Progress Report:

Developing Wolf Population Monitoring Techniques - 2009

Developing Wolf Population Monitoring Techniques - 2006-2008

Link to play:

CBC Interview - Subject: Howlboxes

Mitchell, M.S., J.A. Gude, D.E. Ausband, C. Sime, and E. Bangs. In Press. Temporal validation of an estimator for successful breeding pairs of wolves in the U.S. northern Rocky Mountains. Wildlife Biology.

Gude, J.A., M.S. Mitchell, D.E. Ausband, C. Sime, and E. Bangs. In Press. Internal validation of predictive logistic regression models for decision making in wildlife management. Wildlife Biology.

Ausband, D.E., M.S. Mitchell, K., Doherty, P. Zager, C.M. Mack, and J. Holyan. In Press. Finding a moving needle in a haystack: surveying predicted rendezvous sites to monitor gray wolf populations. Journal of Wildlife Management.

Stengelin, J.L., L.P. Waits, D.E. Ausband, P. Zager, and C.M. Mack. In Press. An efficient noninvasive genetic sampling approach for high-resolution monitoring of a reintroduced wolf population. Journal of Wildlife Management.

Stenglein J.L., L.P. Waits, D.E. Ausband, P. Zager, and C. Mack. In Review. Evaluating noninvasive genetic sampling at grey wolf (Canis lupus) rendezvous sites for determining pack size, family relationships, and relatedness.

Stenglein, J.L., De Barba, M., Ausband, D.E., Waits LP. In Press. Impacts of sampling location within a faeces on DNA quality in two carnivore species. Molecular Ecology Resources.

Ausband, D.E, and A. Moehrenschlager. 2009. Long-range juvenile dispersal and its implication for conservation of reintroduced swift fox Vulpes velox populations in the USA and Canada. Oryx. 43(1):73-77. [PDF]

Ausband, D.E., J. Holyan, and C. Mack. 2009. Longevity and adaptability of a reintroduced gray wolf. Northwestern Naturalist. 90:44-47. [PDF]

Mitchell, M. S., D. E. Ausband, C. A. Sime, E. E. Bangs, J. A. Gude, M. D. Jimenez, C. M. Mack, T. J. Meier, M. S. Nadeau, and D. W. Smith. 2008. Estimation of successful breeding pairs for wolves in the Northern Rocky Mountains, USA. Journal of Wildlife Management. 72:881-891. [PDF]

Ausband, D.E. and K.R. Foresman. 2007. Dispersal, survival, and reproduction of wild-born yearling swift foxes in a reintroduced population. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 85: 185-189.[PDF]

Ausband, D.E., and K.F. Foresman. 2007. Swift fox reintroductions on the Blackfeet Indian Reservation, Montana, USA. Biological Conservation. 136: 423-430. [PDF]

Waters, S.S., C. Smeeton, K.V. Weagle, and D.E. Ausband. 2007. Re-introducing the swift fox to Blackfeet Tribal Lands, Montana, USA. Reintroduction News. 26:34-35. [PDF]

Ausband, D.E., and E.A. Ausband. 2006. Observations of interactions between swift fox and badgers. The Prairie Naturalist. 38(1):63-64. [PDF]

Ausband, D.E., and G.R. Baty. 2005. Effects of precommercial thinning on snowshoe hare habitat use during winter in low-elevation montane forests. Canadian Journal of Forest Research. 35(1): 206-210. [PDF]

UPDATE: We have devised, and are in the process of testing, a proposed population monitoring program rooted in patch occupancy modeling, a statistical technique that can integrate data from multiple sampling methods. To populate a patch occupancy model, we are evaluating a variety of survey methods that have demonstrated strong relationships to wolf abundance and distribution. The survey methods we are developing and testing are hunter surveys, rendezvous site surveys, howlboxes, and rub stations.

We surveyed 2,500 hunters in 2009 and found a strong correlation between the number of wolves detected by hunters and the density of wolves in 5 study areas, suggesting hunters’ observations are reasonably accurate. To provide more detailed data than hunter surveys, we developed a habitat model that predicts the locations of wolf pack rendezvous sites. In 2009, we conducted surveys at 435 predicted rendezvous sites resulting in the detection of 12 of 15 litters of pups and all 19 study packs. DNA analysis of genetic samples collected during these surveys is underway. To provide detailed data on presence of wolves, we developed the howlbox, an automated wolf detection device that can detect wolves remotely. We deployed the howlbox at 7 wolf packs rendezvous sites in 2009 and detected adults and pups quickly and enumerated individuals via spectrograms. Failed deployments at several sites required us to fix electronic faults in the software and miss valuable field time in summer 2009. As a result of these minor setbacks we are currently field testing howlboxes through fall 2009/winter 2010. We also developed a method for collecting hair samples using rub stations baited with scents that elicit roll responses from wolves. We sampled 9 separate wolf packs in 2009 and obtained rolls from each pack. DNA analyses are underway to confirm that hair samples are from wolves and to explore estimation of number of adults present using this method.

Each of our survey methods are designed to provide the data needed to populate a patch occupancy model; further, some of the methods can yield highly detailed information on wolves in limited areas, providing biologists with unprecedented tools for understanding wolves in areas where management interest is high. Estimates of pack size provided by some of our survey methods can be used in the estimation of breeding pairs needed to meet federal monitoring requirements during the 5-year post-delisting phase of wolf recovery. We suggest a monitoring framework based on patch occupancy modeling, using observations available from a variety of sampling techniques, can provide reliable statewide estimates of wolf pack abundance, with potential for estimation of wolf population size. Our goal at the end of 2011 is to provide managers with an accurate, cost-effective, and biologically sound population monitoring tool that generates reliable estimates, with associated measures of precision.