecology. Using scat analysis I evaluated wolf foraging ecology by calculating indices of occurrence/faeces (OF) and percent prey biomass contribution: white tailed deer contributed 43% and 33% respectively to wolf diet; elk (33%, 50%), moose (7%, 14%), beaver (5%, 2%), and snowshoe hare (2%