> An estimated 528 wolves resided in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem as of 2015. As of December 2021, there are at least 95 wolves in the park. Eight packs were noted. This count marks a decrease of 23% from 2020 but is close to the previous decade's average end of year count (2010-2019 average = 94.5).
> From 1995 to 1997, 41 wild wolves from Canada and northwest Montana were released in Yellowstone
That's more than 14 (digits swapped?), but still not a lot from a genetic health standpoint. Seems like there's some exchange with other populations in the Northern Rocky Mountains, who in turn mate with wolves from Canada, so it might be just fine. But it's a bit weird for the article to even mention the issue, only to then get lost in a tangent about one prevalent mutation.
Wasn’t there an article about exactly this topic a few years ago or am I crazy? Feels weird to do a tweet thread about it without even a reference to it.
> Within Yellowstone National Park, no hunting of wolves is allowed. Outside the park, Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming regulate and manage hunting. Because wolves do not recognize political boundaries and often move between different jurisdictions, some wolves that live within the park for most of the year, but at times move outside the park, are taken in the hunts
So there's a clear evolutionary advantage for wolves that do recognize political boundaries. I wonder if that has long-term effects on wolf-pack territories.
That a behavior runs a higher risk of death doesn't mean that it's a evolutionary disadvantage at all, let alone clearly.
You'd have to calculate out the rewards (is letting all of ones cubs starve in order to avoid a 0.01% chance of getting hunted good?), control for any correlated effects (perhaps respecting political boundaries means being overly wary of Yellowstone humans and thus less food), and also the standard worse-is-better proof-of-fitness games involved in sexual competition (a la peacock plumage).
Funny to see coyotes referred to as "jackals." They're similar in size and ecological niche, but I thought biologists long ago rejected the idea of grouping coyotes together with the jackal species. Coyotes are more closely related to wolves.
EDIT: And of course saying "deer" instead of "elk." This reads like someone either writing specifically for an audience that doesn't know American wildlife, or someone trying to dodge the plagiarism filter on a term paper.
16 comments
[ 2.9 ms ] story [ 37.1 ms ] thread> An estimated 528 wolves resided in the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem as of 2015. As of December 2021, there are at least 95 wolves in the park. Eight packs were noted. This count marks a decrease of 23% from 2020 but is close to the previous decade's average end of year count (2010-2019 average = 94.5).
https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/wolves.htm
That's more than 14 (digits swapped?), but still not a lot from a genetic health standpoint. Seems like there's some exchange with other populations in the Northern Rocky Mountains, who in turn mate with wolves from Canada, so it might be just fine. But it's a bit weird for the article to even mention the issue, only to then get lost in a tangent about one prevalent mutation.
* https://truenaturefoundation.org/research/how-wolves-change-...
* https://www.accuweather.com/en/weather-news/scientists-debun...
* https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/upload/YELLOWSTONE-SCIENCE-24...
https://news.yahoo.com/scientists-debunk-myth-yellowstone-wo...
So there's a clear evolutionary advantage for wolves that do recognize political boundaries. I wonder if that has long-term effects on wolf-pack territories.
Edit: quote from https://www.nps.gov/yell/learn/nature/wolves.htm, meant to answer to bombcar who mentioned it
You'd have to calculate out the rewards (is letting all of ones cubs starve in order to avoid a 0.01% chance of getting hunted good?), control for any correlated effects (perhaps respecting political boundaries means being overly wary of Yellowstone humans and thus less food), and also the standard worse-is-better proof-of-fitness games involved in sexual competition (a la peacock plumage).
EDIT: And of course saying "deer" instead of "elk." This reads like someone either writing specifically for an audience that doesn't know American wildlife, or someone trying to dodge the plagiarism filter on a term paper.