Gray wolf mortality patterns in Wisconsin from 1979 to 2012

Abstract Illegal killing (poaching) of wildlife is a problem that warrants legitimate and objective investigation. Treves et al. (2017) use data from reported wolf mortalities in Wisconsin to estimate unreported and unobserved mortality and poaching rates of unmonitored wolves. This publication is frequently cited and often used to advocate for various policy recommendations despite nontrivial problems in analysis resulting in incorrect inference. We provide a constructive examination of this work and we identify significant methodological and analytical flaws that lead to consequential but faulty conclusions about levels of annual mortality that wolf populations can sustain. We also contrast the conclusions of Treves et al. (2017) with established literature on wolf demographics and observed changes in the Wisconsin wolf population and conclude that the observed population growth would not have been possible with mortality rates estimated by their publication.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Journal of Mammalogy
Published
2024-11-23
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1093/jmammal/gyad084
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.92
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Gray wolf mortality patterns in Wisconsin from 1979 to 2012

Jennifer L. Stenglein, Adrian P. Wydeven, Nathan Roberts, Glenn E. Stauffer et al.
2 citations
Journal of Mammalogy
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
0.92
article

Gray wolf mortality patterns in Wisconsin from 1979 to 2012

Jennifer L. Stenglein, Adrian P. Wydeven, Nathan Roberts, Glenn E. Stauffer, David M. MacFarland, Timothy R. Van Deelen, Erik R. Olson
article en
2 citations

Abstract

Abstract Illegal killing (poaching) of wildlife is a problem that warrants legitimate and objective investigation. Treves et al. (2017) use data from reported wolf mortalities in Wisconsin to estimate unreported and unobserved mortality and poaching rates of unmonitored wolves. This publication is frequently cited and often used to advocate for various policy recommendations despite nontrivial problems in analysis resulting in incorrect inference. We provide a constructive examination of this work and we identify significant methodological and analytical flaws that lead to consequential but faulty conclusions about levels of annual mortality that wolf populations can sustain. We also contrast the conclusions of Treves et al. (2017) with established literature on wolf demographics and observed changes in the Wisconsin wolf population and conclude that the observed population growth would not have been possible with mortality rates estimated by their publication.

Journal of MammalogyVol. 105(6)
University of Wisconsin–Madison (US), College of the Ozarks (US), Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources (US), Ashland (United States) (US), Northland College (US)
Openalex Percentile: Top 21%
Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
0.92
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.