Research Agenda
This is where I will present an annotated bibliography of the best sources I found from my research!
Scicomm Article Research Studies
01
Mech, L David. “Alpha status, dominance, and division of Labor in Wolf Packs.” Canadian Journal of Zoology, vol. 77, no. 8, 1 Nov. 1999, pp. 1196–1203, https://doi.org/10.1139/z99-099.
The title of this research article is "Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs"; the researcher is David Mech, an American biologist and wolf researcher, and the article was published through the Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center in 1999. This experiment was conducted by Mech traveling to Ellesmere Island, Canada each summer for thirteen years straight. His method was to familiarize himself with a wolf pack to pay close attention to them and attempt to notice any acts of dominance and submission from the wolves. The results of the experiment highlight the misconception about wolf packs and how they act as a family with the alpha pair being the parents of the group instead of strict rulers over the pack. The main idea of the research is that analyzing wolf packs in the wild offers an accurate description of how they function rather than analyzing captive packs. The research debunks how there is a strict social order amongst wolves and how they instead act as a big family, each with their respective responsibilities. This article relates with the other two by building off and correcting the research claims made by the researchers. This study came out 30 years later than the other articles and used evidence from the wild wolf packs to correct the misconceptions that the other researchers had in their articles.
02
RABB, GEORGE B., et al. “Social relationships in a group of captive Wolves.” American Zoologist, vol. 7, no. 2, May 1967, pp. 305–311, https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/7.2.305.
The title of this research article is "Social Relationships in a Group of Captive Wolves"; the researcher is George Rabb, an American zoologist, and the article was published through the University of Chicago in 1967. This experiment was conducted by analyzing wolves in Brookfield Zoo in Chicago. Researchers would observe the wolves through recordings, studies, and observations of breeding seasons. They would witness interactions between the wolves and how dominance changes over time in the pack. The result is significant because it furthers our understanding of social hierarchies in captive wolf packs and how they compare to wild packs mentioned in Mech's research. Rabb's research allowed researchers to learn about how leadership and dominance change over time in captive packs. The main idea of the research is to analyze how the social structures of wolves in captivity change over time. The purpose is to further the need for studies regarding wolf social structures and how they can help with conservation methods. This article relates to Mech's research as it is a contrast to what Mech's research suggests 30 years later. It also connects to Schenkel as they both mention dominance and submission among wolf packs; they were also published in the same year.
03
SCHENKEL, RUDOLF. “Submission: Its features and function in the Wolf and dog.” American Zoologist, vol. 7, no. 2, May 1967, pp. 319–329, https://doi.org/10.1093/icb/7.2.319.
The title of this research article is "Submission: Its Features and Function in the Wolf and Dog"; the researcher is Rudolf Schenkel, an animal behaviorist who focuses on wolves, and the article was published through Oxford University Press in 1967. Schenkel and his team conducted this experiment through close observations of wolves and how they act. Though there is no quantitative data, Schenkel uses qualitative information to explain submission methods from wolves and dogs. The results of the experiment help us better understand the relationships between wolves and their social hierarchy. The results also establish the importance of active and passive submission to maintaining order within a pack. The main idea of the research is that submission techniques in a wolf pack are very important for maintaining stability and order between the wolves. It is a way to prevent aggression and reduce conflicts. When wolves submit to others, it gives each wolf an understanding of their place in the pack and their responsibilities. This article relates to Mech's article as most of Mech's research includes him analyzing the submission between wolves and how wolf packs function. It also connects to Rabb's research as both focus on the social hierarchies of wolf packs.
Defining the Problem: Human-Wolf Conflicts, Habitat Protection for Wolves
01
Bangs, Edward E., et al. “Managing wolf–human conflict in the Northwestern United States.” People and Wildlife, July 2001, pp. 340–356, https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511614774.022.
The title of this research article is "Managing wolf-human conflict in the Northwestern United States"; the researcher is Edward Bangs, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife wolf recovery coordinator, and the article was published through the National Wildlife Research Center in 2001. This research was done by Bangs as he analyzed how the presence of livestock influenced human-wolf conflicts. The method of this experiment was to count the number of livestock in a given area and see how the presence of wolves affects the livestock population. The results of the study conducted in the Northwest United States showed that wolf populations have significantly decreased due to persecution after they killed nearby livestock. The main idea of the research is to advocate for wolf conservation by redistributing wolves to areas with less livestock to minimize conflicts. The research allows for more focus on rebuilding wolf packs in more protected regions. This article relates to the other two by building on the same problem of human-wolf conflicts. This one specifically, focuses on the correlation between wolf and livestock populations. I can use this article to explain how this relationship harms wolves.
02
McNay, Mark. “Wolf-Human Interactions in Alaska and Canada: A Review of the Case History.” Wildlife Society Bulletin, vol. 30, no. 3, 2002, pp. 831–843. Autumn, https://doi.org/https://www.jstor.org/stable/3784237?seq=1.
The title of this research article is "Wolf-human Interactions in Alaska and Canada: A Review of the Case History"; the researcher is Mark McNay, a worker for the Alaskan Department of Fish and Game, and the article was published through the Wildlife Society Bulletin in 2002. This experiment was conducted by McNay as he documented 80 cases of wolf-human encounters in Alaska and Canada. His method was to track back cases of interactions in hopes of determining a cause for increased conflicts between the two species. The results were that there was only one case of wolf aggression in the first half of the 1900s. However, the second half contained 18. The main idea and conclusion is that as human activity increased in wolf territories, more aggression was brought out from the wolves which led to more conflicts. The research explores the correlation between human activities and wolf attacks in the Northern region. This article relates to the other two by giving information on wolf aggression towards humans and how the conflict has been rising in recent years. I can use this article to advocate for more boundaries in wolf-dominated areas to reduce conflict.
03
TREVES, ADRIAN, et al. “Predicting human‐carnivore conflict: A spatial model derived from 25 years of data on wolf predation on livestock.” Conservation Biology, vol. 18, no. 1, 30 Jan. 2004, pp. 114–125, https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00189.x.
The title of this research article is "Predicting human-carnivore conflict: A spatial model derived from 25 years of data on wolf predation on livestock"; the researcher is Adrian Treves, founder of the carnivore coexistence lab and independent researcher, and the article was published through the Society for Conservation Biology in 2004. This research was conducted by Treves as he aimed to determine the conditions that provoked wolves the most. The method of this experiment was analyzing 17 landscape features to determine which ones would cause wolves to prey on livestock. The results of the study showed that regions with features such as a high density of deer, a low density of forest land, farm size, etc., made wolves more prone to attack livestock. The main idea of the research is to determine the causes of human-wolf conflicts due to cases rising each year of wolf attacks on livestock. The research can help analyze future regions when relocating wolves to safer areas to minimize conflict. This article relates to the others by informing readers of the geographical significance of human-wolf conflicts. I can use this article to advocate for the relocation of wolves to regions with better geographical resources.
Advocating Solutions for Human-Wolf Conflicts
01
Olson, Erik R., et al. "Characterizing Wolf–Human Conflicts in Wisconsin, USA." Wildlife Society Bulletin, vol. 39, no. 4, 2015, pp. 676-688, https://doi.org/10.1002/wsb.606.
The title of this research article is "Characterizing Wolf-Human Conflicts in Wisconsin, USA"; the researcher is Erik Olsen, a professor of wildlife studies at Northland College, and the article was published through the Wildlife Society Bulletin in 2015. The experiment was conducted by Olsen as he analyzed different classes of conflicts between humans and wolves between 1999 and 2011. His method was to track different conflicts throughout the time period and classify them into groups, giving each group a set of conditions. The results showed how wolves and humans act under the different classifications: residential, wildlife, and farmland. The main idea of this research is that management decisions about wolves can be altered depending on the situation and scenario. People can also use this decision on when it is right to use lethal force against wolves. Overall, Olsen states that not every conflict with wolves is the same and each should be treated in their own way. This article relates to the other two by offering a solution depending on the scenario and the other articles branch off this topic. I can use this article to advocate for a closer look a wolf management solutions.
02
DeCesare, Nicholas. J., et al. "Wolf-livestock Conflict and the Effects of Wolf Management." The Journal of Wildlife Management, vol. 82, no. 4, 2018, pp. 711-722, https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.21419.
The title of this research article is "Wolf-livestock Conflict and the Effect of Wolf Management"; the researcher is Nicholas DeCesare, a research biologist at Montana's Fish, Wildlife, and Parks, and the article was published through the Journal of Wildlife Management in 2018. DeCesare performed the experiment as he aimed to pinpoint the variations of depredations of livestock in Montana between 2005 and 2015. The method was to collect all the data for regions that had confirmed wolf-livestock depredations. The results showed what methods of limiting livestock losses worked the best by looking at the regions with the least losses. The main idea of this research is that by using methods such as targeted removal (counterargument) and public harvest, farmers will be able to limit the number of livestock losses. DeCesare uses this research to give advice to others on how to minimize livestock losses by providing us with data on what methods have worked the best in Montana. This article relates to the other two by offering multiple solutions that have worked and can be applied on a global scale in the future. I can use this article and its solutions to advocate for conservation methods for wolves as well as livestock.
03
Märcz, Lisa, and Michael Gibbert. "Fear of the Wolf: Are Human-Wildlife Conflicts Actually Human-Human Feuds?". Society & Animals (published online ahead of print 2023). https://doi.org/10.1163/15685306-bja10142
The title of this research article is "Fear of the Wolf: Are Human-Wildlife Conflicts Actual Human-Human Feuds?"; the researcher is Lisa Marcz, a PhD student and teaching assistant at USI, and the article was published through the Society and Animals in 2023. The experiment was conducted by Marcz as she aimed to pinpoint the opinions expressed by the public on wolves in Germany. Her method was to use data from the past 20 years as well as conduct a recent survey on how the public views wolves. The results showed how misinformed people are about the nature of wolves and how most of them view them as "evil" due to history. The main idea of this research is that by educating the public on the true nature of wolves, we can once again coexist with these carnivores. Education and outreach are valuable and essential to change the views that are placed on wolves. Overall, Marcz wants more focus and funding towards educating the public on wolf management topics. This article relates to the other two by offering a different type of solution which is education rather than doing something to the wolves. I can use this article to advocate for the need to educate others on management efforts around the world.