IUGB 2017

WHERE ARE THE WOLVES

AND HOW MANY ARE OUT THERE?

Renata ŠPINKYTĖ-BAČKAITIENĖ

renata_shpy@yahoo.com

Aleksandras Stulginskis University, Lithuania

Globally researches have unanimously declared that calculating the

abundance of wolves is a rather difficult. A huge attention is paid to detailed

investigations of the state on wolves’ population in many European countries.

For this purpose, rather large expert teams are employed that work all year

round on these issues only.

The entirety of methodologies both classic and based on advanced

techniques is used for investigation of wolves. Scientists often advise that a

combination of several methods should form the basis of population and

variation estimations (Duchamp et al., 2012). Surprisingly, in all countries it is

accentuated that investigations should be performed when there is snow cover

(Rigg et al., 2014, Wabakken et al., 2001). In fact, it is recommended to use

high technologies as possible, i.e. DNA research that improves results of

currently used investigation systems (Marucco, Boitani, 2012; Blanco, Cortes,

2012, Reinhardt et al., 2015). Nevertheless, although genetic investigation is a

highly valued method, it certainly has vulnerabilities. Before undertaking this

method, it is necessary to carefully consider organization of outdoor work

(collection of samples) and lab research (protocols). Without paying respect to

these aspects, the population may be established erroneously. Furthermore,

investigations using snow tracking are considered to be essential method that

helps to collect material for a genetic research (wolves’ scats are most often

used) as well as to interpret results obtained during the genetic research

correctly (Lucchini et al., 2002, Marucco et a., 2009, Blanco, Cortes, 2012).

Reviewing experience of other countries, it is obvious that tracking on snow

cover is the basic method used to estimate wolf abundance. Surprisingly, a

usual way of tracking on the snow is used in many countries including

European and Northern America. For instance, it is generally accepted that, the

methodologies and technologies for wolves’ investigation and monitoring used

in Scandinavia, are most advanced ones if compared among the European

states. However, in this region, tracking on the snow is used alongside with

genotype determination using scats. Using a combination of these methods, the

numbers of packs, pairs, and single wolves can be established.

Investigating wolf abundance and tracking in Southern Europe where there is

no snow cover is much more time consuming and complicated compared to

obtaining the same information in countries with snow. For instance, packs of

wolves in Spain and Portugal are being calculated in summer by searching wolf

dens with pups and rendezvous sites (Blanco et al., 1992; Llaneza et al., 2005;

Pimenta et al., 2005, Blanco, Cortés, 2012). Registration of howling wolves’

through stimulation is also often used to locate and calculate how many

individuals there are in a pack. Unfortunately, this method has not proved

successful in all locations. Many researchers have come to the conclusion that

success of this method (response of wolves) is generally low (Fuller et al., 1988,

Nowak et al., 2007). On the other hand, the howl simulation method is

recommended and used in some cases. Recent research has shown that

analyzing recordings of wolves’ howls, individuals may be identified by unique

voice, i.e., the number of wolves in packs (Root-Gutteridge et al., 2013).

Currently the evaluation of wolf abundance and distribution using genetic

research is becoming used more frequently and on a wider scale. For this

purpose, scats are being collected, analyzed using DNA research, and as a result

wolves are being identified to single individuals. This research might have the

most ideal outcome; however, much investment is required to collect and

conduct genetic research using scats.

Another method which is getting more popular is the registration of wolves

by camera traps. This method has been proven successful during wolf

investigations (Galaverini et al., 2012). Namely, with the help of this method,

most cases of wolf cub were registered in Germany, and Western Poland.

Furthermore, camera traps assist in collecting data to understand pack dynamics

and size, separating neighbouring packs, or finding out about distribution and

state of the species.

Tracking of marked wolves with the help of radio antennas or satellite is

used as a secondary method, but provides significant information on the size of

pack’s territory, traveling distances, activity, etc (Breitenmoser et al., 2006,

Jędrzejewski et al., 2001). For example, often it would be difficult to distinguish

between neighbouring packs or pairs without having information about the

average area used by the pack. Radio telemetric research (especially combined

with other kinds of research) gives the most precise data; however, it is suitable

in smaller-sized territories and only for several individuals (Breitenmoser et al.,

2006). A significant disadvantage of the method is that the data are collected

from several individuals, and the territory used by single individuals may differ

(Reinhardt, Kluth, 2011); therefore, many cases must be investigated to make

the right general view.

Most countries use more or less different methods for wolves’ research and

monitoring. But it is obvious that boundaries of countries made by people do

not exist for wolves. Thus, scientists of Europe pursue for creating methods

with the help of which it would be possible to investigate wolves “without

boundaries” (Linnell et al., 2008, Reinhardt et al., 2015). That means, the

results of the researches in different countries might be analyzed in a common

sense. Currently, wolves that live in Germany and Poland, Sweden and Norway,

as well as the region of the Alps are being investigated jointly (Fabbri et al.,

2007, Liberga et al., 2012, Reinhardt et al., 2012). The accumulated experience

shows that joint activity must expand itself in the name of the right attitude to

this respectable animal.

33rd IUGB CONGRESS 14th Perdix Congress 22 to 25 Aug. 2017 MONTPELLIER - FRANCE

References:

• Blanco J.C., Cortes Y. (2012). Surveying wolves without snow: a critical review of the methods used in Spain. Italian Journal of Mammalogy, vol. 23 (1) 35-48.

• Blanco J.C., Reig S., Cuesta L. (1992). Distribution, status and conservation problems of the wolf Canis lupus in Spain. Biological Conservation, vol.: 60: 73–80.

• Breitenmoser, U., Breitenmoser‐Würsten, Ch., von Arx, M., Zimmermann, F., Ryser, A., Angst, Ch., Molinari‐Jobin, A., Molinari, P., Linnell, J., Siegenthaler, A., Weber, J.M. (2006). Guidelines for the Monitoring of Lynx. KORA Bericht Nr. 33 e.

• Duchamp Ch., Boyer J., Briaudet P.-E., Leonard Y., Moris P., Bataille A., Dahier Th., Delacour G., Millisher G., Miquel Ch., Poillot C., Marboutin E. (2012). A dual frame survey to assess time– and space–related changes of the colonizing wolf

population in France. Italian Journal of Mammalogy, vol. 23 (1), 14-28.

• Fabbri, E., Miquel, C., Lucchini, V., Santini, A., Caniglia, R., Duchamp, C., Weber, J.‐M., Lequette, B., Marucco, F., Boitani, L., Fumagali, L., Taberlet, P., Randi, E. (2007). From the Apennines to the Alps: colonization genetics of the naturally

expanding Italian wolf population. Molecular Ecology vol. 16: 1661‐1671.

• Fuller T.K., Sampson B.A. (1988). Evaluation of a simulated howling survey for wolves. Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 52: 60–63.

• Galaverini, M., Palumbo, D., Fabbri, E., Caniglia, R., Greco, C., Randi, E. (2012). Monitoring wolves (Canis lupus) by non‐invasive genetecs and camera trapping: a small‐scale pilot study. European Journal of Wildlife Research, vol. 58: 47‐58.

• Jedrzejewski W., Schmidt K., Theuerkauf J., Jedrzejewska B., Okarma H. (2001). Daily movements and territory use by radio-collared wolves (Canis lupus) in Bialowieza Primeval Forest in Poland. Canadian Journal of Zooogy, vol. 79: 1993–

2004.

• Liberga O., Aronsonb Å., Sanda H., Wabakkenc P., Maartmannc E., Svenssonb L., Åkessonb M. (2012). Monitoring of wolves in Scandinavia. Italian Journal of Mammalogy, vol. 23 (1): 29-34.

• Linnell, J., Salvatori, V. & Boitani, L. (2008). Guidlines for population level management plans for large carnivores in Europe. A Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe report prepared to the European Commission (contract

070501/2005/434162/MAR/B2), 84 pp.

• Llaneza L., Blanco J.C. (2005). Situación del lobo (Canis lupus L.) en Castilla y León en 2001. Evolución de sus poblaciones. Galemys (n.e.) 17: 15–18.

• Lucchini V., Fabbri E., Marucco F., Ricci S., Boitani L., Randi E. (2002). Noninvasive molecular tracking of colonizing wolves (Canis lupus) packs in the Western Italian Alps. Molecular Ecology, vol. 11: 857–868.

• Marucco F., Boitani L. (2012). Wolf population monitoring and livestock depredation preventive measures in Europe. Hystrix, the Italian Journal of Mammalogy, vol. 23 (1), 1-4 .

• Marucco F., Pletscher D.H., Boitani L., Schwartz M.K., Pilgrim K.L., Lebreton J.D. (2009). Wolf survival and population trend using non-invasive capture-recapture techniques in the Western Alps. Journal of Applied Ecology vol. 46: 1003–1010.

• Nowak, S., Jędrzejewski, W., Schmidt K., Theuerkauf, J., Mysłajek, R.W., Jędrzejewska, B. (2007). Howling activity of free‐ranging wolves (Canis lupus) in the Białowieża Primeval Forest and the Western Beskidy Mountains (Poland). Journal of

Ethology vol. 3: 231–237.

• Pimenta V., Barroso I., Álvares F., Correia J., Ferrao da Costa G., Moreira L., Nascimento J., Petrucci-Fonseca F., Roque S., Santos G. (2005). Situaçao populacional do lobo em Portugal: resultados do censo nacional 2002/2003. Relatório Técnico.

Instituto da Conservaçao da Natureza/ Grupo Lobo. Lisboa.

• Reinhardt, I., Kluth G. (2011). Pilotstudie zur Abwanderung und zur Ausbreitung von Wölfen in Deutschland. Final Report, F+E Vorhaben (FKZ 806 86 080)

• Reinhardt, I., Kluth, G., Nowak, S., Mysłajek, R.W. (2012). A review of wolf management in Poland and Germany with recommendations for future transboundary management. Final report for the German Federal Ministry of Environment,

Nature Conservation and Nuclear safety (BMU) (N I 3 – 45031 POL/0).

• Reinhardt I., Kluth G., Nowak S., Mysłajek R. W. (2015). Standards for the monitoring of the Central European wolf population in Germany and Poland. 46 p.

• Rigg R., Skrbinšek T., Linnell J. (2014). A pilot study of wolves in Slovakia using noninvasive genetic sampling, 38 p.

• Root‐Gutteridge H., Bencsik M., Chebli M., Gentle L. K., Terrell‐Nield C., Bourit A., Yarnell R. W. (2013). Identifying individual wild Eastern grey wolves (Canis lupus lycaon) using fundamental frequency and amplitude of howls. Bioacoustics:

http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/09524622.2013.817317

• Wabakken P., Sand H., Liberg O., Bjärvall A. (2001). The recovery, distribution and population dynamics of wolves on the Scandinavian Peninsula, 1978-1998. Canadian Journal of Zoology vol. 79: 710–725.