Jane E. Wiedenhoeft, Sarah Boles, Wisconsin Department
of Natural Resources, PO Box 220, Park Falls, WI 54552, USA;
Alexia Sabor, Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, 101
South Webster Street, Madison, WI 53703, USA; Pam Troxell, Timber
Wolf Alliance, Sigurd Olson Environmental Institute, Northland
College, Ashland, WI 54806, USA
For the past 20 years the Wisconsin Department of Natural
Resources (WDNR) has used radio telemetry, winter track surveys,
and howl surveys conducted by WDNR personnel to monitor Wisconsin's
wolf population. These methods are relatively expensive and
as the wolf population increases, they become less effective
in detecting wolf abundance and distribution.
In 1995 the WDNR initiated a carnivore tracking program using
both volunteers and professional trackers to assist in the winter
tracking of wolves and other forest carnivores such as coyote,
fox and fisher. The program had three objectives: 1) to determine
wolf numbers, distribution, and breeding status, and to identify
specific wolf packs; 2) to develop an index of the abundance
and distribution of other carnivore species in Wisconsin; and
3) to determine the possible existence of rare carnivores such
as Canada lynx (Lynx canadensis) and puma (Puma concolor).
The areas in the state where wolves were located, or were likely
to occur, were divided into 123 blocks ranging from 74 to 548
mi2 (avg. 183 mi2). Each volunteer or group of volunteers, were
assigned to a block and were asked to complete a track-training
course and conduct three track surveys over the winter tracking
season following WDNR guidelines. WDNR trackers also tracked
some of the same blocks. In 1998 a mammal track test was administered
to a group of volunteer and agency trackers.
Miles surveyed, number of hours spent on surveys, and number
of tracks encountered per species were totaled. Encounter rates
(number of tracks/10 miles surveyed) were calculated for each
species. Results were compared for surveys done by DNR trackers
and volunteer trackers in all blocks and in co-surveyed blocks
over the past four winters. Trackers were asked to give an estimate
of the wolf population in the blocks surveyed and a comparison
was done for co-surveyed blocks. A comparison of the results
of the 1998 mammal track test was made for general public trackers
and agency trackers who attended a track training course immediately
prior to taking the test, and returning trackers who did not
attend a training course just prior to taking the test.
Volunteers have tracked a total of 10900 miles in 2160 hours
over the past 4 years. Their encounter rates for most species
are lower than WDNR trackers, though statistical tests show
few significant differences. In co-surveyed blocks, wolf track
detection rates by volunteers have increased from 42% of WDNR
tracker reports in 1996-97 to 76% of WDNR tracker reports in
1998-99. Though results of mammal track tests were available
for only one year, they indicate the ability to identify wolf
tracks was high for all three groups tested (avg. 95.7%), and
that track identification ability was improved by attending
a training course.
Beyond 2000: