Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size

Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visitin...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Published in:Wildlife Biology
Main Authors: Gable, Thomas D., Johnson‐Bice, Sean M., Homkes, Austin T., Bump, Joseph K.
Format: Article in Journal/Newspaper
Language:English
Published: Wiley 2024
Subjects:
Online Access:http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195
id crwiley:10.1002/wlb3.01195
record_format openpolar
spelling crwiley:10.1002/wlb3.01195 2024-06-02T08:05:02+00:00 Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size Gable, Thomas D. Johnson‐Bice, Sean M. Homkes, Austin T. Bump, Joseph K. 2024 http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195 en eng Wiley http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/ Wildlife Biology ISSN 1903-220X 1903-220X journal-article 2024 crwiley https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195 2024-05-03T10:46:42Z Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visiting wolf dens and marking wolf Canis lupus pups affects important wolf population metrics. Specifically, we examined whether pup recruitment and pack size differed between packs where we visited dens and handled pups (‘disturbed packs' = treatment group) and those where we did not visit dens (‘undisturbed packs' = reference group). During 2019–2023, we studied 43 wolf packs and litters, 19 of which were disturbed packs and 24 of which were undisturbed. We found no difference in recruitment or pack size between disturbed and undisturbed wolf packs. However, we did observe substantial annual variation in recruitment and pack size, which indicated that other ecological factors (e.g. prey abundance) were likely responsible for annual changes in recruitment and pack size. Our findings are consistent with several other studies, and together this research indicates that wolf dens can be visited once and wolf pups handled briefly for research purposes without having a measurable effect on recruitment and pack size. Article in Journal/Newspaper Canis lupus Wiley Online Library Wildlife Biology
institution Open Polar
collection Wiley Online Library
op_collection_id crwiley
language English
description Evaluating methods used to capture and mark neonates is necessary for ensuring research methods are ethical, follow best practices, and do not have long‐term unintended impacts on neonates or populations. We used a quasi‐experimental approach (reference versus treatment) to determine whether visiting wolf dens and marking wolf Canis lupus pups affects important wolf population metrics. Specifically, we examined whether pup recruitment and pack size differed between packs where we visited dens and handled pups (‘disturbed packs' = treatment group) and those where we did not visit dens (‘undisturbed packs' = reference group). During 2019–2023, we studied 43 wolf packs and litters, 19 of which were disturbed packs and 24 of which were undisturbed. We found no difference in recruitment or pack size between disturbed and undisturbed wolf packs. However, we did observe substantial annual variation in recruitment and pack size, which indicated that other ecological factors (e.g. prey abundance) were likely responsible for annual changes in recruitment and pack size. Our findings are consistent with several other studies, and together this research indicates that wolf dens can be visited once and wolf pups handled briefly for research purposes without having a measurable effect on recruitment and pack size.
format Article in Journal/Newspaper
author Gable, Thomas D.
Johnson‐Bice, Sean M.
Homkes, Austin T.
Bump, Joseph K.
spellingShingle Gable, Thomas D.
Johnson‐Bice, Sean M.
Homkes, Austin T.
Bump, Joseph K.
Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
author_facet Gable, Thomas D.
Johnson‐Bice, Sean M.
Homkes, Austin T.
Bump, Joseph K.
author_sort Gable, Thomas D.
title Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
title_short Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
title_full Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
title_fullStr Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
title_full_unstemmed Single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
title_sort single visits to active wolf dens do not impact wolf pup recruitment or pack size
publisher Wiley
publishDate 2024
url http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195
genre Canis lupus
genre_facet Canis lupus
op_source Wildlife Biology
ISSN 1903-220X 1903-220X
op_rights http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/
op_doi https://doi.org/10.1002/wlb3.01195
container_title Wildlife Biology
_version_ 1800749770110664704