I especially want to I thank the judges, Fraser Cain, Maggie Koerth-Baker, and Maryn McKenna, for the effort that must have gone in to reading and selecting the posts.

One reason I am particularly pleased with this award is that “Gorillas” was my favorite post from last year.  The news item itself –the fact that gorillas had figured out how to take apart hunters’ snares and then taught younger gorillas to do it– was astonishing in itself. In fact, a lot of people thought so and blogged or reported the story. But when I started to imagine what kind of cognitive ability and foresight it would take to conceive the idea of removing snares and then pass that knowledge along, well that just blew my mind. I knew that was the story to write.

Mountain Gorilla – Credit: gorillacd.org

The research part of that post was immense.  I cited four papers and three books, but am sure I read much more than that. In addition, I really should take a minute to thank the folks at The Dian Fossey Gorilla Fund. Never have I spoken to more passionate and knowledgeable media contacts. Communications Director, Erika Archibald was not only as excited as I was about what the gorillas did, but enthusiastically gave me a wealth of information about the gorillas and the research and community programs taking place in Volcanoes National Park, Rwanda. I think I took 6 pages of notes during our conversation.

Getting back to the Science Seeker Awards, below are the the winner and the other finalists of that category. I would like to say, I love Aatish Bhatia’s post on colors. Winning the category is well-deserved. The other posts I hadn’t read before today’s award, but I can tell you now, they are all well-written and eye-opening. Check them out and then hop over to Science Seeker and read the finalists and winners in the other categories.

Finally, don’t miss the Science Seeker Blog Post of the Year — Re-Awakenings by Virginia Hughes. It’s an extraordinary story, exquisitely told.

2013 Science Seeker Award for Best psychology or neuroscience post

• The crayola-fication of the world: How we gave colors names, and it messed with our brains (part II) by Aatish Bhatia

Finalists:

• Dr. David H. Barlow and Aversion Therapy for Gays by The Neurocritic
• Exploring the Mind of the Mountain Gorilla by Kim Moynahan
• Why do children hide by covering their eyes? by Christian Jarrett
• Will changing your Facebook profile picture do anything for marriage equality? by Melanie Tannenbaum

Chris Hadfield isn’t the first or only tweeting astronaut, but he has, in layman’s terms, tweeted up a storm. When he left Earth on Dec. 19, he had 20,000 Twitter followers, a number that has grown to more than 824,000 today. Followers come from around the world, and have been particularly intrigued by his much-praised photos of places on the globe.  Eighty-one videos of his ISS experiences have proved an unexpected hit for the Canadian Space Agency, generating 22 million views. Website traffic at the CSA is up 70 per cent so far this year over the same period in 2012.  (CBC)

Spaceflight finale: To some this may look like a sunset. But it’s a new dawn. twitter.com/Cmdr_Hadfield/…

— Chris Hadfield (@Cmdr_Hadfield) May 13, 2013

Almost time to leave Station. Hard to express all of my emotions, but mostly gratitude. I came here on behalf of so many people – thank you.

— Chris Hadfield (@Cmdr_Hadfield) May 12, 2013

No Commander, thank you.

American bullfrog (Lithobates catesbeianus) The largest frog in North America. Reaches a length of 8 inches. Photo: Brad Glorioso USGS

Last time I wrote about swamps, bogs, and other wetlands. This time, as I promised, I’m going to tell you about some of the confusing characters that might inhabit those wetlands.  These are animals that sort of look the same and may even act alike, but can’t necessarily be used interchangeably.

So let’s hop to it, starting with…

Frogs and Toads

The first thing to know is that, scientifically, toads are a kind of frog or Anuran.  Frogs and toads are both amphibians, lay eggs in water, and begin life as tadpoles.  Both are found almost world-wide.  Most hop, but a few walk or run instead. Some climb trees.

• · Kingdom – Animalia
• · Phylum – Chordata
• · Subphylum – Verebrata
• · Class – Amphibia
• ·  Order – Anura  <– Frogs (includes all frogs and toads)

There is one family of Anurans which are considered true toads. These are Common or EuropeanToads.  However, other Anurans have been given the informal name “toad” based on popularly accepted, but unscientific, attributes.

Fowler’s toad (Anaxyrus fowleri) Photo: Brad Glorioso, USGS

Since these identifying characteristics do serve some purpose in differentiating toads from frogs, I’ll go over those them here, with the understanding that there are many exceptions to these informal rules.

Frogs : In general frogs are smooth, wet, mostly water-dwelling, and often colourful and/or with interesting markings. With the exception of tree frogs, you will usually find frogs in or near water. They are great swimmers and in a pond are often found basking on lily pads.

Toads: In general, toads are bumpy, “warty”, and have dry skin. They are primarily land-dwelling and may be found in gardens or in the forest. They do, however, lay their eggs in water so can swim and will be found in water during breeding season.  They are often less colourful than frogs, usually gray, brown, or tan.

FACT: You will not get warts from touching a toad. However, many have toxins in their skin, so don’t lick one.

Alligators and Crocodiles

American Crocodile (Nat Park Svc)

Alligators and crocodiles are both members of the Order Crocodylia, a type of reptile.

• Kingdom: Animalia
• Phylum: Chordata
• Class:     Reptilia
• Clade:    Crocodylomorpha
• Order:   Crocodylia
  • Family: Alligatoridae <- Alligators & Caimans
    
  • Family: Crocodylidae <- Crocodiles
    

For quick recognition, to differentiate between alligators and crocodiles look at their heads.

L) Crocodile R) Alligator (photos: Florida Fish & Wildlife)

Crocodiles have more narrow heads and long V-shaped snouts. Their upper and lower jaws are the same widths, so when they close their mouths, you get that classic toothy grin. Crocodiles tend to be more aggressive than alligators.  They prefer freshwater but can tolerate sea water because of a specialized gland used for filtering out salt. They are usually grey-green in colour.

Alligators have wide heads and short U-shaped snouts. An alligator’s upper jaw is wider than the lower jaw, so when its mouth is shut, the lower teeth slide into small depressions in the upper jaw so you see very few teeth.  Alligators prefer fresh water, and will inhabit, lakes, canals, swamps, or even a swimming pool!  They are usually black.

American Alligator (NASA)

FACT: There are only two species of true alligators: The American Alligator (A. mississippiensis) and the small  Chinese alligator A. sinensis of the Yangtze River. Chinese Alligators only grow to about 5 feet, whereas the American Alligator can exceed 15 feet in length and grow to over 1000 lbs.

Turtles and Tortoises

Red Eared Slider (Photo: Oregon Dept of F&W)

The relationship between turtles and tortoises is like that of frogs and toads.  Every reptile with a shell is considered to be a turtle so tortoises are a type of turtle.

• Kingdom: Animalia
• Phylum: Chordata
• Class:     Reptilia
• Clade:    Crocodylomorpha
• Order:   Testudines (=Chelonii) <- All turtles
  • Sub-Order: Cryptodira <– Most living turtles & tortoises
  • Sub-Order: Pleurodira <- side-necked turtles

A desert tortoise emerges from its burrow. Arizona Game and Fish Department photo.

As a rule, land-dwelling turtles are called tortoises. Since our topic is creatures of wetlands, it is useful to know that there are no true tortoises in North America that would be found in a wetland.  They are all desert and grassland species.  Box turtles act more like tortoises (and in some countries are called tortoises) in that they are land-dwelling. Some species prefer grasslands. Others prefer forests.

Red Footed Tortoise egg (Smithsonian / Nat Zoo)

However, there are dozens of species of turtles which inhabit ponds, swamps, lakes and rivers in North America. These include snapping turtles, sliders, mud turtles, map turtles, and painted turtles, among others.

FACT: The sex of baby turtles is determined by the temperature of the eggs during incubation. The difference between a temperature that creates females and one that creates males may be just a few degrees (the ideal nest resulting in both sexes, depending on the depth of the eggs.) This has implications when it comes to climate change as warming temperatures may cause some species to create nests of same-sex offspring year after year.

Science communicators can learn a great deal from Sagan’s incredible ability to capture the public imagination. Read more in my guest post for the Canadian Science Writers’ Association: The Stuff of Stars: Lessons From Carl Sagan.

Swamp, marsh or bog?

I recently received an email from a writer who told me she was working on a novel in which one of the settings was a swamp. As she started to read about swamps, however, she realized it wasn’t straightforward  – swamps, bogs, marshes, wetlands – all these different words! Are they all terms for the same place or are there differences?

Being a regular reader of Friday Fiction Facts, she knew better than to just guess. So she emailed me to ask if I could help her figure out what type of swamp (or other wetland) would be appropriate to her story.

So on her behalf, I’m going to sort that out for everyone today.

First, before you can add wetland (the generic term that covers all of these) to your story, you’re going to need to know a few things about your larger setting—

• The Climate:  Where on the planet does your story take place?  Is it in a northern zone? (mid- to northern US, Canada, Britain, Northern Europe) Or is it in the tropics or subtropics?  (Southern US, southern Asia, Australia).
• The Weather: What season is it? Has it rained lately?
• The Location: Is it inland or coastal?

Now that you know those things, let’s look at our choices.

Swamps, Marshes and Bogs – What’s the difference?

Swamps

Twin Swamps Nature Preserve Indiana (Vern Wilkins, Indiana University, Bugwood.org)

Bald Cyprus Swamp, NC Randy Cyr, Greentree, Bugwood.org

Swamps involve trees and merge with the forest.  In general (there are exceptions), swamps are freshwater.

Swamps can be in the northern climate or in the tropics. Northern swamps have winter so everything freezes, trees lose leaves, swamp plants die back, and animals leave or hibernate.

Southern swamps are hot and steamy year-round, so more tropical. Animals stay, large reptiles can live there (gators!), and moss and plants grow thick.

Navigating a swamp is difficult. It is essentially a flooded forest, so the ground is uneven and includes fallen trees, hidden stumps, rocks and boulders. Standing trees and undergrowth can be thick, making it hard to traverse by canoe.

 Marshes

Marsh in Florida (Billy Humphries, Forest Resource Consultants, Inc., Bugwood.org )

Marshes  are flat, relatively shallow, and are out in the open, usually merging with rivers, ponds, lakes. They are dominated by grasses  instead of trees.  Plants may include sedges, cattails, grasses, rice, bulrushes and water lilies.

Inland marshes are freshwater. Tidal marshes can be salt or mixed (brackish) water depending on how close to the ocean they occur.

Tidal Marshland in the Plum Island Estuary, MA (Matthew Kirwan , USGS )

During dry summers, marshes can become muddy or even dry. In the winter, northern marshes will freeze and the grasses will die back.

Navigating a marsh is easy in a canoe or flat-bottom boat. If the water level is low, the edges of a marsh may afford a bit of beach where people could walk.  During rainy seasons or spring run-off, the water would flow into the surrounding grasses, making foot-navigation difficult, however, if one didn’t mind getting wet, marshes are not usually too deep to wade across.

Bogs

Bogs are tricky.  They sneak up on you.  When you’re near a swamp or a marsh, you know it. Sure, a low spot may surprise you and suddenly you’ll find yourself up to your bootlaces in water or mud, but you know that’s a possibility when you get there. Bogs on the other hand, pretend to be fields built on solid ground.

Take a look at this bog in Ontario. Looks like a field, doesn’t it?

Mer Bleue Bog conservation area, Ottawa, Canada.

The thing about bogs is this: they tend to be covered in shrubbery which looks like it’s growing on land. But no. It is rooted in moss– often Sphagnum which decays into peat (you know, “peat moss,” that stuff you buy for the garden) — which is completely saturated in water.

Bogs are found in cold, temperate regions, primarily in the northern hemisphere.  There are different kinds of bogs (also called “mires”) which you can read more about on Wikipedia. I particularly like the quaking bog, a floating mat of bog moss that you can actually walk on.  This is a great video that shows and explains quaking bogs:

Another video here showing the NJ Pine Barrens bog.

Purple Pitcher Plant (Sarracenia purpurea) is a carnivorous plant found in bogs (Wikipedia)

Bogs are anaerobic environments (they have no oxygen) and are poor in nutrients. For this reason only specialized plants grow well in bogs: Blueberries, cranberries, cloudberries, huckleberries and lingonberries are harvested from bogs.  Also carnivorous plants are adapted to bogs, as they get their nutrients from the insects and animals they eat.

Finally, because of the lack of oxygen and the high acidity (like vinegar) things that die in bogs do not decay but are instead preserved. This results in Bog People, many of whom have been found in northern Europe.

Now you recognize swamps, marshes and bogs, right? So go back to the first photo. Which do you think it is?

Thank you to my reader who sent the original question!

Next time: Swamp Thing!  Some confusing characters that might inhabit your wetlands.

As the reader will discover, the wolves—given just a fragment of chance and space—wove a story while we, with our supposedly vast powers of imagination, did well to just sit back and watch and learn.

–Rick Bass, Preface to the Mariner Books edition of The Ninemile Wolves (2003)

Granite & pup *  (Aug 2011)

This post is a final analysis of the Haliburton Wolf situation. Before I begin, I’ll refresh your memory and introduce new readers to the most recent  Haliburton Sanctuary Wolf pack:  As of December 2012, this captive wild pack was made up of the alpha couple, Haida and Granite, and their offspring from 2011 and 2012.  The 2011 pups (The “L’s”) consisted of females— Leila** and Luna; and males – Logan and Lonestar.  The three younger pups, born in April 2012, are females.

On New Year’s Eve (Dec 31, 2012), vandals cut through the fences of the sanctuary. Haida, Granite, Lonestar, and Logan left the enclosure. Within 24 hours Granite and Logan were shot by poachers. Logan’s body was never recovered. Granite died two weeks later under the care of a veterinarian. Efforts to recapture Haida and Lonestar have failed. To date, they are still loose and the question of their ability to survive in the wild remains.

Alpha male, Haida (2011)

As I mentioned in my last post about this situation, I want to temporarily put aside the illegality of the vandalism and the emotional response to what happened. I also want to put aside the question of whether these wolves should have been bred and kept captivity in the first place.  Instead, I want to look ahead and take a close look at the biology of wolves and what it can tell us about Haida and Lonestar’s chances of survival.

About Haida and Lonestar

Haida and Lonestar and their family were born and raised in a contained but natural environment.  They were exposed to ordinary weather conditions and seasonal cycles. They engaged in natural pack dynamics including establishing (or losing) dominance and breeding and raising young. They lived on a diet very similar to that of their local wild counterparts – primarily beaver and deer.

They have an unusual relationship with humans – something between purely wild wolves and zoo animals. They keep their distance and generally avoid contact but are not typically alarmed or threatened by human presence. They associate at least some human activity with food delivery and are not hesitant to approach humans delivering the food.

Pup (2011)

Food has always been a dependable resource for Haida and Lonestar. They have never had to travel great distances to find food have never suffered from excessive hunger or starvation.  With the exception of small animals that found their way into the enclosure, they have never hunted and they have never worked together as a pack to bring down large game.

Except possibly through the fence, they have had no experience with other wolves. They have never met a wolf that is a stranger to them, had to look for mates or defend themselves or their territories against rival packs.

So given this background, and compared to wolves born in the wild, how equipped are Haida and Lonestar to survive in the wild?

Human Contact

There is no doubt that biggest danger to these wolves is humans – hunters, poachers, traps, poison, and vehicles.

One third of all documented mortality among wolves east of the central Rockies in Canada was related to roads. (Mech p. 301)

2011

Roads are associated with vehicle strikes, an increase in hunting takes, and poaching.  Hunting is illegal within the Haliburton Forest but, as evidenced by the fates of Granite and Logan, any animal that approaches a side road or highway is at risk of being shot.

But these statistics apply to all wolves. Are Haida and Lonestar in any more danger than their wild counterparts?  They are if their behavior brings them closer to humans, habitation, and roadways than a normal wild wolf.  So let’s look at what might affect their behavior.

Food

The alpha male was observed at least on one occasion on the local landfill. That is not what I consider a life in the “wild” and “free”, not even considering health aspects. The two males, for most of the winter also fed on bait, which we kept outside the Wolf Centre in order to keep them around and close by. (Peter Schleifenbaum )

Pups  (2011)

Food and the ability to hunt is the first thing people think of when they worry about the loose wolves. Can they hunt? How will they know where to find food? Will they approach humans in hopes of being fed?

While they did catch a turkey in February, there is no evidence that the loose wolves are hunting substantial prey.  It would seem that a wolf that has not learned to hunt would be extremely vulnerable. Things that are easy to catch and kill (or eat as-is) are things that would bring them into contact with humans — pets, small livestock and poultry,  garbage,  road kill, food carried by campers and hikers,  the remains of hunter-kills, and animals already in traps.

But is this an accurate portrayal?  What does evidence tell us about wolves released from captivity? The answer surprised me. It turns out that captive-raised wolves with no hunting experience very quickly take up hunting.  In one case captive-reared Mexican wolves (Canis lupus baileyi) reintroduced into Arizona began killing elk within several weeks.

The wolves translocated from Canada to Yellowstone began killing elk within days after their release, despite no tradition of hunting in the area. (Mech p 139)

And then there is the famous case of the first generation of  Ninemile wolves, born in April of 1990 in the Ninemile Valley of Montana.  At five months old the six pups became orphans, their mother killed by poachers in June and her mate hit by a car in September, before he had time to teach the pups to hunt.

Because the wolves were the first known pair to den outside Glacier National Park in 60 years, wildlife officials stepped in to feed the pups. They didn’t remove them from the wild, but began leaving deer carcasses for them – at first cutting them open because the pups’ teeth weren’t strong enough to break through the deer hide.

The family at play (2011)

Little was known then about the effects of artificially feeding wild pups. Officials were fearful that any human contact or even scent on the carcasses would ruin them as predators, so they took every precaution to prevent the pups from knowing where their food came from.

And then, in December, it happened. With no training from adult wolves, the pups killed a deer:

Jimenez was waving the deer leg all around. “He was just beside himself… All he kept saying, over and over, was, ‘They did it just like wolves do it. They did it just like wolves do it.’ He was so afraid he was going to teach them something human..” (Bass p. 74)

Of course, this doesn’t mean that the captive-raised wolves (or uneducated pups) won’t start with the easy-pickings, but wild wolves do that as well. Wolves are well-known to scavenge garbage dumps. Some Mediterranean wolf populations live almost exclusively on garbage and there is some evidence that modern dogs evolved from wolves that shared our leavings.

Wolves are also known to eat road kill and prey on house pets—especially dogs. In fact, wolves are considered “generalist carnivores” – eating any meat that is available to them. So the fact that Haida was spotted at the dump may not be a reflection of his inability to cope in the wild. He’s simply doing what any wolf would do – following his nose to the closest meal.

The Wolf Pack as Hunters

2011

There were six Ninemile pups, so they were able to take down a deer as pack.  As far as we know, Haida and Lonestar have no pack. Will that be an issue when it comes to hunting? In the summer, wild wolves are able to meet their dietary needs by hunting alone or in small groups. But winter is another story.  Even well-fed wild wolves who are skilled hunters lose a substantial portion of their body fat in the winter and even eat into their last fat reserves: bone marrow fat.

Of forty-two wolves taken by trappers and hunters during the winter in Ontario, 17% had used most of their marrow fat and another 12% had begun marrow fat depletion. (Mech, p 117)

Peter Schleifenbaum rightfully points out that this past winter wasn’t the test. Haida and Lonestar were fed right up to mid-February. Conceivably, the sanctuary could continue to feed them, but if they leave the area, next winter will be their real test.  In winter, wolves tend to hunt larger game – in Ontario, moose and deer – prey that normally requires a pack to take down.

This begs two questions. The first is, is killing large game essential for survival?   Adapted to a feast-or-famine diet, wolves are able to survive remarkably well in times when large prey is scarce. Wolves in Isle Royale, for instance, have been observed going three weeks without a moose kill. In between kills they survived by scavenging old prey carcasses and catching small animals.  In addition, wolves very quickly gain back their lost weight when food becomes available.

Another point is that wolf packs seldom remain on a kill for more than a single day. Should a resident pack kill a deer, the remains of their kill would be available to other scavengers. Some coyotes, for instance, are known to follow a day or two behind wolf packs to scavenge their leavings. Haida and Lonestar could do the same.

2011

Another question to ask might be: What’s the largest prey a single or pair of wolves could take down? Again, the evidence is surprising.  There are many documented instances where single wolves have killed large prey, including moose, bison, and muskoxen.  Logic dictates that two wolves would be more efficient and effective than a single wolf, and that holds true. But interestingly, after that, more is not necessarily better. Youngsters and elderly pack members do not contribute a great deal to hunting and may even confuse or interfere with an effective hunt.

..packs kill less food per wolf than do pairs, and of all pack sizes, pairs are the most efficient per wolf.. (Mech p 121)

So in terms of hunting and taking prey, Haida and Lonestar might be just fine, especially if they work together.

Wolf Pack Tradition

2011

It seems like there might be another advantage to being in a pack.  An experienced pack of wolves knows the trails, water sources, and boundaries of their range; they know where to den and the most promising locations of food.  They understand the movement patterns and behavior of their prey and know how to take advantage of weather conditions, snow-cover, gullies, thick brush, and uneven terrain in order to outsmart large game. Presumably all of this tradition is contained in the pack, young members learning from their elders.

But wolf biologists point out that packs are more dynamic than we used to assume. With animals leaving and joining the pack from year to year, beyond teaching pups, it would be hard to establish or preserve any pack-knowledge in such a variable group.

..hunting traditions are far from critical to wolf functioning under most conditions.  (Mech 139)

2011

It is more likely that there is an inherent flexibility in wolves that allows them to quickly adapt to new areas, prey species and behavior, and other novel conditions. This capability will work well for Haida and Lonestar as they explore new areas.

A Pack of One’s Own

The classic picture of a wolf pack is that of an alpha couple, their siblings and offspring, and maybe a few non-breeding elders. New members are born into the pack. Alpha wolves get overthrown by young upstarts and drop in status, eventually to die as low-ranking members of the pack. A pack is a closed system and new members from the outside are not welcome.  If that is the case, then Haida and Lonestar are destined to be outsiders for the rest of their lives.

But while that image is somewhat correct, the dynamics of how packs ebb and flow are not taken into account.  In a natural setting, most wolves do not remain in the pack in which they were born.  Both males and females will leave the pack, especially if they don’t have breeding status.  Some will remain nearby and others may travel great distances before settling into a new area.  In the winter, these dispersed wolves comprise 10-15% of the population.

..each wolf pack can be viewed as a ‘dispersal pump’ that converts prey into young wolves and spews them far and wide over the landscape.  (Mech p. 11)

Logan, Lonestar, Luna and/or Leila (Aug 2011)

Wolves may disperse at any age between about 5 months and 5 years. However, the most common age for dispersal is 11-24 months – about the time of sexual maturity.  If Haida’s pack had remained intact and was a normal wild pack, chances are he and Granite would have remained with the 2012 pups and the 2011 pups, including Lonestar, would have begun exploring independently.

Let’s assume that Lonestar is following the natural course of a young wolf.  What would happen next?  In order to thrive, he would need three things: a mate, food resources, and an exclusive area.  There are several ways he could do this.  Overthrowing another male wolf would work, but that’s a risky proposition, especially for a yearling.  Haida might have better luck in that regard.

2011

Another option is to join a pack (see “Adoption” below) and then steal away a mate.  That solves the mate problem but not the territory problem.  So instead, Lonestar and Haida might opt to do what most unattached wolves do:  Join the singles scene that naturally forms on the edges of territories.  From here it would be short work to find a mate. Some researchers have observed lone wolves finding mates within days of reaching such an area. Within a regional population, most wolves will find a mate within a month of leaving the pack.

After finding a mate, wolves are notoriously successful at setting up housekeeping. Most will carve out a territory and breed within the year. In areas where wolves are hunted, new wolves take over the territories of killed wolves almost immediately.

Adoption

Grissom (2009)

Another way lone wolves make due is by joining a new pack. Most packs act aggressively towards newcomers, however, “adoption” or acceptance of a new wolf into the pack does occur. Adoptions may last days or go on for years.  A very rough estimate is that 10-20% of wolves are adoptees at any given time. However, not every wolf is a candidate for adoption. Most adoptees are male and most of those are 1-3 years old.  Conversely, a high percentage of wolves killed by other wolves are adult males. So adoption bodes better for Lonestar than it does Haida.

Establishing Territories

“There’s a lot of uninhabited land pretty close by….I think everybody would be delighted if they’d go a ridge or two over, and hang out there—and live happily ever after. But it’s asking a lot of a first-year wolf to pick up and set up a new territory of its own.” (Mike Jimenez, quoted in Bass, p. 102)

Based on wolf howl surveys, it’s estimated that there are at least three packs of wolves in the surrounding 70,000-acre Haliburton Forest Reserve.  Does this provide a reasonable opportunity for the two wolves to acquire mates and establish territories?

It could be tight. 70,000 acres equates to just under 300 square kilometers. That’s not big. Depending on many factors, including the availably of resources, a wolf pack may occupy tens or even thousands of square kilometers.

Even a territory as large as 1600 km2 has a diameter of only about 40 km. Wolves can cover this distance in less than a day. (Mech p 20)

To establish a viable territory that meets the needs of their first and possibly second year offspring, a pair needs to claim fifteen times more habitat than they would use to support just themselves. To do this, some pairs start with a smaller territory then encroach upon the neighbors’ lands. Others take advantage of larger unoccupied spaces, often those left by wolves killed by humans.

2011

Whether there is room for one or two additional packs in the Haliburton Forest will depend on several factors:

• 1. How large the current wolf packs are
  2. How large their territories are
  3. Prey type and quantity; prey determines wolf populations, not the other way around.
  4. Availability of other resources – water, denning areas, buffers from humans
  5. Turnover — how frequently wolves are lost due to humans or other causes

I don’t know the answers to those questions, so can’t really speculate on the chances the two wolves have in carving out their own spaces.  However there is another factor to consider.  Wolves think nothing of traveling hundreds of miles to find suitable land. The Haliburton Forest is not a closed system. It borders other wild lands including the 7600 square kilometer Algonquin Provincial Park, itself home to some two dozen wolf packs.

Something biologists are learning is that wolves key in almost frantically to where other wolves have been—old runways and old scent markings—so that this year’s new rash of lone dispersers are pioneers for the future, blazing urine trails through the forest, probably avenues for future expansion and recolonization.” (Bass. p 124) .

2009

In any case, it should be remembered that any shortage or juggling of territories is a problem faced by all of the wolves in the region, not just Haida and Lonestar.  In this respect, their success should have little to do with their captive upbringing.

Essentially what these wolves got was what biologists call a “soft-release.”  It’s the same gradual technique officials use to reintroduce any formerly captive animal into the wild. The wolves were slowly introduced to the area around them; they were fed until they were no longer interested in the food provided; and they were allowed to leave when they were ready.

Sure it was messy.  The timing and location were all wrong, and as a result the pack was broken up badly and wolves died. But still, it gave the surviving wolves the support they needed until they were ready to go.

In an interview in March, Peter Schleifenbaum said:

“Hope is the last thing to die, so obviously we leave the doors literally open…There is a hope but with every day that hope is fading.” (Peter Schleifenbaum quoted in The Haliburton Echo, Mar 11)

Granite (2011)

I am hopeful. Not hopeful the wolves will come home.  Granite isn’t there to entice Haida back and Lonestar is going to follow his natural instinct to roam.  But I am optimistic that the loose wolves have the same chances as their wild counterparts of not only surviving, but prospering in the Haliburton Forest and surrounding region. Certainly their chances were better when they were in the sanctuary, but barring further human interference, I think they’ll be fine.

Which brings us back to the question posed to Peter Schleifenbaum:

I recently was asked if I was not happy knowing if/that the two males were able to survive and live out a free life in the wild.

I won’t speak for Peter, but yes, I’m happy knowing they’ll probably survive.  But I’m not happy with how their freedom came about. And I definitely don’t think they are better off than they were in captivity.

I want to make this point very clearly:  Despite my optimism for the animals, I am adamantly opposed to actions of the vandals.  Speaking just in terms of the wolves’ well-being, freeing them was a cruel and unnecessary act.

Haida 2011

First, two wolves died painfully and needlessly. Second, the pack structure was destroyed, and any disruption in the pack is highly stressful to the animals; and third, the Haliburton wolves did not require freeing. With 15 acres, privacy from humans, a stable pack, and all the resources necessary to raise a family, those animals were content and destined to live comfortable and probably long lives.

“They say not to anthropomorphize—not to think of them as having feelings, not to think of them as being able to think—but late at night I like to imagine that they are killing: that another deer has gone down in a tangle of legs, tackled in deep snow; and that once again the wolves are feeding. That they have saved themselves, once again.”  (Rick Bass)

Unless otherwise noted or linked, all of the information for this post was taken from:

Axelsson, E., Ratnakumar, A., Arendt, M., Maqbool, K., Webster, M., Perloski, M., Liberg, O., Arnemo, J., Hedhammar, �., & Lindblad-Toh, K. (2013). The genomic signature of dog domestication reveals adaptation to a starch-rich diet Nature, 495 (7441), 360-364 DOI: 10.1038/nature11837

Bass, Rick. The Ninemile Wolves. 1st Mariner Books ed. Boston: Houghton Mifflin Co, 2003.

Mech, L. David, and Luigi Boitani. Wolves: behavior, ecology, and conservation. Chicago, Ill.; Bristol: University of Chicago Press ; University Presses Marketing [distributor], 2006.  ISBN: 0226516970  9780226516974

All photos taken by me or my husband at the Haliburton Wolf Center. (c ) Use only with permission.

* The “L” pups had not been named at the time of my visit in 2011. Of the four pups, there are a gray and a black of each sex.

**Leila is sometimes spelled Layla on the Haliburton website

Haida (from Haliburton Wolf Ctr website)

This may be the last installment on the Haliburton wolves.  Peter Schleifenbaum, of the wolf center, says that he will not be posting any more updates unless something changes dramatically.

If you missed the beginning of this story, click the post tag “Haliburton Wolves” to see the rest of the posts.  In short, this past New Year’s Eve, one or more vandals cut through the fences at the Haliburton Forest Wolf Sanctuary and four wolves left the enclosure. Two of those were killed within days (including the alpha female) and the other two, the alpha male, Haida, and his son Lonestar, are still free.

Note: I will not use the term “escape.”  This implies intent; that the animals knew they were fenced and intentionally took advantage of the break to get away.  No, they just kept walking.  And tellingly, they spent the first weeks hanging around the fence, probably trying to get back in. 

Schleifenbaum’s last update is here.  He reiterates that they have made every attempt to catch the loose wolves, and while there have been a couple of close calls, they’ve been unsuccessful.  The last confirmed sighting was February 18^th.  The only further observation was March 1^st, when something triggered the trap and large wolf prints were found around it.  These may or may not have been made by Haida and Lonestar.  So, unless the wolves come home or are captured or killed, I don’t think we’re going to hear any more about them through official channels.

Meanwhile, inside the enclosure are five young wolves, all females. If the males don’t come back very soon, there won’t be any new pups this spring. The Haliburton staff is making no decisions yet in regards to adding new wolves.

“… it’s very difficult to bring a new strange wolf into a pack. A pack is really a family unit and normally not very kind to outside intruders.” (Peter Schleifenbaum,  Haliburton Echo, Jan 17)

Schleifenbaum brings up a good point in his blog:

I recently was asked if I was not happy knowing if/that the two males were able to survive and live out a free life in the wild.

This is something I’ve been thinking a lot about.  We still don’t know who released the wolves, but my suspicion is that it was someone who wanted exactly this outcome – wolves living free.  This presents a moral conundrum for the sanctuary and the rest of us.  If the wolves survive, that’s good for the wolves but then we’d have to acknowledge that maybe the vandals did the right thing, at least for the animals. If the wolves die, that’s a tragedy, but then at least we would know that our instincts were right and the vandals made a huge mistake.

But until we see what happens to the former members of the wolf sanctuary pack (both inside and outside the fence), all we can do speculate, and speculating is meaningless without science behind it.  So what I am going to do in my next blog post is set aside, for the moment, the criminality of the act and the emotional impact that this event has had on all of us following the story, and look instead at the biology of wolves to see what that can tell us about Haida and Lonestar’s chances of survival.

Stay tuned …

Hi everyone! I’m working on an update and analysis of the Haliburton Wolf story, and of course it’s taking me longer than I thought. Analyses get that way.

So, while you wait for that, I thought I’d give you a quick Friday Fiction Facts post.  This week, 5 ways to escape from the bad guys!  Or, I suppose it could be 5 ways bad guys can escape from the good guys. Either way, this could get one of your characters out of trouble.

1. How to get duct tape off your mouth if your hands are tied.

Now you can shout for help!  And, in case you don’t think he did that fairly, his update is HERE.

2.  How to escape handcuffs if you don’t have a key, but do have a bobby pin or paperclip.

This one might work better if one character is trying to free another one.

3. Or, instead of handcuffs, zip ties.

You’d think these would be harder to get out of. But no..

A long version explanation HERE along with actions your characters can take while they’re being zip-tied to make escape easier. And how to escape if your hands are behind you.

4.  Escape from a car through the trunk

This is not just an escape from the trunk, but escape from the main part of the car through the trunk.  This might not work on all vehicles, so you’ll want to make sure your character is in the right kind of car before attempting this one. I do love the Johnny Cash soundtrack here.

I couldn’t help but notice, while I was looking for trunk escape videos, that trunks today all have a glow-in-the-dark trunk escape tab that you can pull to get out. That makes sense, but the image that goes with it shows a person running away, as though they’ve been kidnapped. Makes me wonder how often that even occurs. (It seems it does  happen sometimes)

If the trunk doesn’t have an escape tab, there are other ways out. Here’s a wiki-How page on how to climb through the back seat, activate the trunk release, and even kick out a tail light.

5. Escape from being tied up to a chair.

This one probably works best when your kid-character is being tied up by another kid character.  A helpful hint from the victim here too.

claimtoken-514cb98cd0f4a

If you are a subscriber, you may have received an email this morning that listed the last whole bunch of recent posts as new. I guess Feedburner thinks they are new. In any case, if everything worked, the links should have brought you here. If there is anything wrong with your subscription– if you didn’t get notified of this post, if the links took you to the old site, anything — let me know in comments here.

I still haven’t figured out how to set up the 301 redirect at the other end, so if you have bookmarks and  links to the old site or specific posts, they’re still going to take you over there. I’ll get that sorted out.

Meanwhile, just to show how happy we are at getting here in (mostly) one piece, let’s join some wild foxes jumping on a trampoline!

And don’t worry, I’ll be back with some real blog posts just as soon as I know this site is ready to go.

You’re welcome.