An Experimental Translocation of the Eastern Timber Wolf Part 5

-------------------------------------------------------- Northern Hardwoods 43 48.3 40.9

Northern Hardwoods- Coniferous[13] (57) ...[13] ...[13]

Spruce-fir 19 21.3 17.0

Aspen-hardwoods 11 12.4 20.5

Elm-ash-maple 1 1.1 4.5

Pine 2 2.2 5.5

Oak 0 0.0 1.4

Non-commercial forests 0 0.0 2.6

-------------------------------------------------------- Other (near towns, farms, dumps) 13 14.6(8.9)[13] 7.6 __ ______ _____

Totals 89(146) 100.00 100.0 --------------------------------------------------------

[12] Spencer and Pfeifer 1966.

[13] This forest type was not distinguished separately by Spencer and Pfeifer (1966), so they did not provide availability figures for it.

Thus in this comparison, we did not include the 57 wolf locations that fell in the type. However in calculating percentage figures for non-forest areas (towns, farms, dumps), these 57 fixes could validly be used as representing forest locations.

Failure of Female No. 11 to Whelp

There was no sign that adult female No. 11 whelped or attempted to locate or construct a den. The usual gestation period for wolves is about 63 days (Brown 1936). Because No. 11 was seen coupled in copulation on February 12 and 16, she should have whelped between April 13 and April 21, if she had conceived. Probably she would have moved little during the preceding 2 or 3 weeks (Mech 1970). However no such changes in this animal's movements were noticed. The three wolves stayed near Kenton between April 15 and April 18 but also killed a deer during that time. They moved extensively from April 19 to May 7. The only indirect evidence that the female may have been pregnant was an observation made by a local citizen on April 5 (Table 6) who saw the three wolves and stated that the small wolf looked "fat." This would probably have been No. 11, but a full stomach could easily have been mistaken for pregnancy.

Unfortunately, neither the reproductive tract collected from No. 11 in September nor the blood sample taken in early March shed any light on the cause for the wolf's failure to produce pups. The ovaries did contain _corpora albicantia_, indicating that at some time the wolf had ovulated, but it could not be stated with certainty just when (R. D.

Barnes, personal communication). The blood progesterone levels were more helpful. No. 11 had 3,560 picograms of progesterone per milliliter, compared to 56 picograms per milliliter for Wolf No. 10, whose reproductive tract appeared immature. This high progesterone level of No. 11 indicated that the animal had recently ovulated, but it was impossible to tell whether she was carrying any fetuses at the time the sample was taken (U. S. Seal, personal communication).

Demise of the Translocated Wolves

All four translocated wolves were killed by humans (Table 8). The alpha male (No. 12) was the first victim. He was found from the air in the same location on July 6 and 10. A ground check on July 11 showed him already decomposed. He lay about 60 feet (18.3 m) from paved highway US 141 north of Amasa (Fig. 22). The articular processes on the right side of his fifth and sixth cervical vertebrae were broken and inverted. Part of the process of the sixth cervical vertebra was lodged in the neural ca.n.a.l between the fifth and sixth cervical vertebrae and would have exerted pressure on his spinal cord. His acrylic radio collar was also cracked on the right side in three places. We concluded that he had been struck and killed by an automobile. A scat found beneath the remains contained deer hair, so apparently the animal had been feeding not long before his death.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Fig. 22.--The remains of Wolf No. 12 were found near a highway, and broken bones indicated he had been hit by a vehicle (Photo by Richard P. Smith)_]

Wolf No. 13 was killed next. He had been located south of Sagola in d.i.c.kinson County on July 20, the first time he was found since June 27.

He was still there on July 27, so a ground check was made. It revealed that the wolf had been dead for perhaps 2 or 3 weeks. His flesh had decomposed, and only hair, bones and the transmitting collar remained (Fig. 23). His leg bones and ribs were mostly disarticulated, his skull was separated from the vertebral column, and his mandible had separated.

A small caliber bullet had pa.s.sed through the ramus of the left mandible and had entered the base of the cranium. The hole through the mandible was 0.26 inch 0.34 inch (6.6 mm. 8.6 mm.) and that through the cranium was 0.34 inch 1.30 inch (8.6 mm. 33.0 mm.). Three small lead fragments were removed from the cranium.

[Ill.u.s.tration: _Fig. 23.--Wolf No. 13 had been shot, as the hole in the jawbone indicates (Photo by Tom Weise)_]

The remains of Wolf No. 13 were sent to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources Wildlife Research Center at Rose Lake and examined by staff pathologists Dr. L. D. Fay and Mr. John Stuht. No fractures or other signs were found that might indicate that he had been trapped.

However, some of the smaller foot bones were missing and a complete examination was not possible. Notches were found in both shoulder blades, and one rib was broken, suggesting that the animal had been shot twice by a small caliber firearm in addition to the head shot. The hole in the left scapula indicated a deep penetrating wound. The notch in the right scapula indicated a bullet traveling more parallel to the body.

_Table 8. Details of Deaths of Translocated Wolves_

---------------------------------------------------------------------- Wolf No. 10 11 12 13 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- s.e.x Female Female Male Male

Last date tracked Nov. 17 Sept. 19 July 10 July 27

Date Nov. 16[14] Sept. 20 June 28 to Early killed July 4 July[14]

Date Nov. 18 Sept. 20 July 11 July 28 found

Manner Gunshot in Gunshot in, Struck by Gunshot in of death head and head, after automobile head and right foreleg being trapped chest

Location Van Riper Lake Floodwood 1.9 miles (3.0 2 miles (3.2 of death 5.4 miles (8.7 Plain 3.1 km) north of km) south of km) north of miles (5.0 Amasa (T45N- Sagola (T42N Champion (T49N km) south of R33W-Sec 17) -R30W-Sec 5) -R30W-Sec 36) Witch Lake (T44N-R24W- Sec 11)

Weight 52 lb. 56.5 lb.

(23.6 kg) (25.6 kg) Unknown[15] Unknown[15]

Condition Excellent Good Unknown[15] Unknown[15]

[14] Estimate

[15] Decomposed

Wolf No. 11 was caught the night of September 19, 1974 in a coyote trap set by a trapper from Channing. The next morning the trapper came upon the trapped wolf by surprise at a range of 12 feet (3.6 m). She growled and lunged toward him, and thinking he was in danger, the trapper shot the wolf in the head. The .22 caliber bullet entered below the right eye and lodged in the skull. The trapper immediately took the animal to the Michigan Department of Natural Resources office in Crystal Falls and reported the incident.

The wolf weighed 56.5 lb. (25.6 kg), 1.5 lb. (0.68 kg) less than when she was brought to Michigan. Her general condition was good, with some omental fat, but no subcutaneous fat. She did harbor ten tapeworms (_Taenia pisiformis_) about 40-50 cm long and a few hookworms (_Uncinaria stenocephala_), as determined by Mr. John Wenstrom (personal communication), Biology Department, Northern Michigan University. Both are common tapeworms of wolves (Mech 1970).

Wolf No. 10 was shot by a deer hunter, probably on the morning of November 16, the second day of firearms deer season. On November 17 her signal was heard from near a cabin on the south sh.o.r.e of Van Riper Lake.

The hunters occupying the cabin later said they had removed the collar from the wolf, which they had found dead on the afternoon of November 16. Before we had learned this, the carca.s.s of Wolf No. 10 was discovered without the collar by another hunter, about a half mile (0.8 km) south of Van Riper Lake. It had been shot through the right leg, shattering the radius and ulna, and through the head, the bullet entering the left frontal bone and exiting below the right eye. In addition the radio collar had been shattered by a bullet and was missing, and one ear had been cut off. We identified the wolf from the tag in the other ear.

The wolf had gained 6 lb. (2.7 kg) since she had been brought to Michigan, and had heavy internal and subcutaneous fat. She had light infections of two species of tapeworms (_Echinococcus granulosus_ and _Taenia pisiformis_), and of one species of hookworm (Uncinaria stenocephala), as determined by John Wenstrom. _Echinococcus granulosus_ is not uncommon in wolves (Mech 1970). The other two species were discussed above.

DISCUSSION

Wolves No. 11, 12, and 13 undoubtedly were members of the same pack.

This conclusion is based on the fact that they did not fight when placed together in captivity, that they freely intermixed while penned, that No. 11 and No. 12 copulated, and that all three wolves generally traveled as a unit after their release. No. 11 and No. 12 were always located together from a few days after their release until the death of No. 12. Temporary splitting, as with No. 13 is a normal occurrence in wild wolf packs (Mech 1966).

The ident.i.ty of Wolf No. 10 remains unknown. She was captured 7.5 miles (12.1 km) away from the other three, and in captivity she behaved differently from them, remaining more to herself but intermingling with the others occasionally, with no signs of aggression. The face licking of No. 10 by No. 11 could be interpreted as a sign of patronizing intimacy as an adult might treat a subordinate offspring. The teeth of Wolf No. 10 had very little wear, indicating that she probably was less than 3-years old, whereas the teeth of No. 11 were blunt from wear. The tendency for No. 10 to withdraw from the others and from human beings indicated that she probably was a low-ranking or subordinate animal, a peripheral member of the pack (Woolpy 1968), or even a lone wolf currently dispersing from the pack (Mech 1973).

The separation of No. 10 from the others upon release does not necessarily mean that she was not a member of the pack. No. 10's radio collar was replaced just before she was released. The handling without sedation could have frightened her enough that she ran some distance before the others were even released. The fact that No. 10 returned to within a half mile (0.8 km) of the release pen on March 20 and to within less than 100 feet (30.5 m) on April 18 may indicate she was seeking the other wolves. However, she may also just have used the release pen as a reference point in a generally unfamiliar area, or may have been attracted by the remains of carca.s.ses left there.

Effect of Captivity and Human Contact

The necessary capture, captivity, translocation and contact of the experimental wolves with humans had an unknown effect on the wolves.

They had been exposed to humans for over 2 months while in captivity. No attempts were made to tame them, and they never pa.s.sed the escape stage of socialization as described by Woolpy and Ginsburg (1967). The dominant wolves (No. 11 and No. 12) were more relaxed when approached than were No. 10 and No. 13, however.