The Wolf Intelligencer

Wolf Management

Petracca LS, Converse SJ, Maletzke BT, Gardner B. Forecasting dynamics of a recolonizing wolf population under different management strategies. Animal Conservation. 2026 Fe

ABSTRACT

ABSTRACT

Species recovery can be influenced by a wide variety of factors, such that predicting the spatiotemporal dynamics of recovering species can be exceedingly difficult. These predictions, however, are valuable for decision makers tasked with managing species and determining their legal status. We applied a spatially explicit projection model to estimate population growth and viability of gray wolves (Canis lupus) from 2021 to 2070 in the state of Washington, USA, where wolves have been naturally recolonizing since the establishment of the first resident pack in 2008. Using this model, we predicted the effects of 12 scenarios relating to management actions (e.g., lethal removals by the state agency, translocation, recreational harvest) and system uncertainties (e.g., immigration from out of state, disease) on the probability of meeting Washington’s wolf recovery goals, the probability of extinction, and other metrics related to population status. Population recovery was defined under Washington’s Wolf Conservation and Management Plan as four breeding pairs in each of three recovery regions and three additional breeding pairs anywhere in the state. The baseline and two translocation scenarios indicated a high (> 90%) probability of wolf recovery in Washington by 2070, but scenarios related to harvest mortality (removal of 5% of the population every 6 months), increased lethal removals (removal of 8.53% of the population across the state each year), and cessation of immigration from out of state resulted in probabilities of < 0.20 (0.01, 0.04, and 0.17, respectively) of meeting recovery goals by 2070. Only two scenarios of 12 (increased harvest and lethal removals scenarios) resulted in a geometric mean of population growth ≤ 1, indicating long-term population stability or growth for most scenarios. Our results suggest that wolves will continue to recolonize Washington and that recovery goals are likely to be met so long as harvest and lethal removals are not at unsustainable levels and adjacent populations support immigration into Washington.

Political affiliation predicts public attitudes toward gray wolf (Canis lupus) conservation and management. van Eeden LM, S Rabotyagov S, Kather M, Bogezi C, Wirsing AJ, Marzluff J. Conservation Science and Practice. 2021 Mar

Economic Studies on Wildlife Management and Conservation. Lozano Galindez, J.E., 2020.

An Innovative National Insurance Model to Mitigate the Livestock–Leopard Conflicts in Iran. Sanei A, Teimouri A, Abad RA, Saeida S, Taheri S. InResearch and Management Practices for Conservation of the Persian Leopard in Iran 2020

Development of D-Loop mitochondrial markers for amplification of prey DNA from wolf scat H Schroeder, S Palczewski, B Degen – Conservation Genetics Resources, 2020 Sep

‘Not the Wolf Itself’: Distinguishing Hunters’ Criticisms of Wolves from Procedures for Making Wolf Management Decisions. von Essen E, Allen M. Ethics, Policy & Environment. 2020 Apr
(Sweden)

The effectiveness of livestock protection measures against wolves (Canis lupus) and implications for their co-existence with humans. Bruns A, Waltert M, Khorozyan I. Global Ecology and Conservation. 2020 Mar

Understanding the acceptability of wolf management actions: roles of cognition and emotion. Straka TM, Miller KK, Jacobs MH. Human Dimensions of Wildlife. 2020 Jan

Poisoning wolves with strychnine is unacceptable in experimental studies and conservation programmes. Proulx G, Brook RK, Cattet M, Darimont C, Paquet PC. Environmental Conservation. 2016 Mar

Pendulum swings in wolf management led to conflict, illegal kills, and a legislated wolf hunt
ER Olson, JL Stenglein, V Shelley… – Conservation …, 2015 – Wiley Online Library

Wisconsin wolf management: a cauldron of controversy
LD Mech – Conflicts in Conservation: Navigating Towards …, 2015 – books.google.com

Experimental reduction of wolves in the Yukon: ungulate responses and management implications. Hayes RD, Farnell R, Ward RM, Carey J, Dehn M, Kuzyk GW, Baer AM, Gardner CL, O’Donoghue M. Wildlife Monographs. 2003 Jul

Beyond wolves: The politics of wolf recovery and management. Nie MA. U of Minnesota Press; 2003

Electronic aversive conditioning for managing wolf predation. Shivik JA, Asher V, Bradley L, Kunkel K, Phillips M, Breck S, Bangs E. InProceedings of the Vertebrate Pest Conference 2002

Wolves, bears, and their prey in Alaska: biological and social challenges in wildlife management. National Research Council, 1997

Biological, conservation, and ethical implications of exploiting and controlling wolves. Haber GC. Conservation Biology. 1996 Aug

Increases in moose, caribou, and wolves following wolf control in Alaska. Boertje RD, Valkenburg P, McNay ME. The Journal of Wildlife Management. 1996 Jul

Cross‐boundary management of Algonquin Park wolves
GJ Forbes, JB Theberge – Conservation Biology, 1996