Search

The use of dog shock collars on two different gray wolves (Canis lupus) were examined over a 4-year period to assess whether this system could be used to reduce wolf depredation on livestock. Results indicated that in some situations shock collars with a command center and beeper device could be useful for reducing wolf depredations.

Wolves that are recolonizing mixed agriculture and forest areas in the Lake Superior region are increasingly preying on livestock, generating public complaints and demands for compensation. Researchers documented the number of complaints about wolves in Wisconsin from 1976 to 2000 and analyzed the patterns surrounding the incidents to generate data to help prevent wolf depredation and create a foundation for policy-making related to the planned federal delisting of the wolf.

A new study examines the potential for wolf recovery in the northeastern US and determines whether it could be achieved naturally via dispersal from southeast Canada or through managed reintroduction. Biological factors considered include dispersal habitat, habitat conditions and distance to source populations. It is shown that recovery is a possibility, although there are serious limitations, including negative human attitudes towards predators.

An accompanying article in this issue of the Bulletin (Mech 2006) purports to critique our past research. L. D. Mech attempts to show that our model of prospective, preferred gray wolf (Canis lupus) habitat (Mladenoff et al. 1995, 1997, 1999, Mladenoff and Sickley 1998) has been incorrect. We first state clearly that we are not opposed to the re-assessment of our work based on new data. However we believe the Mech paper contains both serious conceptual and methodological flaws that render its conclusions invalid. Our own analysis, based on logic and current techniques (Mladenoff et al. 2005), shows that the model has behaved according to our predictions and continues to successfully predict wolf recolonization in Wisconsin, USA, over more than 25 years. However, the serious flaws of Mech (2006) alone show that he is incorrect in his putative critique of our work. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]