Gray Wolves, Canis lupus, Killed by Cougars, Puma concolor, and a Grizzly Bear, Ursus arctos, in Montana, Alberta, and Wyoming

Four cases where large predators caused Grey Wolf (Canis lupus) mortality are recorded. We describe two incidents of Cougars (Puma concolar) killing Wolves in Montana and one incident of a Cougar killing a Wolf in Alberta. We report the first recorded incident of a Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) killing a Wolf in the western United States

Wolf Management In The Northwestern United States

Gray wolves (Canis lupus) were deliberately eliminated from the northern Rocky Mountains (NRM) by 1930. Restoration began in 1986. There are currently nearly 120 breeding pair and 1800 wolves. Wolf restoration initially proceeded with more benefits and fewer problems than predicted. However, conflicts have steadily increased since 2002 when the population first met its minimum recovery goal. About 40 million has been spent since 1974 and the management program currently costs >4 million/yr. Wolves were delisted in 2008 and 2009 but relisted by federal court order in 2009 and 2010. While the NRM wolf population is biologically recovered, public opinion remains divisive and the legal, political, and policy decisions will continue to be litigated by a diversity of interests. Science is a poor tool to resolve the differing human values that continue to be debated with great passion through wolf symbolism

Importance Of Recruitment To Accurately Predict The Impacts Of Human-Caused Mortality On Wolf Populations

Reliable analyses can help wildlife managers make good decisions, which are particularly critical for controversial decisions such as wolf (Canis lupus) harvest. Creel and Rotella (2010) recently predicted substantial population declines in Montana wolf populations due to harvest, in contrast to predictions made by Montana Fish, Wildlife and Parks (MFWP). Here we replicate their analyses considering only those years in which field monitoring was consistent, and we consider the effect of annual variation in recruitment on wolf population growth. We also use model selection to evaluate models of recruitment and human-caused mortality rates in wolf populations in the Northern Rocky Mountains. Using data from 27 area-years of intensive wolf monitoring, we show that variation in both recruitment and human-caused mortality affect annual wolf population growth rates and that human-caused mortality rates have increased with the sizes of wolf populations. We also show that either recruitment rates have decreased with population sizes or that the ability of current field resources to document recruitment rates has recently become less successful as the number of wolves in the region has increased. Predictions of wolf population growth in Montana from our top models are consistent with field observations and estimates previously made by MFWP. Familiarity with limitations of raw data helps generate more reliable inferences and conclusions in analyses of publicly-available datasets. Additionally, development of efficient monitoring methods for wolves is a pressing need, so that analyses such as ours will be possible in future years when fewer resources will be available for monitoring

Effects of Wolf Removal on Livestock Depredation Recurrence and Wolf Recovery in Montana, Idaho and Wyoming

Wolf predation on livestock and management methods used to mitigate conflicts are highly controversial and scrutinized especially where wolf populations are recovering.  Wolves are commonly removed from a local area in attempts to reduce further depredations, but the effectiveness of such management actions is poorly understood.  We compared the effects of 3 management responses to livestock depredation by wolf packs in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming:  no removal, partial pack removal, and full pack removal.  From 1989 to 2008, we documented 967 depredations by 156 packs: 228 on sheep and 739 on cattle and other stock.  Median time between recurrent depredations was 19 days following no removal (n = 593), 64 days following partial pack removal (n = 326), and 730 days following full pack removal (n = 48).  Partial pack removal was most effective if conducted within the first 7 days following depredation, after which there was only a marginally significant difference between partial pack removal and no action (HR = 0.86, P = 0.07), and no difference after 14 days (HR = 0.99, P = 0.93).   Ultimately, pack size was the best predictor of a recurrent depredation event; the probability of a depredation event recurring within 5 years increased by 7% for each animal left in the pack after the management response.  However, the greater the number of wolves left in a pack, the higher the likelihood the pack met federal criteria to count as a breeding pair the following year toward population recovery goals

Gray Wolves, Canis lupus, Killed by Cougars, Puma concolor, and a Grizzly Bear, Ursus arctos, in Montana, Alberta, and Wyoming

Four cases where large predators caused Grey Wolf (Canis lupus) mortality are recorded. We describe two incidents of Cougars (Puma concolar) killing Wolves in Montana and one incident of a Cougar killing a Wolf in Alberta. We report the first recorded incident of a Grizzly Bear (Ursus arctos) killing a Wolf in the western United States

MOOSE CALVING AREAS AND USE ON THE KENAI NATIONAL MOOSE RANGE, ALASKA

Although female moose (Alces alces) with newly-born calves have frequently been observed in open, bog-meadow, black spruce (Picea mariana) habitats on the Kenai National Moose Range, moose also calve in other denser habitats where they are more difficult to observe. A total of 139 aerial surveys were flown over one major calving area, the Moose-Chickaloon River area, from 1957 to 1971. Peak use during this period occurred 17-12 years after a wildfire burned 1255 km2 in the region. Fluctuations in moose observed per hour in the calving area were probably related to winter mortality and human harvest. Reduced cow moose densities apparently triggered a reproductive response in the late 1960’s despite previous low productivity and deteriorating winter range. Twinning rates were more closely and inversely related to the age of the 1947 burn, time of earliest annual survey, and, to a lesser extent, cows observed per hour. Observations of newly-born calves and calf:cow ratios indicated parturition extended from mid-May to late-June and early July. Estimates of cow numbers in the spring of 1979 indicated less than 10 percent of the region's cow population were observed in the Moose-Chickaloon River calving area

INTERRELATIONS OF WEATHER, FIRE, AND MOOSE ON THE KENAI NATIONAL MOOSE RANGE, ALASKA

Moose populations on the Kenai National Moose Range in Alaska were monitored by spring, fall, and winter aerial surveys. Data indicate a positive response in moose productivity and density to disturbance by wildfire. Weather data indicated that summer precipitation and temperature influenced the type of habitat created by fire. Precipitation, temperature, and snow depth during the winter modified moose productivity and density. Severe winter weather slowed increases and accelerated declines while mild winter weather accelerated increases. Habitat quality appeared to determine whether the population was increasing or decreasing

Effects of Increased Human Populations on Wildlife Resources of the Kenai Peninsula, Alaska

In this paper, we will discuss what has occurred to several wildlife populations on the Kenai Peninsula as the human population increased. By discussing historical impacts, management techniques, and potential human impacts, we intend to show the significance of what occurred and may occur as human populations expand, both on the Kenai and in Alaska

HABITAT DIFFERENCES AND MOOSE USE OF TWO LARGE BURNS ON THE KENAI PENINSULA, ALASKA

Two large burns, one in 1947 (125,000 ha) and another in 1969 (35,000 ha), produced excellent moose (Alces alces) habitat believed responsible for up to 6.6 moose/km2 on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska. The fire in 1969 burned during much hotter and drier conditions than the one in 1947. This resulted in a larger proportion of the forested habitat being consumed by fire and more, but smaller, remnant forest stands. Remnant forest edge (21-25km/km2) and the percentage of burned forest habitat (71-75%) were similar in each burn. Areas within 1.6km of the 1947 burn boundary had less burned forest, more remnant forest, more forested edge, and larger stands than interior areas of the burn. The boundary and center of the 1969 burn were similar, apparently because it was a hot suppressed fire. Relocations of radio-collared moose, from 1980-84, indicated moose used water, bog, and burned forest significantly less and remnant forest significantly more than their proportion in each burn. Moose, using 1969 burned forest habitat, were located within 100m of forest edge (cover) 56% of the time. The activity of radio-collared moose was similar in burned forest, remnant forest, and bog habitats and in each burn. Moose were bedded on 60%, and traveling, feeding, or standing on 40% of the times located. Areas within 100m of the edge of forest edge appeared to be important to moose. However moose also frequently (44%) used burned habitat over 100m from the nearest cover

BULL MOOSE BEHAVIOR AND MOVEMENTS IN RELATION TO HARVEST ON THE KENAI NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE

The movements, behavior, and mortality patterns of bull moose (Alces alces) were examined to evaluate moose harvest strategies on the Kenai National Wildlife Refuge, Alaska. Seven radiocollared adult bull moose where aerially located 242 times from November 1980, to September 1983. Four migratory bulls had larger home ranges (165 km2) and different movement patterns than three bulls that were residents (59 km2) in early successional stage forest. All were legally harvested by hunters in early succession stage forest where they had been tagged within three years. Migratory bulls that traveled into early successional stage forest to breed lived longer (x=6.5 years) then resident bulls (x=4 years) because they were generally in remote locations and thicker cover during the September 1-20 bull-only hunting season. Bull moose behavior and movement patterns changed with the onset of the rut in mid-September. This made them particularly susceptible to harvest because moose moved into open areas and formed larger groups. High hunter accessibility and hunting pressure in early succession stage forest lowered the average age of bulls and modified the moose population composition to below 20 bulls/100 cows despite an expanding moose population. Hunting seasons in early September concentrated harvest on resident moose near roads, while hunting after September 15 harvested both resident and migratory moose and impacted moose over a much larger area