Planning and Implementing a Reintroduction of Wolves to Yellowstone National Park and Central Idaho

Abstract

The Northern Rocky Mountain Wolf Recovery plan proposed reintroduction of Canis lupus (gray wolf) to Yellowstone National Park and central Idaho as part of a wolf restoration plan for the northern Rocky Mountains of the United States. Strong opposition from some factions within the region forestalled the action for two decades. An environmental impact statement, conducted in 1992–1994 with extensive public input, culminated in a proposal to reintroduce wolves designated as “non‐essential—experimental” under Section 10 (j) of the federal Endangered Species Act. This approach, approved by the Secretary of the Interior in 1994, provided for wolf restoration while allowing management flexibility to deal with concerns of the local public. A reintroduction plan was developed in the summer and fall of 1994. Acquiring, holding, transporting, and releasing suitable wolves for reintroduction presented a myriad of technical and logistical challenges that required effective planning and coordination by all participants. In January 1995, 29 wolves were captured in Alberta and transported to Yellowstone National Park (14) and central Idaho (15). Idaho wolves were freed immediately upon arrival; Yellowstone wolves (three family groups) were held in acclimation pens in the park until late March. Most Idaho wolves traveled extensively within the area intended for them, averaging 82 km net distance away from release sites after 5 months (range = 30–220 km), and three male‐female pairs formed by July. After 5 months in the wild, at least 13 of 15 Idaho‐released wolves were alive within the intended area, as were 13 of 14 Yellowstone wolves; one wolf was known to have been illegally killed in each area. No livestock were killed. Wolves released into Yellowstone Park continued to live as packs, stayed closer to their release sites (x = 22 km at end of June), and settled into home ranges; two packs produced a total of nine pups. The progress of the reintroduction program in its first year far exceeded expectations. Reintroductions of about 15 wolves to each area for 2–4 more years are scheduled, but the project may be shortened because of early successes. Future reintroduction planners can expect sociocultural issues to pervade the effort, but they can be optimistic that, from a biological standpoint, reintroduction of wolves has strong potential as a restoration technique.

Parasite invasion following host reintroduction: a case study of Yellowstone's wolves

“…Thirty-one wolves were captured from British Columbia and Alberta, Canada and released in groups to establish seven packs in Yellowstone in 1995 and 1996 [10,14]. All translocated wolves, as well as several early litters that were temporarily brought into holding pens for management purposes [29], were vaccinated for a suite of common canid pathogens (rabies, CDV, canine adenovirus type-1, Leptospiria sp., CPV and canine parainfluenza virus) and were treated with ivermectin, a broad-spectrum antiparasitic, prior to their release.…”

“…In 1995 and 1996, wolves were reintroduced into the Northern Rockies where they have since established and spread [10,14,15].…”

Giant panda reintroduction: factors affecting public support

“…The local people hunted and killed the reintroduced wild dogs because they believed those dogs would pose threats to livestock and children (Davies and du Toit 2004). In contrast, the acceptance of local residents toward a reintroduction project can greatly promote the project (Fischer and Lindenmayer 2000;Fritts et al 1997;Kleiman et al 1994;Osterberg et al 2015). For example, in Argentina, the local community strongly supports the return of jaguars (Panthera onca) and human-jaguar conflict was well handled via ecotourism-mediated financial compensation schemes (Caruso and Perez 2013).…”

Sarcoptic Mange Found in Wolves in the Rocky Mountains in Western United States

“…In 1995 and 1996, the USFWS reintroduced 31 wolves from Canada into Yellowstone National Park (YNP) and 35 wolves into central Idaho. Sarcoptic mange has been documented in the Canadian wolf population; however, captured wolves showing signs of sarcoptic mange or evidence of disease were not selected for reintroduction (Fritts et al, 1997), and, as a precaution, Canadian wolves relocated to the US were examined for external parasites and given two injections (0.4 mg/kg) of ivermectin at 1-5-day intervals. By the end of 2008, we estimate that there were $1,645 wolves in $217 packs living in the NRM (Sime and Bangs, 2009).…”