Psychology Wiki

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Animals · Animal ethology · Comparative psychology · Animal models · Outline · Index

?Gray Wolf
Conservation status: Least concern[1]
Fossil range: Late Pleistocene - Recent
Iberian Wolf (Canis lupus signatus)
Iberian Wolf (Canis lupus signatus)
Scientific classification
Kingdom: Animalia
Phylum: Chordata
Class: Mammalia
Order: Carnivora
Family: Canidae
Genus: Canis
Species: C. lupus
Binomial name
Canis lupus
Linnaeus, 1758
Range map. Green, present; red, former.
Range map. Green, present; red, former.


The grey wolf or gray wolf (Canis lupus), also known as the timber wolf or simply wolf, is the largest wild member of the Canidae family. It is an ice age survivor originating during the Late Pleistocene around 300,000 years ago.[2] DNA sequencing and genetic drift studies indicate that the gray wolf shares a common ancestry with the domestic dog, (Canis lupus familiaris) and might be its ancestor,[3] though this is disputed by certain experts who point out large behavioural and morphological dissimilarities.[4] A number of other gray wolf subspecies have been identified, though the actual number of subspecies is still open to discussion. Gray wolves are typically apex predators in the ecosystems they occupy. Though not as adaptable as more generalist canid species,[4] wolves have thrived in temperate forests, deserts, mountains, tundra, taiga, grasslands, and even urban areas.[5]

Though once abundant over much of Eurasia and North America, the gray wolf inhabits a very small portion of its former range because of widespread destruction of its habitat, human encroachment of its habitat, and the resulting human-wolf encounters that sparked broad extirpation. Considered as a whole, however, the gray wolf is regarded as being of least concern for extinction according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Today, wolves are protected in some areas, hunted for sport in others, or may be subject to extermination as perceived threats to livestock and pets.

In areas where human cultures and wolves are sympatric, wolves frequently feature in the folklore and mythology of those cultures, both positively and negatively.


Physical characteristics

Gray wolf weight and size can vary greatly worldwide, tending to increase proportionally with latitude as predicted by Bergmann's Rule. In general, height varies from 0.6 to .95 meters (26–38 inches) at the shoulder and weight typically ranges from 20 (44 lb.) up to 68 (150 lb.) kilograms, which together make the gray wolf the largest of all wild canids.[6] Although rarely encountered, extreme specimens of more than 77 kg (170 lb.) have been recorded in Alaska, Canada,[7] and the former Soviet Union.[8] The heaviest gray wolf recorded in the New World was killed on 70 Mile River in east central Alaska on July 12, 1939 and weighed 79 kg (175 lb.),[9] while the heaviest wolf recorded in the Old World was killed after World War II in the kobelyakski Area of the Poltavskij Region in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic and weighed 86 kg (189 lb.).[8] The smallest wolves come from the Arabian Wolf subspecies, the females of which may weigh as little as 10 kg (22 lb) at maturity. Grey wolves are sexually dimorphic, with females in any given wolf population typically weighing 20% less than males.[10] Females also have narrower muzzles and foreheads; slightly shorter, smoother furred legs; and less massive shoulders.[9] Gray wolves can measure anywhere from 1.3 to 2 meters (4.5–6.5 feet) from nose to the tip of the tail, which itself accounts for approximately one quarter of overall body length.[11]


Picture of a Gray Wolf skeleton.

Gray wolves are built for stamina, possessing features ideal for long-distance travel. Their narrow chests and powerful backs and legs facilitate efficient locomotion. They are capable of covering several miles trotting at about a pace of 10 km/h (6 mph), and have been known to reach speeds approaching 65 km/h (40 mph) during a chase.[12] One female gray wolf was recorded to have made 7 metre bounds when chasing prey.[8]

Gray wolf paws are able to tread easily on a wide variety of terrains, especially snow. There is a slight webbing between each toe, which allows them to move over snow more easily than comparatively hampered prey. Gray wolves are digitigrade, which, with the relative largeness of their feet, helps them to distribute their weight well on snowy surfaces. The front paws are larger than the hind paws, and have a fifth digit, the dewclaw, that is absent on hind paws.[13] Bristled hairs and blunt claws enhance grip on slippery surfaces, and special blood vessels keep paw pads from freezing.[14] Scent glands located between a wolf's toes leave trace chemical markers behind, helping the wolf to effectively navigate over large expanses while concurrently keeping others informed of its whereabouts.[14] Unlike dogs and coyotes, gray wolves lack sweat glands on their paw pads. This trait is also present in Eastern Canadian Coyotes which have been shown to have recent wolf ancestry.[15] Wolves in Israel are unique due to the middle two toes of their paws being fused, a trait originally thought to be unique to the African Wild Dog.[16]


Gray wolves molt some of their coats in late spring or early summer.

Wolves have bulky coats consisting of two layers. The first layer is made up of tough guard hairs that repel water and dirt. The second is a dense, water-resistant undercoat that insulates. The undercoat is shed in the form of large tufts of fur in late spring or early summer (with yearly variations). A wolf will often rub against objects such as rocks and branches to encourage the loose fur to fall out. The undercoat is usually gray regardless of the outer coat's appearance. Wolves have distinct winter and summer pelages that alternate in spring and autumn. Females tend to keep their winter coats further into the spring than males.

Fur coloration varies greatly, running from gray to gray-brown, all the way through the canine spectrum of white, red, brown, and black. These colors tend to mix in many populations to form predominantly blended individuals, though it is not uncommon for an individual or an entire population to be entirely one color (usually all black or all white). With the exception of Italy, in which black wolves can constitute 20-25% of the entire population, melanistic wolves rarely occur outside the North American continent.[17] A multicolor coat characteristically lacks any clear pattern other than it tends to be lighter on the animal's underside. Fur color sometimes corresponds with a given wolf population's environment; for example, all-white wolves are much more common in areas with perennial snow cover. Aging wolves acquire a grayish tint in their coats. It is often thought that the coloration of the wolf's pelage serves as a functional form of camouflage. This may not be entirely correct, as some scientists have concluded that the blended colors have more to do with emphasizing certain gestures during interaction.[9]

At birth, wolf pups tend to have darker fur and blue irises that will change to a yellow-gold or orange color when the pups are between 8 and 16 weeks old.[18]

File:Canis lupus pup closeup.jpg

Adolescent wolf with golden-yellow eyes.

Wolves' long, powerful muzzles help distinguish them from other canids, particularly coyotes and Golden Jackals, which have more narrow, pointed muzzles. In wolves, the anterior incisure of the nasal bones does not have a medial protrusion, unlike jackals. The cingulum on the external edge of the first upper molar is only slightly expressed, while it is broad and distinctly marked in jackals.[19]

Wolves differ from domestic dogs in a more varied nature. Anatomically, wolves have smaller orbital angles than dogs (>53 degrees for dogs compared with <45 degrees for wolves) and a comparatively larger brain capacity.[20] Larger paw size, yellow eyes, longer legs, and bigger teeth further distinguish adult wolves from other canids, especially dogs. Also, precaudal glands at the base of the tail are present in wolves but not in dogs.

Wolves and most larger dogs share identical dentition. The maxilla has six incisors, two canines, eight premolars, and four molars. The mandible has six incisors, two canines, eight premolars, and six molars.[21] The fourth upper premolars and first lower molars constitute the carnassial teeth, which are essential tools for shearing flesh. The long canine teeth are also important, in that they hold and subdue the prey. Capable of delivering up to 10,000 kPa (1450 lbf/in²) of pressure, a wolf's teeth are its main weapons as well as its primary tools.[9] This is roughly twice the pressure that a domestic dog of similar size can deliver.[22] The dentition of grey wolves is better suited to bone crushing than those of other modern canids, though it is not as specialised as that found in hyenas.[23]

Wolf saliva has been shown to reduce bacterial infection in wounds and accelerate tissue regeneration.[24]

Reproduction and life cycle

Generally, mating occurs between January and April — the higher the latitude, the later it occurs.[25] A pack usually produces a single litter unless the breeding male mates with one or more subordinate females. During the mating season, breeding wolves become very affectionate with one another in anticipation of the female's ovulation cycle. The pack tension rises as each mature wolf feels urged to mate. During this time, the breeding pair may be forced to prevent other wolves from mating with one another.[26] Incest rarely occurs, though Inbreeding depression has been reported to be a problem for wolves in Saskatchewan[27] and Isle Royale.[28] When the breeding female goes into estrus (which occurs once per year and lasts 5–14 days),[29] she and her mate will spend an extended time in seclusion. Pheromones in the female's urine and the swelling of her vulva make known to the male that the female is in heat. The female is unreceptive for the first few days of estrus, during which time she sheds the lining of her uterus; but when she begins ovulating again, the two wolves mate.

The gestation period lasts between 60 and 63 days. The pups, which weigh 0.5 kg (1 lb) at birth, are born blind, deaf, and completely dependent on their mother.[25][30] The average litter size is 5-6 pups, though litters of 10 can occur.[8] The pups reside in the den and stay there for two months. The den is usually on high ground near an open water source, and has an open chamber at the end of an underground or hillside tunnel that can be up to a few meters long.[14] During this time, the pups will become more independent, and will eventually begin to explore the area immediately outside the den before gradually roaming up to a mile away from it at around 5 weeks of age. Wolf growth rate is slower than that of coyotes and dholes.[31] They begin eating regurgitated foods after 2 weeks of feeding on milk, which in wolves has less fat and more protein and arginine than dog milk.[10] By this time, their milk teeth have emerged — and are fully weaned by 10 weeks. During the first weeks of development, the mother usually stays with her litter alone, but eventually most members of the pack will contribute to the rearing of the pups in some way.[25] After two months, the restless pups will be moved to a rendezvous site, where they can stay safely while most of the adults go out to hunt. One or two adults stay behind to ensure the safety of the pups. After a few more weeks, the pups are permitted to join the adults if they are able, and will receive priority on anything killed, their low ranks notwithstanding. Letting the pups fight for eating privileges results in a secondary ranking being formed among them, and allows them to practice the dominance/submission rituals that will be essential to their future survival in pack life.[25] During hunts, the pups remain ardent observers until they reach about 8 months of age, by which time they are large enough to participate actively.

Wolves typically reach sexual maturity after two or three years, at which point many of them will be compelled to leave their birth packs and seek out mates and territories of their own.[25][32] Wolves that reach maturity generally live 6 to 10 years in the wild, although in captivity they can live to twice that age.[33] High mortality rates give them a low overall life expectancy. Pups die when food is scarce; they can also fall prey to predators such as bears, tigers, or other wolves. The most significant causes of mortality for grown wolves are hunting and poaching, car accidents, and wounds inflicted while hunting prey. Although adult wolves may occasionally be killed by other predators, rival wolf packs are often their most dangerous non-human enemy.


Diseases recorded to be carried by wolves include brucella, deerfly fever, leptospirosis, foot-and-mouth disease, and anthrax.[8] Wolves are major hosts for rabies in Russia, Iran, Afghanistan, Iraq, and India.[8] Though wolves are not reservoirs for the disease, they can catch it from other species. Wolves develop an exceptionally severe aggressive state when rabid and can bite numerous people in a single attack. Before a vaccine was developed, bites were almost always fatal. Today, wolf bites can be treated, but the severity of rabid wolf attacks can sometimes result in outright death, or a bite near the head will make the disease act too fast for the treatment to take effect. Rabid attacks tend to cluster in winter and spring. With the reduction of rabies in Europe and North America, few rabid wolf attacks have been recorded, though some still occur annually in the Middle East.[34] Wolves also carry the Canine coronavirus, infections being most prelevant in winter months.[35]

Wolves in Russia have been recorded to carry over 50 different kinds of harmful parasites, including echinococcus, cysticercosis, and coenuri.[8] Wolves are also carriers of Trichinella spiralis. Between 1993-94, 148 wolf carcasses near Fairbanks, Alaska were examined for larvae, 54 (36%) of which were found to be infected. Prevalence of Trichinella spiralis in wolves is significantly related to age.[36] Wolves may carry Neospora caninum, which is of particular concern to farmers, as the disease can be spread to livestock; infected animals being three to thirteen times more likely to abort than those not infected.[37]

Despite their habit of carrying harmful diseases, large wolf populations are not heavily regulated by epizootic outbreaks as with other social canids. This is largely due to the habit of infected wolves vacating their packs, thus preventing mass contagion.[8]


Social structure

File:Wolf pack in Yellowstone NP.jpg

A wolf pack in Yellowstone National Park

Occasionally, single wolves are found in the wild, though packs are more common.[38][39] Lone wolves are typically old specimens driven from their pack or young adults in search of new territory.[40] Wolf packs tend not to be as compact or unified as those of African Wild Dogs and Spotted Hyenas,[41] though they are not as unstable as those of coyotes.[42] Normally, the pack consists of a male, a female, and their offspring, essentially making the pack a nuclear family.[38][39] The size of the pack may change over time and is controlled by several factors, including habitat, personalities of individual wolves within a pack, and food supply. Packs can contain between 2 and 20 wolves, though 8 is a more typical size.[43] An unusually large pack consisting of 36 wolves was reported in 1967 in Alaska.[44] While most breeding pairs are monogamous, there are exceptions.[45] Wolves will usually remain with their parents until the age of two years. Young from the previous season will support their parents in nursing pups of a later year. Wolf cubs are very submissive to their parents, and remain so after reaching sexual maturity. On occasion in captivity, subordinate wolves may rise up and challenge the dominant pair; such revolts may result in daughters killing mothers and sons killing fathers.[46] This behavior has never been documented in the wild,[47] and it is hypothesized that it only happens in captivity because dispersal is impossible.[48] There are no documented cases of subordinate wolves challenging the leadership of their parents.[38][39][45] Instead of openly challenging the leadership of the pack leaders, most young wolves between the ages of 1-4 years leave their family in order to search for a pack of their own.[45] Wolves acting unusually, such as epileptic pups or thrashing adults crippled by a trap or a gunshot, are usually killed by other members of their own pack.[9]

In literature, wolf packs are commonly portrayed as strongly hierarchic communities, with a dominant breeding "Alpha pair", a group of subordinate "Beta" individuals, and the scapegoat "Omega wolf" on the lowest end of the hierarchy. These descriptions are heavily based on research on captive wolves and cannot be extrapolated to wild wolf packs. In captivity, dispersal of mature individuals is impossible, resulting in frequent aggressive hierarchic encounters.[38][39] According to wolf biologist L. David Mech, "Calling a wolf an alpha is usually no more appropriate than referring to a human parent or a doe deer as an alpha. Any parent is dominant to its young offspring, so alpha adds no information."[45] The term may be valid under certain circumstances, such as when a pack adopts an unrelated dispersed wolf, when the breeding pair die, thus leaving the alpha position open, or when siblings disperse from a pack together. In these cases, the standard nuclear family model does not apply, which may cause wild wolves to behave more like they do in captivity.

Territorial Behaviors

Wolves are territorial animals. Studies have shown that the average size of a wolf pack's territory is close to 200 km2.[49] Wolf packs travel constantly in search of prey, covering roughly 9% of their territory per day (average 25km/d). The core of their territory is on average 35 km2, in which they spend 50% of their time.[50] Prey density tends to be much higher in the territory's surrounding areas. Despite this higher abundance of prey, wolves tend to avoid hunting in the fringes of their territory unless desperate, due to the possibility of fatal encounters with neighboring packs.[51] Established wolf packs rarely accept strangers into their territories, with one study on wolf mortality in Minnesota and the Denali National Park and Preserve concluding that 14–65% of wolf deaths were due to predation by other wolves.[52] In fact, 91% of wolf fatalities occur within 3.2km of the borders between neighboring territories.[53]

Communication between these boundaries is achieved in part through scent marking and howling. Howling is the principle means of spacing in wolf populations. It communicates the location of a core territory as well as enforcing a territory-independent buffer zone around the roaming wolf pack. This territory-independent buffer zone is a means of avoiding encounters with neighboring packs near territory borders.[54] Lone wolves, in contrast, rarely respond to howls, instead taking an "under the radar" approach. Howling communicates a core territory over time, as a wolf packs spends much of their time there.


Offspring of the breeding pair tend to stay with the pack for some portion of their adulthood. These "subordinate" wolves play a number of important roles in the pack, including participating in hunts, enforcing discipline and raising pups [55]. This behavior is achieved, in part, by an active suppression of reproduction in subordinate wolves by the breeding pair. Thus, while they remain members of the pack, they are unable to reproduce, even if there are other subordinate unrelated wolves in the pack. In many wolves, the drive to reproduce leads them to leave the pack. Dispersals occur at all times during the year, and typically involve wolves that have reached sexual maturity prior to the previous breeding season.[40] Dispersed wolves search for new territory and companionship, a hazardous process that could lead to death.[56] Successful dispersions end when the wolf has found another single wolf of the opposite sex and bonds with it. Thus it takes two such dispersals from two separate packs for a new breeding pair to be formed, for dispersing wolves from the same maternal pack tend not to mate.[26] Once two dispersing wolves meet and begin traveling together, they immediately begin the process of seeking out territory, preferably in time for the next mating season.[25] Dispersions can also end by the wolf joining a new pack of unrelated wolves, in which it will not have rights as a breeder.

Scent marking

File:Duma roll.jpg

Wolves scent-roll to bring scents back to the pack.

Wolves, like other canines, use scent marking to lay claim to anything—from territory to fresh kills.[57] Breeding wolves scent mark the most often, with males doing so more than females. The most widely used scent marker is urine. Male and female breeding wolves urine-mark objects with a raised-leg stance (all other pack members squat) to enforce rank and territory. They also use marks to identify food caches and to claim kills on behalf of the pack. Defecation markers are used for the same purpose as urine marks, and serve as a more visual warning, as well.[57] Defecation markers are particularly useful for navigation, keeping the pack from traversing the same terrain too often and also allowing each wolf to be aware of the whereabouts of its pack members. Above all, though, scent marking is used to inform other wolves and packs that a certain territory is occupied, and that they should therefore tread cautiously.

Wolves have scent glands all over their bodies, including at the base of the tail, between toes, and in the eyes, genitalia, and skin.[57] Pheromones secreted by these glands identify each individual wolf. A dominant wolf will "rub" its body against subordinate wolves to mark such wolves as being members of a particular pack. Wolves may also "paw" dirt to release pheromones instead of urine marking.[58]

Dietary habits

Wolves feed primarily on medium to large sized ungulates, including sheep, goats, chamois, pigs, deer, antelope, caribou, horses, moose, yaks, and bison. Other recorded large prey include marine mammals such as seals[59] and beached whales.[60] Cannibalism in wolves has been recorded to occur in times of food scarcity.[61] Solitary wolves depend more on smaller animals, which they capture by pouncing and pinning with their front paws, though lone wolves have been recorded to bring down prey as large as bison unaided.[10] Some wolf packs in Alaska and Western Canada have been observed to feed on salmon.[62][63] They also prey on rodents, game birds, and other small animals. A single wolf can eat up to 3.2-3.5 kg of food at a time, though they can eat as much as 13-15 kg when sufficiently hungry.[8] A wolf's yearly requirement is 1.5 tons of meat.[8] Wolves can go without sustenance for long periods of time, with one Russian record showing how one specimen survived for 17 days without food.[9] Research has shown that 2 weeks without food will not weaken a wolf's muscle activity.[8] After eating, wolves will drink large quantities of water to prevent uremic poisoning.[9] A wolf's stomach can hold up to 7.5 litres of water.[8]

File:Canis lupus pack surrounding Bison.jpg

An American Bison standing its ground, thereby increasing its chance for survival.

Wolves will typically avoid a potential prey item which does not conform to what they experienced during their lives. Generally, the greater the discrepancy to what wolves are previously accustomed to, the greater their resistance to exploring it. This is only increased should the new prey act bold, assertive, and fearless. Nevertheless, even if there is no food shortage, wolves will explore alternative prey if they continually come in close contact with it and habituate themselves.[64] Wolf packs show little strategic cooperation in hunting unlike lions, though wolf pairs have been shown to strategize when attacking large prey.[10] When hunting large prey, wolves typically attempt to conceal themselves as they approach the selected animal. Often, they will wait for the prey to graze, when it is distracted. Wolves generally do not engage in long chases, and will usually stop a pursuit after a chase of 10-180 metres, though there has been one documented case of a wolf chasing a moose for 36 km.[8] Wolves typically kill large prey by tearing at their haunches and perineum areas, causing massive bleeding.[8] Sometimes, the wolves will bite the throat, severing the windpipe or jugular.[65] A single bite can cause a wound up to 10-15 cm in length. A large deer in optimum health will succumb to three bites at the perineum area after a chase of 150 metres. Once the prey collapses, the wolves will tear open the abdominal cavity and commence feeding on the animal, sometimes while it is still alive.[8] On some occasions, wolves will not press an attack, and will wait for their prey to die from their wounds before feeding begins.[66] Pack status is reinforced during feeding. The breeding pair usually eats first, starting with the heart, liver, and lungs. Wolves of intermediate rank will prevent low ranking animals from feeding until the dominant pair finishes eating.[24] The stomach is eaten, though the contents are left untouched. The leg muscles are eaten next, with the hide and bones being the last to be eaten.[10] There are exceptions, with some wolf packs having been reported to show preferences to their prey's fat deposits rather than internal organs.[67]

Though commonly portrayed as targeting solely sick or infirm animals,[32] there is little evidence that they actively limit themselves to such targets. Rather, the evidence shows that wolves will simply target the easiest options available, which as well as sick and infirm animals, can also include young animals and pregnant females.[8] Research from the former Soviet Union for example shows that in some cases, 93% of all killed prey may have no illnesses or infirmities.[8] In the Nenets Autonomous Okrug, wolves were shown to select pregnant female domestic caribou and calves rather than infirm specimens, with some reports showing that wolves bypassed emaciated, sickly animals altogether in favour of well fed ones.[8] However, most healthy, fit individuals will not run from wolves and will instead choose to stand their ground, thus increasing the possibility of injury to the attacking wolves. Wolves are more likely to yield when confronted by large, assertive prey, for which their killing success rates are as low as 20%.[68] Wolves have on occasion been observed to engage in acts of surplus killing. An example of this was reported by a Conservation Officer for the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources, stating that during a spring snow storm, two wolves killed 21 deer, consuming only two.[69] Surplus killing in the wild peaks in winter months when heavy snow impedes the movements of large hooved prey.[8] Wolves will occasionally attack pregnant ungulates to feed on the fetus(es), whilst leaving the mother uneaten.[70]

Wolves will on occasion supplement their diet with vegetation, with some areas of the former Soviet Union reporting that wolves cause serious damage to watermelon plantations.[8] In certain localities in Eurasia where there is little natural prey, wolves will forage in garbage dumps. There are few cases of wolves in North America relying on garbage for food,[10] though in 2005, a wolf pack in Saskatchewan had been regularly seen in broad daylight at a garbage dump, adjusting their arrival with that of the front-end loader carrying garbage. Wolves which feed regularly in garbage dumps often display bolder behaviour toward humans than those that hunt game.[67]

Interspecific predatory relationships

Wolves typically dominate other canid species in areas where they are sympatric. In North America, wolves are generally intolerant of coyotes in their territory; two years after their reintroduction to the Yellowstone National Park, the wolves were responsible for a near 50% drop in coyote populations through both competition and predation.[71] Wolves have been reported to dig coyote pups from their dens and kill them. Wolves typically do not consume the coyotes they kill. There are no records of coyotes killing wolves,[10] though they have been known to gang up on wolves if they outnumber them.[71] Near identical interactions have been observed in Greece between wolves and Golden Jackals.[72] Wolves may kill foxes, though not as frequently as they do with coyotes. Raccoon Dogs are also reportedly preyed upon.[10]

In North America, wolves are usually hostile toward cougars and will kill cubs if given the opportunity. The wolf's relation to adult cougars is more complex. A pack often takes advantage of cougars, stealing kills and sometimes killing mature adults. Interactions between solitary wolves and cougars are rarer, but the two species have killed each other.[73] National Park Service cougar specialist Kerry Murphy stated that the cougar usually is at an advantage on a one to one basis, considering it can effectively use its claws, as well as its teeth, unlike the wolf which relies solely on its teeth. Yellowstone officials have reported that attacks between cougars and wolves are not uncommon. Multiple incidents of cougars taking wolves and vice versa have been recorded in Yellowstone National Park. However, researchers in Montana have found that wolves regularly kill cougars in the area, though they did not specify whether or not this was a pack situation.[74]

File:Canis lupus pack fighting Ursus arctos horribilis (illustration).jpg

Illustration of a wolf pack confronting a Grizzly Bear by Adolph Murie (1944)

Brown Bears are encountered in both Eurasia and North America. The majority of interactions between wolves and Brown Bears usually amount to nothing more than mutual avoidance. Serious confrontations depend on the circumstances of the interaction, though the most common factor is defence of food and young. Brown Bears will use their superior size to intimidate wolves from their kills and when sufficiently hungry, will raid wolf dens. Brown Bears usually dominate wolves on kills, though they rarely prevail against wolves defending den sites. Wolves in turn have been observed killing bear cubs, to the extent of even driving off the defending mother bears.[10] Deaths in wolf/bear skirmishes are considered very rare occurrences, the individual power of the bear and the collective strength of the wolf pack usually being sufficient deterrents to both sides.[75] Encounters with American Black Bears occur solely in the Americas; their interactions with wolves are much rarer than those of Brown Bears, due to differences in habitat preferences. The majority of Black Bear encounters with wolves occur in the species' northern range, with no interactions being recorded in Mexico. Wolves have been recorded to kill Black Bears on numerous occasions without eating them. Unlike Brown Bears, Black Bears frequently lose against wolves in disputes over kills.[10]

In areas where wolves and tigers share ranges, such as the Russian Far East, the two species typically display a great deal of dietary overlap, resulting in intense competition. Wolf and tiger interactions are well documented in Sikhote-Alin, which until the beginning of the 20th century, held very few wolves. It is thought by certain experts that wolf numbers increased in the region after tigers were largely eliminated during the Russian colonization in the late 1800s and early 1900s. This is corroborated by native inhabitants of the region claiming that they had no memory of wolves inhabiting Sikohte-Alin until the 1930s, when tiger numbers decreased.[76] Tigers depress wolf numbers, either to the point of localized extinction or to such low numbers as to make them a functionally insignificant component of the ecosystem. Wolves appear capable of escaping competitive exclusion from tigers only when human persecution decreases the latter's numbers.[77] Today wolves are considered scarce in tiger inhabited areas, being found in scattered pockets, and usually seen traveling as loners or in small groups. First hand accounts on interactions between the two species indicate that tigers occasionally chase wolves from their kills, while wolves will scavenge from tiger kills. Tigers are not known to prey on wolves, though there are four records of tigers killing wolves without consuming them.[76] This competitive exclusion of wolves by tigers has been used by Russian conservationists to convince hunters in the Far East to tolerate the big cats, as they limit ungulate populations less than wolves, and are effective in controlling the latter's numbers.[78]

Wolves may occasionally encounter Striped Hyenas in the Middle East and Central and South Asia, mostly in disputes over carcasses. Though hyenas usually dominate wolves on a one to one basis, wolf packs have been reported to displace lone hyenas from carcasses.[79] Wolf remains have been found in Cave Hyena den sites, though it is unknown if the wolves were killed or scavenged upon.[80] Unlike cave hyenas, which preferentially preyed on lowland animals such as horses, wolves relyed more on slope-dwelling ibex and Roe Deer, thus minimising competition. Wolves and Cave Hyenas seem to display negative abundance relations over time, with wolf populations expanding their ranges as hyenas disappeared. [81]


Body language

File:Canis lupus arabic.JPG

The posture and facial expression of this Arabian wolf is defensive and gives warning to other wolves to be cautious.

File:Grey Wolf 4.jpg

This facial expression shows fear.

Wolves can communicate visually through a wide variety of expressions and moods ranging from subtle signals, such as a slight shift in weight, to more obvious ones, such as rolling on their backs to indicate complete submission.[82]

  • Dominance – A dominant wolf stands stiff legged and tall. The ears are erect and forward, and the hackles bristle slightly. Often the tail is held vertically and curled toward the back. This display asserts the wolf's rank to others in the pack. A dominant wolf may stare at a submissive one, pin it to the ground, "ride up" on its shoulders, or even stand on its hind legs.
  • Submission (active) – During active submission, the entire body is lowered, and the lips and ears are drawn back. Sometimes active submission is accompanied by muzzle licking, or the rapid thrusting out of the tongue and lowering of the hindquarters. The tail is placed down, or halfway or fully between the legs, and the muzzle often points up to the more dominant animal. The back may be partly arched as the submissive wolf humbles itself to its superior; a more arched back and more tucked tail indicate a greater level of submission.
  • Submission (passive) – Passive submission is more intense than active submission. The wolf rolls on its back and exposes its vulnerable throat and underside. The paws are drawn into the body. This posture is often accompanied by whimpering.
  • Anger – An angry wolf's ears are erect, and its fur bristles. The lips may curl up or pull back, and the incisors are displayed. The wolf may also arch its back, lash out, or snarl.
  • Fear – A frightened wolf attempts to make itself look small and less conspicuous; the ears flatten against the head, and the tail may be tucked between the legs, as with a submissive wolf. There may also be whimpering or barks of fear, and the wolf may arch its back.
  • Defensive – A defensive wolf flattens its ears against its head.
  • Aggression – An aggressive wolf snarls and its fur bristles. The wolf may crouch, ready to attack if necessary.
  • Suspicion – Pulling back of the ears shows a wolf is suspicious. The wolf also narrows its eyes. The tail of a wolf that senses danger points straight out, parallel to the ground.
  • Relaxation – A relaxed wolf's tail points straight down, and the wolf may rest sphinx-like or on its side. The wolf may also wag its tail. The further down the tail droops, the more relaxed the wolf is.
  • Tension – An aroused wolf's tail points straight out, and the wolf may crouch as if ready to spring.
  • Happiness – As dogs do, a wolf may wag its tail if in a joyful mood. The tongue may roll out of the mouth.
  • Hunting – A wolf that is hunting is tensed, and therefore the tail is horizontal and straight.
  • Playfulness – A playful wolf holds its tail high and wags it. The wolf may frolic and dance around, or bow by placing the front of its body down to the ground, while holding the rear high, sometimes wagged. This resembles the playful behavior of domestic dogs.

Howling and other vocalisations


Howling adult wolf at the UK Wolf Conservation Trust

Wolf howls, which can last from 0.5-11 seconds, typically have a frequency of 150-780 Hz.[17] Howling helps pack members keep in touch, allowing them to communicate effectively in thickly forested areas or over great distances. Howling also helps to call pack members to a specific location. Howling can also serve as a declaration of territory, as shown in a dominant wolf's tendency to respond to a human imitation of a "rival" wolf in an area the wolf considers its own. This behavior is stimulated when a pack has something to protect, such as a fresh kill. As a rule of thumb, large packs will more readily draw attention to themselves than will smaller packs. Adjacent packs may respond to each others' howls, which can mean trouble for the smaller of the two. Wolves therefore tend to howl with great care.[83] Wolves will also howl for communal reasons. Some scientists speculate that such group sessions strengthen the wolves' social bonds and camaraderie—similar to community singing among humans.[83] During such choral sessions, wolves will howl at different tones and varying pitches, making it difficult to estimate the number of wolves involved. This confusion of numbers makes a listening rival pack wary of what action to take. For example, confrontation could be disastrous if the rival pack gravely underestimates the howling pack's numbers. A wolf's howl may be heard from up to ten miles (16 km) away, depending on weather conditions. Observations of wolf packs suggest that howling occurs most often during the twilight hours, preceding the adults' departure to the hunt and following their return. Studies also show that wolves howl more frequently during the breeding season and subsequent rearing process. The pups themselves begin howling soon after emerging from their dens and can be provoked into howling sessions easily over the following two months. Such indiscriminate howling usually is intended for communication, and does not harm the wolf so early in its life.[83] Howling becomes less indiscriminate as wolves learn to distinguish howling pack members from rival wolves. The Arabian and Iranian wolf subspecies are unusual as they are not known to howl.[9][84]

Growling, while teeth are bared, is the most visual warning wolves use. Wolf growls have a distinct, deep, bass-like quality which can range from 250-1,500 Hz.[17] It is often used to threaten rivals, though not necessarily to defend themselves. Wolves also growl at other wolves while being aggressively dominant. Wolves bark when nervous or when alerting other wolves of danger but do so very discreetly and will not generally bark loudly or repeatedly as dogs do. Instead they use a low-key, breathy "whuf" sound which can measure from 320-904 Hz[17] to immediately get attention from other wolves. Wolves also "bark-howl" by adding a brief howl to the end of a bark. Wolves bark-howl for the same reasons they normally bark. Generally, pups bark and bark-howl much more frequently than adults, using these vocalizations to cry for attention, care, or food. A lesser known sound is the rally. Wolves will gather as a group and, amidst much tail-wagging and muzzle licking, emit a high-pitched wailing noise interspersed with something similar to (but not the same as) a bark. Rallying is often a display of submission to an alpha by the other wolves.[85] Wolves also whimper, a sound with a maximum range of 3,500 Hz[17], usually when submitting to other wolves. Wolf pups whimper when they need a reassurance of security from their parents or other wolves.


The gray wolf is a member of the genus Canis, which comprises between 7 and 10 species. It is one of six species termed 'wolf', the others being the Red Wolf (Canis rufus), the Indian Wolf (Canis indica), the Himalayan Wolf (Canis himalayaensis), the Eastern Wolf (Canis lycaon), and the Ethiopian Wolf (Canis simensis), although concerning a couple of these there is still some uncertainty as to whether they should be considered subspecies of Canis lupus or species in their own right. Recent genetic research suggests that the Indian Wolf, originally considered only as a subpopulation of the Iranian Wolf (Canis lupus pallipes), represents a distinct species (Canis indica). Similar results were obtained for the Himalayan Wolf, which is traditionally placed into the Tibetan Wolf (Canis lupus laniger) [86].

With respect to common names, spelling differences result in the alternative spelling grey wolf. As the first-named and most widespread of species termed "wolf", gray wolves are often simply referred to as wolves. It was one of the many species originally described by Carl Linnaeus in his eighteenth-century work, Systema Naturae, and it still bears its original classification, Canis lupus.[87] The binomial name is derived from the Latin Canis, meaning "dog", and lupus, "wolf".[88]

File:Canis lupus arabs head front.JPG

Desert dwelling grey wolf subspecies, such as this Arabian wolf, tend to be smaller than their more northern cousins.

Classifying gray wolf subspecies can be challenging. Although scientists have proposed a host of subspecies, wolf taxonomy at this level remains controversial.[89] Indeed, only a single wolf species may exist. Taxonomic modification will likely continue for years to come.

Current theories propose that the gray wolf first evolved in Eurasia during the early Pleistocene. The rate of changes observed in DNA sequence date the Asiatic lineage to about 800,000 years, as opposed to the American and European lineages which stretch back only 150,000.[90] The gray wolf migrated into North America from the Old World, probably via the Bering land bridge, around 400,000 years ago. However, they did not become widespread until 12,000 years ago, when the native American megafauna began dying out. It is thought by certain experts that the wolf's Eurasian origin could account for it's relative inability to modify it's behaviour in light of human encroachment, compared to native American predators like black bears, cougars and coyotes which were under greater predation pressure from larger, now extinct predators.[91] The gray wolf then coexisted with the Dire Wolf (Canis dirus). Although more heavily built and possessing a stronger bite, the dire wolf's dentition was less adept at crushing bones as the grey wolf was.[23] The Dire Wolf ranged from southern Canada to South America until about 8,000 years ago when climate changes are thought to have caused it to become extinct. After that the gray wolf is thought to have become the prime canine predator in North America.


Main article: Subspecies of Canis lupus

At one point, up to 50 gray wolf subspecies were recognized. Though no true consensus has been reached, this list can be condensed to 13–15 general extant subspecies. Modern classifications take into account the DNA, anatomy, distribution, and migration of various wolf colonies. As of 2005Template:Dated maintenance category, 37 subspecies are currently described, including the dingo and the domestic dog.[92]

Relation to the dog

Much debate has centered on the relationship between the wolf and the domestic dog, though most authorities see the wolf as the dog's direct ancestor (see Origin of the domestic dog). Because the canids have evolved recently and different canids interbreed readily, untangling the relationships has been difficult. However, molecular systematics now indicate very strongly that domestic dogs and wolves are closely related, and the domestic dog is now normally classified as a subspecies of the wolf: Canis lupus familiaris. DNA evidence has demonstrated that canis lupus lupus and canis lupus familiaris are genetically very similar. Both species have 39 chromosomes, representing roughly 19000 genes spread over 2.4 billion base pairs [93] In a 2005 study reported in Nature [93], genetic similarity was assessed within breed, between breeds, and between subspecies by measuring the frequency of single nucleotide polymorphisms. The dogs studies were genetically most similar to others of the same breed (SNP frequency roughly 1/1600). The primary breed studied, the Boxer, was also genetically similar to other breeds (SNP frequency roughly 1/900), although there was some variance depending on breed. For instance, The Boxer was found to be significantly less similar to Alaskan Malamutes (SNP frequency roughly 1/750). The Boxer was found to be least similar to other canids, including canis lupus lupus (SNP frequency roughly 1/580) and coyotes (SNP frequency roughly 1/400). From these analyses, it can be estimated that the variance between canis lupus lupus and canis lupus familiaris is roughly twice as great as the variance within the subspecies canis lupus familiaris, and four times as great as the variance within an individual breed.

All skeletal dog remains found from the upper Paleolithic and Mesolithic periods are from relatively small specimens, therefore pointing to either the Arabian or Iranian wolf as the most likely progenitor.[94] Experts such as Raymond Coppinger theorize that the domestication of wolves may have occurred as a side effect of primitive humans disposing of waste in landfills close to their settlements, attracting wolves to easy meals. Natural selection favoured wolves which were less prone to fleeing upon seeing approaching humans; physical changes quickly appeared in subsequent generations, namely a reduction in head and tooth size, as the abundance of easily acquired food made the hunting of large game unnecessary.[15] North American domestic dogs are believed to have originated from Old World wolves. No known dog breed is derived from wolves indigenous to North America. The first people to colonize North America 12,000 to 14,000 years ago brought their dogs with them from Asia, and apparently did not separately domesticate the wolves they found in the New World.[95]

Some experts however reject the ancestral wolf hypothesis based on substantial differences in behaviour and morphology.[4] Compared to equally sized wolves, dogs tend to have 20% smaller skulls and 10% smaller brains, as well as proportionately smaller teeth than other canid species.[15] The premolars and molars of dogs are much more crowded. Dog's teeth also have less complex cusp patterns, and their tympanic bulla is much smaller than in wolves.[94] Dogs require fewer calories to function than wolves. The dog's diet of human refuse in antiquity made the large brains and jaw muscles needed for hunting unnecessary. It is thought by certain experts that the dog's limp ears are a result of atrophy of the jaw muscles.[15] The paws of a dog are half the size of those of a wolf, and their tails tend to curl upwards, another trait not found in wolves.[9] Dogs are not monogamous, and breeding in feral packs is not restricted to a dominant breeding pair. Male dogs differ from male wolves by the fact that they play no role in raising their puppies, and do not kill the young of other females to increase their own reproductive success.[20] Dogs differ also from wolves by the fact that they do not regurgitate food for their young, nor the young of other dogs in the same territory.[15]

Interspecific hybridization

Main article: Canid hybrid
File:Wolf-malamute hybrid.jpg

A wolf-dog hybrid with malamute ancestry

Wolves can interbreed with domestic dogs and produce fertile offspring. Wolf-dog hybrids are generally said to be naturally healthy animals, and are affected by less inherited diseases than most breeds of dog. Wolfdogs are usually healthier than either parent due to heterosis.[96] According to the National Wolfdog Alliance, 40 U.S. states effectively forbid the ownership, breeding and importation of wolfdogs, while others impose some form of regulation upon ownership.[97] Most European nations, as well as many U.S. counties and municipalities, also either outlaw the animal entirely or put restrictions on ownership.[98]. Although wolves in the wild will usually kill dogs, matings of dogs and wild wolves has been confirmed in some populations through genetic testing. As the survival of most Continental wolf packs is severely threatened, scientists fear that the creation of wolf-dog hybrid populations in the wild is a threat to the continued existence of some isolated wolf populations. Hybridization in the wild usually occurs near human habitations where wolf density is low and dogs are common. However, extensive wolf-dog hybridization is not supported by morphological evidence, and analyses of mtDNA sequences have revealed that such matings are rare.[10] In some cases, the presence of dewclaws is considered a useful, but not absolute indicator of dog gene contamination in wild wolves. Dewclaws are the vestigial fifth toes of the hind legs common in domestic dogs but thought absent from pure wolves, which only have four hind toes.[13] Observations on wild wolf hybrids in the former Soviet Union indicate that wolf hybrids in a wild state may form larger packs than pure wolves, and have greater endurance when chasing prey.[8]


The Red Wolf has been shown through various genetic testing techniques to be a wolf/coyote hybrid[99]

Wolves and coyotes can interbreed and produce fertile offspring, a fact which calls into question their status as two separate species.[100] The offspring, known as a coywolf, is generally intermediate in size to both parents, being larger than a pure coyote, but smaller than a pure wolf. A study showed that of 100 coyotes collected in Maine, 22 had half or more wolf ancestry, and one was 89 percent wolf. A theory has been proposed that the large eastern coyotes in Canada are actually hybrids of the smaller western coyotes and wolves that met and mated decades ago as the coyotes moved toward New England from their earlier western ranges.[101] The Red Wolf is thought by certain scientists to be in fact a wolf/coyote hybrid rather than a unique species. Strong evidence for hybridization was found through genetic testing which showed that red wolves have only 5% of their alleles unique from either grey wolves or coyotes. Genetic distance calculations have indicated that red wolves are intermediate between coyotes and grey wolves, and that they bear great similarity to wolf/coyote hybrids in southern Quebec and Minnesota. Analyses of mitochondrial DNA showed that existing Red Wolf populations are predominantly coyote in origin.[99]

Current status

Main article: List of grey wolf populations by country
File:Present distribution of wolf subspecies.gif

Present distribution of the various wolf subspecies

Though once abundant over much of North America and Eurasia, the gray wolf inhabits a very small portion of its former range because of widespread destruction of its habitat, human encroachment of its habitat, and the resulting human-wolf encounters that sparked broad extirpation. Considered as a whole, however, the gray wolf is regarded as being of least concern for extinction according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature. Today, wolves are protected in some areas, hunted for sport in others, or may be subject to extermination as perceived threats to livestock and pets.

Wolves tend to have difficulty adapting to change, and are often referred to as an indicator species; a species delineating an ecoregion or indicating an environmental condition such as a disease outbreak, pollution, species competition, or climate change. Wolves do not seem to be able to adapt as readily to expanding civilization the way coyotes do. While human expansion has seen an increase in the latter's numbers, it has caused a drop in those of the former.[15]

Relationships with humans

In folklore and mythology

Main article: Wolves in folklore, religion and mythology
File:Romolo e remo.jpg

Romulus and Remus nursed by the She-wolf by Peter Paul Rubens (Rome, Capitoline Museums)

Humans historically have had a complex and varied viewpoint of wolves. In many parts of the world, wolves were respected and revered, while in others they were feared and held in distaste. The latter viewpoint was notably accentuated in European folklore beginning in the Christian era, though wolves did feature as heraldic animals on the arms and crests of numerous noble families. Many languages have names meaning "wolf", examples including: Scandinavian Ulf, Albanian "Ujk", Hebrew Ze'ev, Hungarian Farkas, Serbian Vuk, Ukrainian Vovk, Romanian Lupu, Lupescu/Lupulescu, and Bulgarian Vǎlko. Wolves also figure prominently in proverbs. Many Chinese proverbs use wolves as a description towards any ill-willed person with a hidden agenda like Wolf hearted (狼子野心) which could also connote to the impossibility of taming bad people, while Wolf heart; dog lungs (狼心狗肺) refers to an ungrateful person who later betrays someone who previously helped them. The Kazakh language has up to 20 proverbs referring to wolves, while the Russian language has 253.[8]

Attacks on humans

Main article: Wolf attacks on humans

One of four photographs taken by Chris van Gelder of Todd Svarchopf fending off an aggressive wolf on November 4th 2005, four days before the Kenton Joel Carnegie wolf attack

Wild wolves are generally timid around humans, though overall, how they react to people generally depends on prior experiences with humans[10] rather than inherent behaviour.[91] When they have sufficient habitat, food, and are occasionally hunted, wolves will usually try to avoid contact with people, to the point of even abandoning their kills when an approaching human is detected[64], though there are several reported circumstances (provocation, habituation, rabies, mistaken identity, teaching cubs how to hunt, hybridization with dogs and seasonal prey scarcity), in which wolves have been recorded to act aggressively toward humans.[34][102] Unprovoked attacks by non-rabid wolves are rare, though they have happened. The majority of victims of unprovoked healthy wolves tend to be women and children.[34] Historically, attacks by non-rabid wolves tended to be clustered in space and time, indicating that human-killing was not a normal behavior for the average wolf, but was rather a specialized behavior that single wolves or packs developed and maintained until they were killed.[103] However, compared to other carnivorous mammals known to attack humans, the frequency with which wolves have been recorded to kill people is rather low, indicating that though potentially dangerous, wolves are among the least threatening for their size and predatory potential.[34] Wolf attacks were an occasional but widespread feature of life in pre-20th century Europe.[103] In France alone, historical records indicate that between the years 1580-1830, 3,069 people were killed by wolves, 1,857 of which were non-rabid.[104] The case of the Beast of Gevaudan is well documented, though whether or not the culprit in question was a wolf or a wolf-like animal is still debated.[34] There are numerous documented accounts of wolf attacks in the Asian continent, with three Indian states reporting a large number of non-rabid attacks in recent decades. These attacks were well documented by trained biologists.[34][105] North America has fewer cases of verified wolf attacks than Europe and Asia. In many sections of the United States, there was a propaganda campaign to garner support for state-sponsored bounties for killed wolves, thus resulting in an economic incentive to exaggerate the effects of wolf depredation, and likely led to false or over-enthusiastic claims of wolf attacks. Many of these accounts have been shown to be factually incorrect.[9] However, more aggressive encounters have been recorded as humans begin to encroach on North American wolf habitat more. Retired wolf biologist Mark McNay compiled 80 events in Alaska and Canada where wolves closely approached or attacked people, finding 39 cases of aggression by apparently healthy wolves, and 29 cases of fearless behavior by nonaggressive wolves.[106]

Livestock and pet predation


Waiting for a Chinook, by C.M. Russell, depicting wolves harassing a steer.

Wolf depredations on livestock tend to increase in September and October when females teach their cubs how to hunt. Wolves usually attack livestock when they are grazing, though it is not uncommon for some wolves to break into fenced enclosures.[8] Sheep are the most frequently recorded victims in Europe, in India it is goats, in Mongolia it is horses, while North American records show wolves having a greater tendency to attack cattle and turkeys.[10] Wolves usually disregard size or age on medium sized prey such as sheep and goats.[107] According to Theodore Roosevelt, the small wolves of the Southern Plains rarely attack full grown cattle or steers, preferring instead young or sick animals, while the large wolves of the northern Rockies can kill fully grown steers unaided.[108] Injuries may include a crushed skull, severed spine, disembowelment and massive tissue damage. Wolves will also kill sheep by attacking the throat, similar to the manner in which coyotes kill sheep. Wolf kills can be distinguished from coyote kills by the far greater damage to the underlying tissue. Surplus killing often occurs when within the confines of human made livestock shelters.[107] One specimen known as the "Aquila Wolf" in Arizona was known to have killed 65 sheep in one night and 40 at another time.[66] Sometimes, the animals survive, but are left with severe mutilations, sometimes warranting euthanasia.[66] Livestock with prior experience of a wolf attack may develop behavioural problems, with some animals having been reported to run through barbed wire fences upon hearing wolves, or refusing to go out into pastures, causing severe weight loss.[8] They may also become more aggressive toward both human handlers and herding dogs.[37] Animals severely injured by wolves often appear dazed and are reluctant to move due to the deep pain.[107] It is often difficult to confirm kills, seeing as wolves often eat all of the animal they have killed if it is below the size of a calf.[66] In some cases, wolves do not need to physically attack livestock in order to negatively affect them; the stress livestock experiences in being vigilant for wolves may result in miscarriages, decreased weight gain, and a decrease in meat quality.[37] Some non- or less-lethal methods of protecting livestock from wolves have been under development for the past decade. Such methods include rubber ammunition and use of guard animals.[109] Recorded wolf howls have also been shown to be effective in at least one incident.[24]

The extent of livestock losses to wolves vary regionally; from being statistically insignificant, to having critical effects on local economies. In North America, loss of livestock by wolves makes up only a small percentage of total losses. In the United States, wolf predation is low compared to other human or animal sources of livestock loss.[110] Since the state of Montana began recording livestock losses due to wolves back in 1987, only 1,200 sheep and cattle have been killed. 1,200 killings in twenty years is not very significant when in the greater Yellowstone region 8,300 cattle and 13,000 sheep die from natural causes. According to the International Wolf Center, a Minnesota-based organization:

To put depredation in perspective, in 1986 the wolf population was at about 1,300–1,400, there were an estimated 232,000 cattle and 16,000 sheep in Minnesota's wolf range. During that year 26 cattle, about 0.01% of the cattle available, and 13 sheep, around 0.08% of the sheep available, were verified as being killed by wolves. Similarly, in 1996 an estimated 68,000 households owned dogs in wolf range and only 10, approximately 0.00015% of the households, experienced wolf depredation.

— Wolf Depredation, International Wolf Center, Teaching the World about Wolves[111]

Furthermore, Jim Dutcher, a film maker who raised a captive wolf pack observed that wolves are very reluctant to try meat that they have not eaten or seen another wolf eat before possibly explaining why livestock depredation is unlikely except in cases of desperation.[112]

The results however differ in Eurasia. Greece for example reports that between April 1989 and June 1991, 21000 sheep and goats plus 2729 cattle were killed. In 1998 it was 5894 sheep and goats, 880 cattle and very few horses. [72] A study on livestock predation taken in Tibet showed that the wolf was the most prominent predator, accounting for 60% of the total livestock losses, followed by the snow leopard (38%) and lynx (2%). Goats were the most frequent victims (32%), followed by sheep (30%), yak (15%), and horses (13%). Wolves killed horses significantly more and goats less than would be expected from their relative abundance.[113] In 1987, Kazakhstan reported over 150,000 domestic livestock losses to wolves, with 200,000 being reported a year later.[8]

In some areas, dogs are a major food source for wolves. Reports from Croatia indicate that dogs are killed more frequently than sheep. Wolves in Russia apparently limit feral dog populations. In Wisconsin, more compensation has been paid for dog losses than livestock.[10] Some wolf pairs have been reported to predate on dogs by having one wolf lure the dog out into heavy brush where the second animal waits in ambush.[8] In some instances, wolves have displayed an uncharacteristic fearlessness of humans and buildings when attacking dogs, to an extent where they have to be beaten off or killed.[114] Specially bred Livestock guardian dogs have been used to repel wolves from pastures, though their primary function has more to do with intimidating the wolves rather than fighting them.[115]

Wolf hunting

Main article: Wolf hunting

A 19th century painting depicting the conclusion of a wolf hunt

Wolves are usually hunted for sport, for their skins, to protect livestock, and in some rare cases to protect humans. Historically, the hunting of wolves was a huge, capital and manpower intensive operation, requiring miles of netting, specialized net-carts and big drying sheds for storing and drying nets. The threat wolves posed to both livestock and people was significant enough to warrant the conscription of whole villages under threat of punishment, despite the disruption of economic activities and reduced taxes.[91] Some cultures, such as the Apache, would hunt wolves as a rite of passage.[116] Wolves are usually hunted in heavy brush and are considered especially challenging to hunt, due to their elusive nature and sharp senses.[117] Wolves are notoriously shy and difficult to kill, having been stated to be almost as hard to still hunt as cougars, and being far more problematic to dispatch with poison, traps or hounds. Wolves though generally do not defend themselves as effectively as cougars or bears.[108] Some wolves will evade capture for very long periods of time and display great cunning. One specimen nicknamed "Three Toes of Harding County" in South Dakota eluded its pursuers for 13 years before finally being caught.[66] Another wolf nicknamed "Rags the digger" near Meeker, Colorado would deliberately ruin trap lines by digging up traps without tripping them.[118] In Sport hunting, wolves are usually taken in late Autumn and early Winter, when their pelts are of the highest quality and because the heavy snow makes it easier for the wolves to be tracked.[117] Wolves have occasionally been hunted for food, the meat having been variously described as being tough and tasting like chicken.[119]

The hunting of grey wolves, while originally actively endorsed in many countries, has become a controversial issue in some nations. Opponents see it as cruel, unnecessary and based on misconceptions, while proponents argue that it is vital for the conservation of game herds and as pest control.[120]


Main article: Wolf reintroduction

North America

File:Gray wolf endangered species sheet.jpg

Gray wolf endangered species sheet

In North America, debate about wolf reintroduction is ongoing and often heated, both where reintroduction is being considered and where it has already occurred. Where wolves have been successfully reintroduced, as in the greater Yellowstone area and Idaho, reintroduction opponents continue to cite livestock predation, surplus killing, and economic hardships caused by wolves.[121] Opponents in prospective areas echo these same concerns. These reintroductions were the culmination of over two decades of research and debate. Ultimately, the economic concerns of the local ranching industry were dealt with when Defenders of Wildlife decided to establish a fund that would compensate ranchers for livestock lost to wolves, shifting the economic burden from industry to the wolf proponents themselves.[122] As of 2005, there are over 450 Mackenzie Valley wolves in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem and over 1,000 in Idaho. Both populations have long since met their recovery goals. Lessons learned from this ordeal may yet prove useful where wolf reintroduction continues to create a sharp divide between industry and environmental interests, as it has in Arizona (where the Mexican Wolf was released beginning in 1998).

Proponents claim that the food chain within the Yellowstone ecosystem has been re-ordered to deliver a banquet that favors a more varied array of species. Prior to wolf reintroduction, high numbers of elk were believed to be linked to reductions in aspen and willow communities, which negatively affected beaver and moose. Pre-wolf coyote numbers were much larger, affecting small rodent populations, foxes, and the production of pronghorn antelope. Scavengers had slimmer pickings. Today, with wolves taking elk, reducing their numbers, and leaving more carcasses on the landscape, grizzlies and wolverines have easier access to more meat, meaning a better chance for larger litters of cubs and pups. Coyote numbers have been significantly reduced, meaning more mice and pocket gophers for foxes and avian predators like hawks and eagles.[123]

Opponents argue that the Yellowstone reintroductions were unnecessary, as American wolves were never in danger of biological extinction. Opponents have stated that wolves are of little commercial benefit, as cost estimates on wolf recovery are from $200,000 to $1 million per wolf. Tourism based on wolves is problematic, as wolves are elusive and very hard to spot; In 1996, less than 0.5% of visitors to Yellowstone ever saw a wolf. Hunters have also cited the possibility of large ungulate population drops in within the park due to wolf predation. National Park Service Biologist Wayne Brewster informed guides and outfitters living north of Yellowstone National Park, to expect a fifty percent (50%) drop in harvestable game when wolves were reintroduced to Yellowstone National Park.[124] This was confirmed when in 2006, the Yellowstone elk herd had in fact shrunk to 50% since the mid 1990s. Two thirty day periods of tracking radio collared wolves showed that 77-97% of prey species documented by wolves in the park were elk. Outside the park, numerous hunting outfitters have been run out of business due to elk hunting opportunities being reduced by 90%.[125] Although Defenders of Wildlife have established a $100,000 compensation program to reimburse ranchers in Wyoming, Idaho, Montana, New Mexico and Arizona for losses caused by wolves, reintroduction opponents have argued that the program is nothing more than a publicity tool and is inadequate for addressing the problem of livestock loss to wolves, due to the fact that the programme has apparently unrealistic criteria in confirming wolf kills. This can be problematic, as wolves often leave little physical evidence of kills the size of lambs and small calves.[124]

Native American attitudes toward wolf reintroductions varied. Although the Nez Perce welcomed the reintroduction of wolves in Idaho, the Apaches of the southwestern US and Kalispells of Washington opposed any reintroduction, as wolves held little spiritual significance in their cultures.[10]

United Kingdom

The British Government signed conventions in the 1980s and 1990s agreeing to consider reintroducing wolves and to promote public awareness about them. Being party to European conventions, the British government is obliged to study the desirability of reintroducing extinct species and to consider reintroducing wolves. Although there are indications that wolves are recolonizing areas in Western Europe, they are unable to return to their former ranges in Britain without active human assistance. The Scottish Highlands are one of the few large areas in western Europe with a relatively small human population, thus ensuring that wolves would suffer little disturbance from human activity. One popular argument in favour of the reintroduction is that the Highlands' Red Deer populations have overgrown. A reintroduction of wolves would aid in keeping their numbers down, thus allowing native flora some respite. Other arguments include the generation of income and local employment in the Highlands through wolf-related ecotourism. This could replace the declining and uneconomical Highland sheep industry.

Wolves as pets and working animals

Many countries, states and local regions have specific regulations governing the acquisition and management of wolves. In Britain, the keeping of wolves is strictly controlled under the Dangerous Wild Animals Act 1976 and a licence is needed to own one. In the United States, the keeping of pure wolves is prohibited by the U.S. Endangered Species Act of 1973.

File:Raven Greeting.jpg

Raven, a former Ambassador wolf, greeting a visitor enthusiastically at Mission: Wolf

Captive wolf pups are usually taken from their mother at the age of 14 days, preferably no later than 21 days.[126] Wolf cubs require more socialisation than dog pups. Wolf pups typically stop responding to socialization at the age of 19 days, as opposed to dogs which can still be socialised at the age of 10 weeks.[15] For the first four months of their lives, wolf pups need to be kept isolated from adult canines except for a few brief visits per week in order for them to properly imprint on humans.[126] Pups will typically develop behavioural abnormalities if raised without another member of their own kind.[126] Because wolf milk contains more arginine than can be found in puppy milk substitutes, an arginine supplement is needed when feeding pups below the weaning age. Failure to do so can result in the pups developing cataracts.[10]

As adults, wolves have been shown, most of the time, to be largely unpredictable, and will sometimes display aggressive behaviour toward small animals and children. Pure wolves can never be fully trusted with children because, unlike dogs, they lack any alteration of their predatory behavior. These behaviors are genetically encoded and thus cannot be eliminated by socialization or training. At best, these inherent behaviours can only be suppressed.[127] Captive wolves are generally shy and avoid eye contact with humans other than their owner, as well as not listening to any commands made by any other humans. They usually vacate rooms or hide when a new person enters the establishment.[128] Ordinary pet food is inadequate, seeing as an adult wolf needs 1-2.5 kg (2-5 lbs) of quality meat daily along with bones, skin and fur to meet its nutritional requirements. Wolves may defend their food against people, and react violently to people trying to remove it.[126] The exercise needs of a wolf exceed the average dog's demand. Because of this, captive wolves typically do not cope well in urban areas.[126] Due to their talent at observational learning, adult captive wolves can quickly work out how to escape confinement[15], and need constant reminding that they are not the leader of their owner/caretaker, which makes raising wolves difficult for people who raise their pets in an even, rather than subordinate, environment. They will instinctively challenge their owner for pack status after reaching adult age. Some wildlife centres housing captive wolves prohibit handlers from entering wolf enclosures if they happen to have a cold or other vulnerability which the wolves can detect.[129]

Though wolves are trainable, they lack the same degree of tractability seen in dogs. They are generally not as responsive as dogs are to coercive techniques involving fear, aversive stimuli and force. Generally, far more work is required to obtain the same degree of reliability seen in most dogs. Even then, once a certain behavior has been repeated several times, wolves may get bored and ignore subsequent commands. Wolves are most responsive toward positive conditioning and rewards,[130] though simple praise is not sufficient as in most dogs.[131] Unlike dogs, wolves tend to respond more to hand signals than voice.[131] Although they are more difficult to control than dogs, they can be easier to teach if the motivation exists.[130]

According to the American Zoological Association, the minimum housing recommended for a large canid is an enclosure of 4m x 4m (12 x 12 ft), increased by 50% for each additional canid. To prevent the wolf jumping over the enclosure, fences are specified to be necessarily at least 2m (6 ft) high and needing an overhang at the top. An inside skirt buried below ground is also required to prevent tunnelling.

Some pet wolves are euthanised or might be released into the wild where they are likely to starve or be killed by resident wolf packs in regions where they are still present. Abandoned or escaped captive wolves can be more destructive and pose a greater danger to humans and livestock than wild wolves, seeing as their habituation to humans causes them to lose their natural shyness.[8] The Wolf of Gysinge is thought to have been one such animal.

Captive wolves have also been shown to be largely unsuitable for working as dogs do. German wolf biologist Erik Zimen once attempted to form a dog sled team composed entirely of pure wolves. The attempt proved to be a complete failure, as the wolves were far more prone to fighting than sled dogs and ignored most commands.[15] North American wolves and wolf hybrids were used as experimental attack dogs by the South African Defence Force in Apartheid South Africa in an attempt to breed animals capable of tracking guerillas. However, the experiment proved a failure and was discontinued due to the wolves' inability to follow even basic commands.[132][133] However, their sense of smell apparently rivals that of most established scenthounds. Tests undertaken in the Perm Institute of Interior Forces in Russia demonstrated that high content hybrids took 15-20 seconds to track down a target in training sessions, whereas ordinary police dogs took 3-4 minutes. Their success has led to plans to use them as police dogs.[134]


    Wolf howl recording

    European wolves rallying — 157 KB

  • Problems playing the files? See media help.

See also

Cultural depictions of wolves

  • Big Bad Wolf
  • Warg
  • Werewolf
  • Wolves in fiction
  • Wolves in heraldry

Wolf based organizations

  • International Wolf Center
  • UK Wolf Conservation Trust
  • Mission: Wolf

Notes and references

  1. Mech & Boitani (2004). Canis lupus. 2006 IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. IUCN 2006. Retrieved on 2006-05-05. Database entry includes justification for why this species is of least concern.
  2. Nowak, R. 1992. Wolves: The great travelers of evolution. International Wolf 2(4):3 - 7.
  3. Lindblad-Toh, K, et al. (2005). Genome sequence, comparative analysis and haplotype structure of the domestic dog. Nature 438: 803–819.
  4. 4.0 4.1 4.2 The Origin of the Dog Revisited, Janice Koler-Matznick, © 2002. Anthrozoös 15(2): 98 - 118
  5. Wolves: From Brink of Extinction to the Edge of the City
  6. <>
  7. Persecution and Hunting. Endangered Species Handbook. Animal Welfare Institute. URL accessed on 2006-08-20.
  8. 8.00 8.01 8.02 8.03 8.04 8.05 8.06 8.07 8.08 8.09 8.10 8.11 8.12 8.13 8.14 8.15 8.16 8.17 8.18 8.19 8.20 8.21 8.22 8.23 8.24 8.25 8.26 Graves, Will (2007). Wolves in Russia: Anxiety throughout the ages, pp.222.
  9. 9.0 9.1 9.2 9.3 9.4 9.5 9.6 9.7 9.8 9.9 Lopez, Barry (1978). Of wolves and men, pp.320.
  10. 10.00 10.01 10.02 10.03 10.04 10.05 10.06 10.07 10.08 10.09 10.10 10.11 10.12 10.13 10.14 10.15 L. David Mech & Luigi Boitani (2001). Wolves: Behaviour, Ecology and Conservation, 448.
  11. Hodgson, Angie (1997). Wolf Restoration in the Adirondacks?. (PDF) Wildlife Conservation Society. URL accessed on 2006-08-21.
  12. Gray Wolf Biologue. Midwest Region. U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. URL accessed on 2006-08-21.
  13. 13.0 13.1 "Claws reveal wolf survival threat". Paul Rincon. BBC online. URL accessed on 2007-05-11.
  14. 14.0 14.1 14.2 Gray Wolf. Corwin's Carnival of Creatures. Animal Planet. URL accessed on 2006-05-24.[dead link]
  15. 15.0 15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 15.5 15.6 15.7 15.8 Coppinger, Ray (2001). Dogs: a Startling New Understanding of Canine Origin, Behavior and Evolution, p352.
  16. Macdonald, David (1992). The Velvet Claw, pp.256.
  17. 17.0 17.1 17.2 17.3 17.4 Template:It iconApollonio, Marco & Mattioli, Luca (2006). Il Lupo in Provincia di Arezzo.
  18. (2004). Wolf Pup Development. Wolf Basics. International Wolf Center. URL accessed on 2006-08-23.
  19. Fred H. Harrington, Paul C. Paquet (1982). Wolves of the World: Perspectives of Behavior, Ecology, and Conservation, pp.474.
  20. 20.0 20.1 Serpell, James (1995). The Domestic Dog; its evolution, behaviour and interactions with people, p267.
  21. The skull of Canis lupus. World of the Wolf. Natural Worlds. URL accessed on 2005-08-21.
  23. 23.0 23.1 Journal of Zoology Volume 267, Part 1, September 2005
  24. 24.0 24.1 24.2 Shaun Ellis. (2007). A Man Among Wolves [DVD]. National Geographic.
  25. 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 Dewey, Tanya (2002). Canis lupus. Animal Diversity Web. University of Michigan Museum of Zoology. URL accessed on 2005-08-18.
  26. 26.0 26.1 Mating system. Department of Biology, Davidson College. URL accessed on 2006-08-22.
  27. Wolves in national park becoming isolated, say biologists. URL accessed on 2008-08-30.
  28. In Long Running Wolf-Moose Drama, Wolves Recover from Disaster. Michigan Technological University. URL accessed on 2008-08-30.
  29. Gray Wolf. Discover Life in America. URL accessed on 2005-05-05.
  30. (2002). Grey Wolves. Yellowstone-Bearman. URL accessed on 2007-03-17.
  31. Fox, Michael W. (1984). The Whistling Hunters: Field Studies of the Asiatic Wild Dog (Cuon Alpinus), pp.150.
  32. 32.0 32.1 (2005). Gray Wolf Biology and Status. Wolf Basics. URL accessed on 2006-08-23.
  33. Harper, Liz (2002). FAQ. Wolf Basics. International Wolf Center. URL accessed on 2005-08-21.
  34. 34.0 34.1 34.2 34.3 34.4 34.5 The Fear of Wolves: A Review of Wolf Attacks on Humans. (PDF) Norsk Institutt for Naturforskning. URL accessed on 2008-06-26.
  35. Serologic survey for canine coronavirus in wolves from Alaska, Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 37(4), 2001, pp. 740–745, Wildlife Disease Association 2001
  36. Trichinella sp. in Wolves from Interior Alaska, Journal of Wildlife Diseases, 35(1), 1999, pp. 94–97, Wildlife Disease Association 1999
  37. 37.0 37.1 37.2 Effects of Wolves and Other Predators on Farms in Wisconsin: Beyond Verified Losses. (PDF) Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. URL accessed on 2008-10-20.
  38. 38.0 38.1 38.2 38.3 (German) Bibikov, Dimitrij I. (2003). Der Wolf, pp.587.
  39. 39.0 39.1 39.2 39.3 (German) H. Okarma (2002). Der Wolf.
  40. 40.0 40.1 Mech L.D., Adams L.G., Meier T.J., Burch J.W., Dale B.W. (1998) The Wolves of Denali. University of Minnesota Press, Minneaopolis
  41. Kruuk, Hans (1972). The Spotted Hyena: A study of predation and social behaviour, pp.335.
  42. Macdonald, David (1984). The Encyclopedia of Mammals: 1, pp.446.
  43. Wolf Pack Size and Food Acquisition. Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center. U.S. Geological Survey. URL accessed on 2005-08-21.
  44. Rausch R.A. (1967) Some aspect of the population ecology of wolves, Alaska. American Zoologist 7:253-265
  45. 45.0 45.1 45.2 45.3 Mech, L. David (1999). [ Alpha Status, Dominance, and Division of Labor in Wolf Packs].
  46. Lois Chrisler 1956, Arctic Wild. Ballantine books, New York.
  47. Steinhart, peter. The Company of Wolves.
  48. Dutcher, Jim. Wolves at our Door.
  49. Jedrzejewski W, Schmidt K, Theuerkauf J, Jedrzejewska B, Okarma H (2001). Daily movements and territory use by radio-collared wolves (Canis lupus) in Bialowieza Primeval Forest in Poland. Can. J. Zool. 79.
  50. W Jedrzejewski, K Schmidt, J Theuerkauf, BJ edrzejewska and R Kowalczyk. Territory size of wolves Canis lupus: linking local (Białowieża Primeval Forest, Poland) and Holarctic-scale patterns.
  51. Mech, David. Wolf-pack Buffer Zones as Prey Reservoirs. Science 198.
  52. Huber, Đuro Huber, Josip Kusak, Alojzije Frković, Goran Gužvica. Causes of wolf mortality in Croatia in the period 1986-2001. Veterinarski Arhiv 72 (3): 131–139.
  53. Mech, D (1994). Buffer zones of territories of gray wolves as regions of intraspecific strife. Journal of mammalogy.
  54. Harrington F, Mech D. Wolf Howling and Its Role in Territory Maintenance. Behavior 68.
  55. Asa C, Valdespino C (1998). Canid Reproductive Biology: an Integration of Proximate Mechanisms and Ultimate Causes. American Zoologist 38.
  56. Steinhart, peter. The Company of Wolves.
  57. 57.0 57.1 57.2 Frequently Asked Questions About Wolves. Wolf Park. URL accessed on 2006-08-22.
  58. Species Wolf, Gray. Virginia Tech Conservation Management Institute. URL accessed on 2006-08-23.
  59. Rumyantsev, V. D. and L. S. Khuraskin. 1978. New data on the mortality of the Caspian seal due to wolves. Page 187 in Congress of the All-Union Theriological Society, 2nd (P. A. Panteleev, et. al. eds.). Nauka, Moscow, USSR. ZR 116(19):5669
  60. Walker, Brett L. (2005). The Lost Wolves Of Japan, pp.331. ISBN 0295984929.
  61. When Biologists Stocked Alaska with Wolves, Alaska Science Forum, February 5, 2004
  62. Alaska’s Salmon-Eating Wolves
  63. Wolves prefer fishing to hunting
  64. 64.0 64.1 When do Wolves Become Dangerous to Humans?. (PDF) Valerius Geist, Professor Emeritus of Environmental Science, The University of Calgary, Calgary, Alberta, Canada. URL accessed on 2008-09-30.
  65. Wolf Predation on Sheep in Alaska. Abundant Wildlife Society of North America. URL accessed on 2008-07-10.
  66. 66.0 66.1 66.2 66.3 66.4 The Wolf: Myth, Legend and Misconception. Abundant Wildlife Society of North America. URL accessed on 2008-07-10.
  67. 67.0 67.1 Statement by Valerius Geist pertaining to the death of Kenton Carnegie, Part II. (PDF) Wolf Crossing. URL accessed on 2008-08-29.
  68. Wolves Find Happy Hunting Grounds In Yellowstone National Park. Science Daily. URL accessed on 2007-09-17.
  69. Wolves and Hunting. Abundant Wildlife Society of North America. URL accessed on 2008-07-10.
  70. We'll, Be Quiet No More. (PDF) The Outdoorsman. URL accessed on 2008-09-20.
  71. 71.0 71.1 Jim Robbins (1998). Weaving A New Web: Wolves Change An Ecosystem. Smithsonian National Zoological Park. URL accessed on 2007-08-10.
  72. 72.0 72.1 Conservation Action Plan for the golden jackal (Canis aureus) in Greece. (PDF) WWF Greece. URL accessed on 2007-07-31.
  73. Wolf Ecology: How wolves interact with other predators.. University of Alberta - Edmonton. URL accessed on 2007-08-10.
  74. Ralph Maughan. Park wolf pack kills mother cougar. Ralph Maughan's Wildlife Reports, The Wolf Recovery Foundation. URL accessed on 2007-08-10.
  75. L. David Mech, Layne G. Adams, Thomas J. Meier, John W. Burch, and Bruce W. Dale. The Wolves of Denali: Chapter 1. University of Minnesota Press. URL accessed on 2007-08-10.
  76. 76.0 76.1 Tigers and Wolves in the Russian Far East: Competitive Exclusion, Functional Redundancy, and Conservation Implications. URL accessed on 2008-07-09.
  77. Matthiessen, Peter (2005). Large Carnivores and the Conservation of Biodiversity: Biodiversity, pp.526.
  78. Wildlife Science: Linking Ecological Theory and Management Applications, By Timothy E. Fulbright, David G. Hewitt, Contributor Timothy E. Fulbright, David G. Hewitt, Published by CRC Press, 2007, [ISBN 0849374871]
  79. Striped Hyaena: Association with other species. IUCN Species Survival Commission Hyaenidae Specialist Group. URL accessed on 2008-10-13.
  80. Prey and den sites of the Upper Pleistocene hyena Crocuta crocuta spelaea (Goldfuss, 1823) in horizontal and vertical caves of the Bohemian Karst. CAJUSG. DIEDRICH & KARELŽÁK. URL accessed on 2008-01-20.[dead link]
  81. Comparative ecology and taphonomy of spotted hyenas, humans, and wolves in Pleistocene Italy. (PDF) C. Stiner, Mary. Revue de Paléobiologie, Genève. URL accessed on 2008-09-16.
  82. Communication. Wolfdancer Holding Company. URL accessed on 2005-08-21.
  83. 83.0 83.1 83.2 Harrington, Fred H. (2000). What's in a Howl?. NOVA Online. PBS. URL accessed on 2005-08-21.
  84. The Iranian Wolf. Wolf Song of Alaska. URL accessed on 2007-08-11.
  85. Rally to Seneca + important information about Norwegian wolves, Wolfpaper Picture Archive (February 7, 2001)
  86. R. K. Aggarwal, T. Kivisild, J. Ramadevi, L. Singh:Mitochondrial DNA coding region sequences support the phylogenetic distinction of two Indian wolf species. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, Volume 45 Issue 2 Page 163-172, May 2007 online
  87. Template:La icon Linnaeus, C (1758). Systema naturae per regna tria naturae, secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis. Tomus I. Editio decima, reformata., 824, Holmiae. (Laurentii Salvii)..
  88. Simpson, D.P. (1979). Cassell's Latin Dictionary, 5, 883, London: Cassell Ltd..
  89. Saunders, Stephen C. Endangered and Threatened Wildlife and Plants; Proposal To Reclassify and Remove the gray wolf From the List of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife in Portions of the Conterminous United States; Proposal To Establish Three Special Regulations for Threatened Gray Wolves End Hierarchical Links. Federal Register Environmental Documents. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. URL accessed on 2006-08-23.
  90. includeonly>"Indian wolves are world's oldest", BBC News, 2004-07-17. Retrieved on 2007-07-19.
  91. 91.0 91.1 91.2 Statement by Valerius Geist pertaining to the death of Kenton Carnegie. (PDF) Wolf Crossing. URL accessed on 2008-09-17.
  92. Template:MSW3 Wozencraft
  93. 93.0 93.1 Lindblad-Toh et al. (2005). Genome sequence, comparative analysis and haplotype structure of the domestic dog. Nature 438.
  94. 94.0 94.1 Clutton-Brock, Juliet (1987). A Natural History of Domesticated Mammals, pp.208.
  95. Susan Lumpkin. Spotlight on Zoo Science: Hiding In Plain Sight. Conservation and Science. Smithsonian National Zoological Park. URL accessed on 2007-10-07.
  96. (2000). The Wolf-Dog Hybrid: An Overview of a Controversial Animal. Animal Welfare Information Center Newsletter. URL accessed on 2008-05-17.
  97. NWA
  98. National Wolf Dog Alliance
  99. 99.0 99.1 The red wolf (Canis rufus) – hybrid or not?. (PDF) Montana State University. URL accessed on 2008-08-04.
  100. The decline, fall and return of the red wolf - life - 23 February 2008 - New Scientist
  101. Eastern Coyotes Are Becoming Coywolves. David Zimmerman. Caledonian record. URL accessed on 2007-08-17.
  102. Mader, TR. Wolf attacks on humans. Abundant Wildlife Society of North America. URL accessed on 2007-05-31.
  103. 103.0 103.1 Is the fear of wolves justified? A Fennoscandian perspective.. (PDF) Acta Zoologica Lituanica, 2003, Volumen 13, Numerus 1. URL accessed on 2008-05-09.
  104. (French) Moriceau, Jean-Marc (2007). Histoire du méchant loup : 3 000 attaques sur l'homme en France, p.623.
  105. Rajpurohit, Kishan Singh (1999). Child Lifting: Wolves in Hazaribagh, India (PDF). ISSN 0044-7447.
  106. A Case History of Wolf-Human Encounters in Alaska and Canada. (PDF) Alaska Department of Fish and Game Wildlife Technical Bulletin. URL accessed on 2008-08-17.
  107. 107.0 107.1 107.2 Ranchers' Guide to Wolf Depredation. Montana state university. URL accessed on 2007-08-24.
  108. 108.0 108.1 Hunting the Grisly and Other Sketches. Theodore Roosevelt. URL accessed on 2007-09-12.
  109. Naughton, Lisa, Adrian Treves, Rebecca Grossberg, and David Wilcove. Summary Report: 2004/2005 Public Opinion Survey: Wolf Management in Wisconsin. (PDF) Living with Wolves. UW-Madison Geography. URL accessed on 2005-08-30.
  110. Wolf Predation Plays Small Role in Livestock Losses in 2005. Defenders of Wildlife. URL accessed on 2006-08-30.
  111. (2005). Wolf Depredation. International Wolf Center.
  112. Dutcher, Jim and Jamie (2002). Wolves at our door. Touchstone. URL accessed on 2007-02-27.
  113. "Carnivore-Caused Livestock Mortality in Trans-Himalaya"
  114. Wolf at my door. BBC. URL accessed on 2007-08-11.
  115. Livestock Guarding Dogs - Protecting Sheep from Predators. United States Department of Agriculture. URL accessed on 2007-07-20.
  116. Geronimo, Geronim His Own Story: The Autobiography of a Great Patriot Warrior, Plume, ISBN-10: 0452011558
  117. 117.0 117.1 Alberta Canada Wolf & Coyote Hunts with Alberta Bush Adventures Hunting Guides. Alberta Bush Adventures. URL accessed on 2007-09-27.
  118. Legends of the "Outlaw Wolves". (PDF) International Wolf Centre. URL accessed on 2008-07-12.
  119. - Canadian Arctic Expedition - Food
  120. (2000). Game board says yes to aerial shooting of wolves. (PDF) URL accessed on 2008-04-23.
  121. includeonly>Vanderpool, Tim. "Politics of the Wolf", Tucson Weekly, 2002-06-20. Retrieved on 2006-08-27.
  122. The Bailey Wildlife Foundation Wolf Compensation Trust. Defenders of Wildlife. URL accessed on 2006-08-27.
  123. Wilkinson, Todd A Brewing Backlash Against Lobos. Wildlife Conservation. URL accessed on 2007-02-27.
  124. 124.0 124.1 Fact Sheet- Wolf Reintroduction in the United States. Abundant Wildlife Society of North America. URL accessed on 2008-08-24.
  125. Miniter, Frank (2007). The Politically Incorrect Guide to Hunting, pp.269.
  126. 126.0 126.1 126.2 126.3 126.4 Guidelines for Keeping Wolves and Wolf-Dog Hybrids. (HTML) Wolf Park. URL accessed on 2008-10-28.
  127. Of Wolves, Wolf Hybrids and Children. (HTML) Wolf Park. URL accessed on 2008-10-28.
  128. Wolf Song of Alaska: Guideline Characteristics of Wolves and Wolfdogs
  129. Statement by Valerius Geist pertaining to the death of Kenton Carnegie. (PDF) Wolf Crossing. URL accessed on 2008-09-09.
  130. 130.0 130.1 [ Are wolves and wolfdog hybrids trainable?]. (HTML) Wolf Park. URL accessed on 2008-10-30.
  131. 131.0 131.1 Wolf Training and Socialisation: Example #1. (HTML) Wolf Park. URL accessed on 2008-10-30.
  132. Sad Howl of Wolves Recalls Apartheid in South Africa. (PDF) Robyn Dixon / Los Angeles Times / October 17, 2004. Wolfsong Alaska. URL accessed on 2008-08-01.
  133. Apartheid Regime Bred Man-Hunting Wolf-Dogs. (PDF) Gavin du Venage in Cape Town / / May 3, 2005. Wolfsong Alaska. URL accessed on 2008-08-01.
  134. Russian police employ wolves for service. (HTML) Oksana Anikina, Translated by Maria Gousseva. English Pravda. URL accessed on 2008-10-30.

Further reading

  • Anahita, S., & Mix, T. L. (2006). Retrofitting Frontier Masculinity for Alaska's War Against Wolves: Gender & Society Vol 20(3) Jun 2006, 332-353.
  • Atwood, T. C., & Gese, E. M. (2008). Coyotes and recolonizing wolves: Social rank mediates risk-conditional behaviour at ungulate carcasses: Animal Behaviour Vol 75(3) Mar 2008, 753-762.
  • Coelho, C. M., De Melo, L. F. B., Sabato, M. A. L., Rizel, D. N., & Young, R. J. (2007). A note on the use of GPS collars to monitor wild maned wolves Chrysocyon brachyurus (Illiger 1815) (Mammalia, Canidae): Applied Animal Behaviour Science Vol 105(1-3) Jun 2007, 259-264.
  • Cordoni, G., & Palagi, E. (2008). Reconciliation in wolves (Canis lupus): New evidence for a comparative perspective: Ethology Vol 114(3) Mar 2008, 298-308.
  • Coscia, E. M. (1996). Ontogeny of timber wolf vocalizations: Acoustic properties and behavioural contexts. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Cummings, D., Brown, J. L., Rodden, M. D., & Songsasen, N. (2007). Behavioral and physiologic responses to environmental enrichment in the maned wolf (Chrysocyon brachyurus): Zoo Biology Vol 26(5) Sep-Oct 2007, 331-343.
  • Fatjo, J., Feddersen-Petersen, D., de la Torre, J. L. R., Amat, M., Mets, M., Braus, B., et al. (2007). Ambivalent signals during agonistic interactions in a captive wolf pack: Applied Animal Behaviour Science Vol 105(4) Jul 2007, 274-283.
  • Gacsi, M., Gyori, B., Miklosi, A., Viranyi, Z., Kubinyi, E., Topal, J., et al. (2005). Species-Specific Differences and Similarities in the Behavior of Hand-Raised Dog and Wolf Pups in Social Situations with Humans: Developmental Psychobiology Vol 47(2) Sep 2005, 111-122.
  • Gadbois, S. (2003). The socioendocrinology of aggression-mediated stress in timber wolves (Canis lupus). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • King, T. (2004). Comment on van Kerkhove's Commentary: Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(4) 2004, 293-294.
  • Klinghammer, E. (1979). An Attempt at Interdisciplinary Synthesis: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 24 (10), Oct, 1979.
  • Kubinyi, E., Viranyi, Z., & Miklosi, A. (2007). Comparative social cognition: From wolf and dog to humans: Comparative Cognition & Behavior Review Vol 2(1) 2007, 26-46.
  • Liley, S., & Creel, S. (2008). What best explains vigilance in elk: Characterises of prey, predators, or the environment? : Behavioral Ecology Vol 19(2) Mar-Apr 2008, 245-254.
  • Macnulty, D. R. (2007). Development, senescence, and cooperation in the predatory behavior of a social carnivore, Canis lupus. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Maia, O. B., Jacomo, A. T. A., Bringel, B. A., Kashivakura, C. K., Oliveira, C. A., Teodoro, L. O. F., et al. (2008). Comparison of serum hormone levels of captive and free-living maned wolves Chrysocyon brachyurus: Brazilian Journal of Medical and Biological Research Vol 41(2) Apr 2008, 176-179.
  • Mallonee, J. S., & Joslin, P. (2004). Traumatic Stress Disorder Observed in an Adult Wild Captive Wolf (Canis lupus): Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(2) 2004, 107-126.
  • Marvin, G. (2005). Review of Waiting for Wolves in Japan: An Anthropological Study of People-Wildlife Relations: Anthrozoos Vol 18(1) 2005, 85-89.
  • Mertens, P. A. (2004). The Concept of Dominance and the Treatment of Aggression in Multidog Homes: A Comment on van Kerkhove's Commentary: Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(4) 2004, 287-291.
  • Miklosi, A., Kubinyi, E., Topal, J., Gacsi, M., Viranyi, Z., & Csanyi, V. (2003). A Simple Reason for a Big Difference: Wolves Do Not Look Back at Humans, but Dogs Do: Current Biology Vol 13(9) Apr 2003, 763-766.
  • Randall, D. A., Pollinger, J. P., Wayne, R. K., Tallents, L. A., Johnson, P. J., & Macdonald, D. W. (2007). Inbreeding is reduced by female-biased dispersal and mating behavior in Ethiopian wolves: Behavioral Ecology Vol 18(3) May-Jun 2007, 579-589.
  • Rao, D. G. (2005). The wolf in the consulting room. Madison, CT: International Universities Press, Inc.
  • Rogers, C. (1996). "Raised By Wolves". Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Sabato, M. A. L., de Melo, L. F. B., Magni, E. M. V., Young, R. J., & Coelho, C. M. (2006). A note on the effect of the full moon on the activity of wild maned wolves, Chrysocyon brachyurus: Behavioural Processes Vol 73(2) Sep 2006, 228-230.
  • Sand, H., Wikenros, C., Wabakken, P., & Liberg, O. (2006). Effects of hunting group size, snow depth and age on the success of wolves hunting moose: Animal Behaviour Vol 72(4) Oct 2006, 781-789.
  • Sands, J., & Creel, S. (2004). Social dominance, aggression and faecal glucocorticoid levels in a wild population of wolves, Canis lupus: Animal Behaviour Vol 67(3) Mar 2004, 387-396.
  • Stout, G. R. (2002). Wolves and wilderness: A mythological and psychological approach. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Stronen, A. V. (2008). In the company of wolves: Ethology Vol 114(1) Jan 2008, 103-104.
  • Topal, J., Gacsi, M., Miklosi, A., Viranyi, Z., Kubinyi, E., & Csanyi, V. (2005). Attachment to humans: A comparative study on hand-reared wolves and differently socialized dog puppies: Animal Behaviour Vol 70(6) Dec 2005, 1367-1375.
  • van Kerkhove, W. (2004). A Fresh Look at the Wolf-Pack Theory of Companion-Animal Dog Social Behavior: Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(4) 2004, 279-285.
  • van Kerkhove, W. (2004). "A Fresh Look at the Wolf-Pack Theory of Companion-Animal Dog Social Behavior": Reply: Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(4) 2004, 299-300.
  • Viranyi, Z., Gacsi, M., Kubinyi, E., Topal, J., Belenyi, B., Ujfalussy, D., et al. (2008). Comprehension of human pointing gestures in young human-reared wolves (Canis lupus) and dogs (Canis familiaris): Animal Cognition Vol 11(3) Jul 2008, 373-387.
  • Vucetich, J. A., Peterson, R. O., & Waite, T. A. (2004). Raven scavenging favours group foraging in wolves: Animal Behaviour Vol 67(6) Jun 2004, 1117-1126.
  • Wilkes, C. S. (2002). The Wild Sacred: Revisioning the wolf and Little Red Riding Hood. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Winnie, J., Jr., Christianson, D., Creel, S., & Maxwell, B. (2006). Elk decision-making rules are simplified in the presence of wolves: Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology Vol 61(2) Dec 2006, 277-289.
  • Wright, J. C. (2004). Comment on van Kerkhove's "Wolf-Pack Theory": Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(4) 2004, 295-298.
  • Zawistowski, S., & Patronek, G. (2004). The Dog in Wolf's Clothing? : Journal of Applied Animal Welfare Science Vol 7(4) 2004, 277-278.

External links

Template:Canidae nav

This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).