DOCSLIB.ORG

Translocating Red Wolves Using a Modified Soft-Release Technique

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Translocating Red Wolves Using a Modified Soft-Release Technique McLellan and Rabon Translocating red wolves Canid News Copyright © 2006 by the IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group. ISSN 1478-2677 The following is the established format for referencing this article: McLellan, S.R. and Rabon, D.R. 2006. Translocating red wolves using a modified soft-release technique. Canid News 9.1 [online] URL: http://www.canids.org/canidnews/9/Translocating_red_wolves.pdf. Field Report Translocating red wolves using a modified soft-release technique Scott R. McLellan1 and David R. Rabon, Jr.2 1 Maine Department of Inland Fisheries and Wildlife, 650 State Street, Bangor, ME 04401, USA. E-mail: [email protected] 2 Correspondence author: United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Post Office Box 33726, Raleigh, NC 27636-3726, USA. E-mail: [email protected] Keywords: acclimation pen, Canis rufus, electrified corral, soft release, translocation Abstract Introduction Intensive management of the reintroduced red The red wolf once occurred throughout the wolf Canis rufus population in northeastern mid-Atlantic and southeastern United States North Carolina (USA) is required, in part, to (Nowak 2002). The species was extirpated limit introgression of coyote Canis latrans from most of its former range by the early part genes through red wolf-coyote mating. To of the 20th Century, primarily by predator con- reduce these matings, and to enhance the red trol activities and changes in land use (Nowak wolf population, the Red Wolf Recovery Pro- 1972). The red wolf was listed as endangered gram released wolf pairs or solitary wolves in the United States in 1967 (USFWS 1967) and into vacant areas or areas previously occupied was one of the first species to attract recovery by a coyote or wolf-coyote hybrid. Five male- attention. In the mid 1970s, the U.S. Fish and female wolf pairs and four solitary wolves Wildlife Service began capturing the few re- were held in a central captive facility (for 17-64 maining wild wolves to initiate a captive days), then subsequently in a portable, electri- breeding program. The ultimate goal of the fied corral (for 11-24 days), before being re- program was to restore the red wolf into por- leased. Following release, three of five pairs tions of its former range (USFWS 1990). That established a territory in the vicinity of the goal was realized in 1987 when four male- acclimation/release site and defended it from female adult pairs of captive-born red wolves other canids; however, only one of four soli- were successfully released on Alligator River tary wolves paired with a mate and defended National Wildlife Refuge (NWR), North Caro- the area from other canids. Three of five un- lina (Parker 1987a; Parker and Phillips 1991). successful release events ended with the wolves being killed while homing to their Although the red wolf remains listed as Criti- original capture site. cally Endangered (IUCN 2003), the restoration efforts show signs of success. In 2005, ap- proximately 100 red wolves in 20 packs inhab- 1 McLellan and Rabon Translocating red wolves ited more than 6,000km2 of public and private cosin, and pond pine Pinus serotina woodland lands in northeastern North Carolina. Inten- communities (Shafale and Weakley 1990). Ag- sive management of the red wolf population is ricultural cropland, primarily soybean, corn, required, however, to reduce wolves breeding cotton, and wheat (USDA 2004), and timber- with the coyote, which recently expanded its land forests of loblolly-shortleaf pine and oak- range into North Carolina (DeBow et al. 1998). gum-cypress (Brown 2004) predominate the Since the initial 1987 red wolf release, the free- area. Approximately 27% of the land is owned ranging population has been augmented by and managed by the federal and state gov- releasing captive-born wolves (Phillips 1994), ernments as four national wildlife refuges and wild-born wolves from island propagation 12 state game lands. sites (Parker 1987b) and, more recently, by fostering captive-born pups into wild-born Study animals litters (Waddell et al. 2002). The Red Wolf Re- covery Program also attempted to reduce Fourteen wild-born red wolves (6 males:8 fe- wolf-coyote matings and enhance and expand males) were used in the study. Seven (2:5) of the red wolf population by releasing wild- the animals were born and reared in the wild born wolves into areas vacant of wolves, into within the experimental population area (i.e. areas containing potential mates (i.e. solitary residents), and five wolves were born and wolves), or to replace coyote or wolf-coyote reared at island propagation sites: (2:2) Bulls hybrids (Kelly et al. 1999). Island in Cape Romain NWR, South Carolina and (1:0) St. Vincent NWR, Florida (Henry et The Red Wolf Recovery Program has made al. 1995). Two sibling wolves (1:1) were wild- use of hard- and soft-release methods to re- born in the Great Smoky Mountains National store wolves. Soft-release methods typically Park (GSMNP), Tennessee (Parker 1990), but include the construction of a semi-permanent were transferred to the captive facility at Alli- enclosure (e.g. chain-linked fence) to acclimate gator River NWR (hereafter referred to as the animal(s) to the surroundings prior to re- Sandy Ridge) when they were seven months lease, and generally increase the likelihood of of age. The mean age at time of release was a successful release when compared to hard- 26.3 + 2.8 SE months (range 17 to 35) for males release methods (Fritts 1993, but see Phillips et and 29.1 + 6.1 SE months (range 20 to 71) for al. 2003). However, construction of a fixed females. The study wolves were not known to fence enclosure can be costly, time consuming, have prior reproductive experience, unless destructive of native vegetation, and impracti- otherwise noted. Wolves were fitted with a cable in some remote locations or rugged ter- radio (VHF) telemetry collar (Model 315, 400, rain. or 500, Telonics, Inc., Mesa, AZ 85204-6699), and a transponder chip (Model EID-ID100, Herein we present details of nine, modified Eidap, Inc., Sherwood Park, Alberta, Canada soft-release events of translocated red wolves T8H 2M8) was inserted subcutaneously be- using a portable, electrified acclimation corral. tween the shoulders prior to being moved from Sandy Ridge. Methods Acclimation corral Study area A portable, electrified corral was used as an acclimation pen (Figure 2). The corral fencing The work was conducted in a five-county area was constructed of lightweight plastic and (Beaufort, Dare, Hyde, Tyrrell, and Washing- nylon mesh, approximately 2.3m high; the ton) in northeastern North Carolina desig- area (and shape) of the corral varied depend- nated as the red wolf experimental population ing on the location, but was generally 200m2. area (Figure 1) (USFWS 1995). This area is The lower 1.2m of fencing was nylon mesh largely rural, with few improved roads, and approximately 5cm by 10cm, with an inter- bounded by the Albemarle Sound to the north, woven 16-gauge wire for connection to an Roanoke and Pamlico Sounds to the east, and electrical current (Model ElectroStop, Premier the Pamlico River to the south. The natural 1 Supplies, Washington, IA 52353). communities of the area are characterized as non-riverine swamp forest, high and low po- 2 McLellan and Rabon Translocating red wolves Figure 1. Map of the red wolf experimental population area in North Carolina showing lands owned by federal and state governments. An additional electrified 16-gauge wire at ground level prevented animals from digging out of the corral. A solar-charged, battery- operated 12-volt fence charger (Model Parmak Solar Magnum Charger, Country Supply, Lou- isiana, MO 63353) provided electricity to the interwoven and digging wires. The upper portion of fencing was approximately 10cm by 15.25cm non-electrified, plastic mesh (Model Barrier Fencing, Forestry Supplies Inc., Jack- son, MS 39284). The plastic and nylon fencing were fastened together and to polyvinylchlo- ride (PVC) posts using cable ties, then secured to the ground with nylon ropes and stakes. Figure 2. A solitary, male red wolf (M1166) in the portable, electrified acclimation corral. Cost for the corral mesh was approximately US$250, and the solar-powered battery and fence charger approximately US$480. The PVC pipe and other miscellaneous supplies (e.g. rope, stakes, hammers) to construct the corral cost approximately US$300. The time 3 McLellan and Rabon Translocating red wolves required to construct the corral varied de- virginianus and/or commercially packaged pending on the number of people assisting, horse meat (Bravo Packing, Inc., Carney's but generally took less than eight hours. Dis- Point, NJ 08069 and Dallas Crown, Inc., Kauf- mantling the acclimation corral typically took man, TX 75142), was provided once or twice a less than two hours. After the initial set-up, week depending on weather and prior feeding the plastic and nylon fencing can be rolled and amount, and to minimize human disturbance. stored together to minimize the time required Uneaten food from the previous feeding was to construct the corral for future releases. removed from the site to limit attracting scav- engers. Two metal water tubs were placed Release sites inside the corral; water was available ad libi- tum. An inspection of the corral and, if possi- Release sites were selected based on known ble, a visual observation of each wolf was historical use by wild canids (i.e. red wolves, made during the feeding visit. Any repairs to coyotes, or wolf-coyote hybrids), habitat, and the corral fencing or digging wire were com- land ownership. Eight of the nine release pleted as quickly as possible; time spent at the events occurred on federally owned property corral was less than 20 minutes per visit.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Report Highlights
    Consensus Study Report October 2020 HIGHLIGHTS A Research Strategy to Examine the Taxonomy of the RED WOLF Dramatic reductions in the population of modern WHY DO MORE RESEARCH ON red wolf, Canis rufus in the eastern United States led to THE RED WOLF? their re-introduction by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service There are three possible explanations for the significant (USFWS) into North Carolina in the early 1980s. Since amount of coyote ancestry in modern red wolves. First, then, USFWS has managed a population of red wolves that the extant red wolves may be hybrids between coyotes was established from re-introduced individuals. However, and either gray wolves or what were once red wolves. subsequent genetic studies of the managed population Hybridization may have occurred long ago or in more indicated that these wolves displayed evidence of significant recent years. Evidence suggests that some hybridization coyote ancestry. This discovery raised the issue of whether certainly occurred in the 20th century as red wolf the extant managed1 population in North Carolina was a populations dwindled in size while coyotes expanded valid species that was eligible for conservation and recovery. their range eastward. Second, the extant red wolves may In March 2019, at the request of USFWS, the National have diverged from coyotes recently enough that they Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine issued continue to share alleles, even though each species has its a report that provided evidence that retained the existing own forward evolutionary trajectory— a situation referred taxonomic designation of the red wolf and reinforced the to as incomplete lineage sorting.
    [Show full text]
  • Red Wolves: Creating Economic Opportunity Through Ecotourism in Rural North Carolina
    Red Wolves: Creating Economic Opportunity Through Ecotourism in Rural North Carolina Report By Dr. Gail Y. B. Lash & Pamela Black Ursa International For Defenders of Wildlife Washington, DC February 2005 Red Wolves: Creating Economic Opportunity Through Ecotourism in Rural North Carolina Report By Dr. Gail Y. B. Lash & Pamela Black Ursa International Published By Defenders of Wildlife Washington, DC February 2005 Defenders of Wildlife 1130 Seventeenth Street NW Washington, DC 20036-4604 USA phone: 1-202-682-9400 web: http://www.defenders.org Ursa International 366 Oakland Ave., SE Atlanta, GA 30312-2233 USA phone: 1-404-222-9595 web: http://www.ursainternational.org Red Wolf Ecotourism Report, p. 1 TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Foreword .............................................................................................................................4 Executive Summary.............................................................................................................5 List of Tables .......................................................................................................................7 List of Figures......................................................................................................................8 List of Abbreviations ...........................................................................................................9 Introduction........................................................................................................................10 Purpose of Study....................................................................................................10
    [Show full text]
  • Red Wolf Brochure
    U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service Endangered Red Wolves The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service is reintroducing red wolves to prevent extinction of the species and to restore the ecosystems in which red wolves once occurred, as mandated by the Endangered Species Act of 1973. According to the Act, endangered and threatened species are of aesthetic, ecological, educational, historical, recreational, and scientific value to the nation and its people. On the Edge of Extinction The red wolf historically roamed as a top predator throughout the southeastern U.S. but today is one of the most endangered animals in the world. Aggressive predator control programs and clearing of forested habitat combined to cause impacts that brought the red wolf to the brink of extinction. By 1970, the entire population of red wolves was believed to be fewer than 100 animals confined to a small area of coastal Texas and Louisiana. In 1980, the red wolf was officially declared extinct in the wild, while only a small number of red wolves remained in captivity. During the 1970’s, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service established criteria which helped distinguish the red wolf species from other canids. From 1974 to 1980, the Service applied these criteria to find that only 17 red wolves were still living. Based on additional Greg Koch breeding studies, only 14 of these wolves were selected as founders to begin the red wolf captive breeding population. The captive breeding program is coordinated for the Service by the Point Defiance Zoo & Aquarium in Tacoma, Washington, with goals of conserving red wolf genetic diversity and providing red wolves for restoration to the wild.
    [Show full text]
  • Controlled Animals
    Environment and Sustainable Resource Development Fish and Wildlife Policy Division Controlled Animals Wildlife Regulation, Schedule 5, Part 1-4: Controlled Animals Subject to the Wildlife Act, a person must not be in possession of a wildlife or controlled animal unless authorized by a permit to do so, the animal was lawfully acquired, was lawfully exported from a jurisdiction outside of Alberta and was lawfully imported into Alberta. NOTES: 1 Animals listed in this Schedule, as a general rule, are described in the left hand column by reference to common or descriptive names and in the right hand column by reference to scientific names. But, in the event of any conflict as to the kind of animals that are listed, a scientific name in the right hand column prevails over the corresponding common or descriptive name in the left hand column. 2 Also included in this Schedule is any animal that is the hybrid offspring resulting from the crossing, whether before or after the commencement of this Schedule, of 2 animals at least one of which is or was an animal of a kind that is a controlled animal by virtue of this Schedule. 3 This Schedule excludes all wildlife animals, and therefore if a wildlife animal would, but for this Note, be included in this Schedule, it is hereby excluded from being a controlled animal. Part 1 Mammals (Class Mammalia) 1. AMERICAN OPOSSUMS (Family Didelphidae) Virginia Opossum Didelphis virginiana 2. SHREWS (Family Soricidae) Long-tailed Shrews Genus Sorex Arboreal Brown-toothed Shrew Episoriculus macrurus North American Least Shrew Cryptotis parva Old World Water Shrews Genus Neomys Ussuri White-toothed Shrew Crocidura lasiura Greater White-toothed Shrew Crocidura russula Siberian Shrew Crocidura sibirica Piebald Shrew Diplomesodon pulchellum 3.
    [Show full text]
  • NC Zoo Society
    Magazine of the NC Zoo Society www.nczoo.com Drawing Inspiration from Nature, Architecture and Science This ISSUE Fall 2021 Issue No.106 SOCIETY BOARD 3 Better By the Dozen JOHN L. RUFFIN Jayne Owen Parker, Ph.D., Director Communications & Education Chair 5 Dear Friend of the Zoo Winston-Salem Cheryl Armstrong, Zoo Society Executive Director NICOLE CRAWFORD 6 A Big Addition to the Zoo Vice Chair Durham 7 Thank Yous THERENCE O. PICKETT 8 Baboons on the Rocks Secretary Greensboro 10 Twenty Years Serving Wildlife - BILL CURRENS Halley Buckanoff, BS, CVT, CWR - Wildlife Center Supervisor Treasurer 12 Protecting Our Families Charlotte Jayne Owen Parker, Ph.D. WILLIAM “BILLY” CLARKE Asheville 13 What’s Up Next Year? SCOTT JONES 15 Go Behind the Scenes Clemmons BC Zoo Society 2021 Christmas Ornament WALKER MOFFIT Asheboro DAVID K. ROBB Charlotte BARRY C. SAFRIT Greensboro MARGERY J. SPRINGER Raleigh S. M. “MONTY” WHITE, JR. Raleigh On the Cover.... CHERYL C. ARMSTRONG Asheboro Executive Director Assistant Secretary Wood Stork Matthew Cuda EDITORIAL BOARD Alamy Stock Photo VALERIE ABBOTT VALERIE Jayne Owen Parker, Ph.D., Managing Editor De Potter, Design & Layout Angie Kahn, Proofreader Cheryl Armstrong John D. Groves Please go to nczoo.com to purchase any items listed in the Alive magazine Corinne Kendall, Ph.D. or to make a donation to the Zoo Society. If you have questions, or need help, Mark MacAllister please give us a call at 336-879-7273. Tonya Saunders Jb Minter, DVM The North Carolina Zoo is open every day, weather permitting, Pat Simmons except on Christmas Day and Thanksgiving Day.
    [Show full text]
  • Glimpse of an African… Wolf? Cécile Bloch
    $6.95 Glimpse of an African… Wolf ? PAGE 4 Saving the Red Wolf Through Partnerships PAGE 9 Are Gray Wolves Still Endangered? PAGE 14 Make Your Home Howl Members Save 10% Order today at shop.wolf.org or call 1-800-ELY-WOLF Your purchases help support the mission of the International Wolf Center. VOLUME 25, NO. 1 THE QUARTERLY PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER SPRING 2015 4 Cécile Bloch 9 Jeremy Hooper 14 Don Gossett In the Long Shadow of The Red Wolf Species Survival Are Gray Wolves Still the Pyramids and Beyond: Plan: Saving the Red Wolf Endangered? Glimpse of an African…Wolf? Through Partnerships In December a federal judge ruled Geneticists have found that some In 1967 the number of red wolves that protections be reinstated for of Africa’s golden jackals are was rapidly declining, forcing those gray wolves in the Great Lakes members of the gray wolf lineage. remaining to breed with the more wolf population area, reversing Biologists are now asking: how abundant coyote or not to breed at all. the USFWS’s 2011 delisting many golden jackals across Africa The rate of hybridization between the decision that allowed states to are a subspecies known as the two species left little time to prevent manage wolves and implement African wolf? Are Africa’s golden red wolf genes from being completely harvest programs for recreational jackals, in fact, wolves? absorbed into the expanding coyote purposes. If biological security is population. The Red Wolf Recovery by Cheryl Lyn Dybas apparently not enough rationale for Program, working with many other conservation of the species, then the organizations, has created awareness challenge arises to properly express and laid a foundation for the future to the ecological value of the species.
    [Show full text]
  • Red Wolf Biology and Status
    Red Wolf Biology and Status The red wolf (Canis rufus) is distinguished from the gray wolf (Canis lupus) and the coyote (Canis latrans) by size and coloring. Intermediate in size between coyotes and gray wolves, red wolves average 50-80 pounds. They are mostly brown and buff colored, often with the signature red shading around their ears, muzzle and the backs of their legs. Red wolves are known to hunt individually and in packs, eating white-tailed deer (50% of their diet), raccoons and small mammals such as marsh rabbits and rodents. They have also been known to prey on domestic pets and livestock, but in very small numbers. Similar to gray wolves, red wolves live in the social structure of a pack comprised of a breeding pair and older offspring that assist with pup rearing. Red wolves are territorial just as gray wolves are, and evidence demonstrates that they interbreed with coyotes only when they cannot find a red wolf mate. The origin of the red wolf remains an enigma, and scientists do not universally agree on whether the red wolf is indeed a separate species, a subspecies of the gray wolf, or hybrid between gray wolves and coyotes. However, based on years of research and data supporting the uniqueness of this predator, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service has legally designated the red wolf, Canis rufus, a distinct species. Petitions to delist the red wolf on grounds that it is a hybrid have been defeated, and Canis rufus remains a protected species under federal law in the United States.
    [Show full text]
  • List of 28 Orders, 129 Families, 598 Genera and 1121 Species in Mammal Images Library 31 December 2013
    What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library LIST OF 28 ORDERS, 129 FAMILIES, 598 GENERA AND 1121 SPECIES IN MAMMAL IMAGES LIBRARY 31 DECEMBER 2013 AFROSORICIDA (5 genera, 5 species) – golden moles and tenrecs CHRYSOCHLORIDAE - golden moles Chrysospalax villosus - Rough-haired Golden Mole TENRECIDAE - tenrecs 1. Echinops telfairi - Lesser Hedgehog Tenrec 2. Hemicentetes semispinosus – Lowland Streaked Tenrec 3. Microgale dobsoni - Dobson’s Shrew Tenrec 4. Tenrec ecaudatus – Tailless Tenrec ARTIODACTYLA (83 genera, 142 species) – paraxonic (mostly even-toed) ungulates ANTILOCAPRIDAE - pronghorns Antilocapra americana - Pronghorn BOVIDAE (46 genera) - cattle, sheep, goats, and antelopes 1. Addax nasomaculatus - Addax 2. Aepyceros melampus - Impala 3. Alcelaphus buselaphus - Hartebeest 4. Alcelaphus caama – Red Hartebeest 5. Ammotragus lervia - Barbary Sheep 6. Antidorcas marsupialis - Springbok 7. Antilope cervicapra – Blackbuck 8. Beatragus hunter – Hunter’s Hartebeest 9. Bison bison - American Bison 10. Bison bonasus - European Bison 11. Bos frontalis - Gaur 12. Bos javanicus - Banteng 13. Bos taurus -Auroch 14. Boselaphus tragocamelus - Nilgai 15. Bubalus bubalis - Water Buffalo 16. Bubalus depressicornis - Anoa 17. Bubalus quarlesi - Mountain Anoa 18. Budorcas taxicolor - Takin 19. Capra caucasica - Tur 20. Capra falconeri - Markhor 21. Capra hircus - Goat 22. Capra nubiana – Nubian Ibex 23. Capra pyrenaica – Spanish Ibex 24. Capricornis crispus – Japanese Serow 25. Cephalophus jentinki - Jentink's Duiker 26. Cephalophus natalensis – Red Duiker 1 What the American Society of Mammalogists has in the images library 27. Cephalophus niger – Black Duiker 28. Cephalophus rufilatus – Red-flanked Duiker 29. Cephalophus silvicultor - Yellow-backed Duiker 30. Cephalophus zebra - Zebra Duiker 31. Connochaetes gnou - Black Wildebeest 32. Connochaetes taurinus - Blue Wildebeest 33. Damaliscus korrigum – Topi 34.
    [Show full text]
  • Red Wolf (Canis Rufus)
    Red Wolf (Canis rufus) Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) Virginia Beach, Virginia 13 - 16 April, 1999 WORKSHOP REPORT A Collaborative Workshop: United States Fish & Wildlife Service The Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN) A contribution of the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group in collaboration with the United States Fish & Wildlife Service. Cover photo: ©Waverley Traylor, 1999. All Rights Reserved. Kelly, B.T., P.S. Miller, and U.S. Seal (eds.). 1999. Population and Habitat Viability Assessment Workshop for the Red Wolf (Canis rufus). Apple Valley, MN: Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN). Additional copies of this publication can be ordered through the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group, 12101 Johnny Cake Ridge Road, Apple Valley, MN 55124 USA. Fax: 612-432-2757. Send checks for US$35 (for printing and shipping costs) payable to CBSG; checks must be drawn on a US bank. Red Wolf (Canis rufus) Population and Habitat Viability Assessment (PHVA) TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1: Workshop Executive Summary 3 Section 2: Canid Hybridization Working Group Report 11 Section 3: Population Viability Modeling Working Group Report 19 Section 4: Biological Control/Canid Management Working Group Report 31 Section 5: Field Monitoring Working Group Report 41 Section 6: Site Selection Working Group Report 49 Section 7: Captive Population Management Working Group Report 55 Section 8: Workshop Participants 67 Section 9: IUCN Policy Statements 71 IUCN/SSC Guidelines for Reintroduction. May,
    [Show full text]
  • LARGE CANID (Canidae) CARE MANUAL
    LARGE CANID (Canidae) CARE MANUAL CREATED BY THE AZA Canid Taxon Advisory Group IN ASSOCIATION WITH THE AZA Animal Welfare Committee Large Canid (Canidae) Care Manual Large Canid (Canidae) Care Manual Published by the Association of Zoos and Aquariums in association with the AZA Animal Welfare Committee Formal Citation: AZA Canid TAG 2012. Large Canid (Canidae) Care Manual. Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Silver Spring, MD. p.138. Authors and Significant contributors: Melissa Rodden, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, AZA Maned Wolf SSP Coordinator. Peter Siminski, The Living Desert, AZA Mexican Wolf SSP Coordinator. Will Waddell, Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium, AZA Red Wolf SSP Coordinator. Michael Quick, Sedgwick County Zoo, AZA African Wild Dog SSP Coordinator. Reviewers: Melissa Rodden, Smithsonian Conservation Biology Institute, AZA Maned Wolf SSP Coordinator. Peter Siminski, The Living Desert, AZA Mexican Wolf SSP Coordinator. Will Waddell, Point Defiance Zoo and Aquarium, AZA Red Wolf SSP Coordinator. Michael Quick, Sedgwick County Zoo, AZA African Wild Dog SSP Coordinator. Mike Maslanka, Smithsonian’s National Zoo, AZA Nutrition Advisory Group Barbara Henry, Cincinnati Zoo & Botanical Garden, AZA Nutrition Advisory Group Raymond Van Der Meer, DierenPark Amersfoort, EAZA Canid TAG Chair. Dr. Michael B. Briggs, DVM, MS, African Predator Conservation Research Organization, CEO/Principle Investigator. AZA Staff Editors: Katie Zdilla, B.A. AZA Conservation and Science Intern Elisa Caballero, B.A. AZA Conservation and Science Intern Candice Dorsey, Ph.D. AZA Director, Animal Conservation Large Canid Care Manual project consultant: Joseph C.E. Barber, Ph.D. Cover Photo Credits: Brad McPhee, red wolf Bert Buxbaum, African wild dog and Mexican gray wolf Lisa Ware, maned wolf Disclaimer: This manual presents a compilation of knowledge provided by recognized animal experts based on the current science, practice, and technology of animal management.
    [Show full text]
  • Spring2004.Pdf
    A PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER WINTERSPRING 20042003 Wolf Recovery in the Midwest: What’s Next? page 4 Our Neighbors in Gray Coats, page 8 The Last Irish Wolf, page 10 THE QUARTERLY PUBLICATION OF THE INTERNATIONAL WOLF CENTER VOLUME 14, NO. 1 SPRING 2004 Features Departments Should the Wolf Be Delisted? 2 As a Matter of Fact 4 The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service wants to ”delist” the wolf, or remove it from the endangered species list, except in the Southwest. 3 From the Executive Delisting would end federal protection for wolves in the delisted areas Director and return wolf management to individual states. Two articles by International Wolf veterans of the debate on how best to enhance recovery of wolf popu- 14 Center Notes From lations present important opposing viewpoints on this important issue. Home Why I Support Federal Wolf Delisting, L.David Mech ?????????????????????????? Wolves Are Still in Need of Federal Protection, 16 Tracking the Pack Rick Duncan and Anne Mahle The Return of the Wolf to Idaho: 18 Wolves of the World A Cultural Triumph 8 21 News and Notes A wildlife biologist and member of the Nez Perce Tribe describes her first encounter with wolves and what they mean to the tribe. 22 Personal Encounter Marcie Carter 25 Book Review From Fourteen: A Beginning 26 Wild Kids 10 By 1980, the red wolf was declared extinct in the wild. Today the red wolf is reproducing and surviving, made possible by the efforts of dedicated professionals and the last 28 A Look Beyond 14 red wolves known to exist.
    [Show full text]
  • Far Traveler: a Teacher's Companion to Red Wolf Recovery
    U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service Far Traveler A Teacher’s Companion to Red Wolf Recovery Elise McCauley Hammond A long time ago, the howl became a word, a name. Wa'ya to the Cherokee, to whom the mountains also listened in the old time. Son of the wind; companion to Kana'ti; father of Ani'-Wa'ya, the Wolf people, principal clan. Familiar spirit to hunters. Perfect walker. Far traveler. Revenge taker and altruist. Unseen shape between the trees. Shy shadow from the long past. Christopher Camuto Another Country: Journeying Toward the Cherokee Mountains Table of Contents Part One Acknowledgements..................................................................................................... 1 A Letter to Teachers and Students ......................................................................... 2 What is a Red Wolf? ................................................................................................... 3 Where Have all the Red Wolves Gone? ................................................................... 4 The Red Wolf's Future: A Cautious Optimism ....................................................... 5 Why Should Red Wolves be Protected? .................................................................. 5 Red Wolves Need Your Help ..................................................................................... 6 As a Matter of Fact..................................................................................................... 7 Some Basics of Wolf Biology ...................................................................................
    [Show full text]