While it feels that the decision to end the Red Wolf restoration program in North Carolina has already been made by USFW(usually public commentary is just a smokescreen and decisions in D.C. have already been made), it is useful to learn about the most recent peer reviewed research in the August 2014 issue of THE JOURNAL OF MAMMALOGY that speaks about the distinct nature of the Red Wolf, different from both the western and eastern Coyote..............Joseph Hinton and Michael Chamberlain out of the University of Georgia state the following-----"AMONG THE THREE SYMPATRIC CANIS TAXA IN EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA, RED WOLVES ARE CLEARLY THE LARGER CANID WITH HYBRIDS INTERMEDIATE TO COYOTES AND RED WOLVES IN BODY SIZE"........."OUR RESULTS SUGGEST THAT RED WOLVES REPRESENT A UNIQUE CANIS PHENOTYPE IN THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES"......"HYBRIDS(ADMIX OF RED WOLVES AND COYOTES) ARE INCAPABLE OF REACHING BODY SIZES OF ADULT RED WOLVES"................"EFFECTS OF BODY SIZE, ON THE RELATIVE ABILITY OF RED WOLVES AND COYOTES SO SUCCESSIVELY HUNT PREY, ACQUIRE MATES AND DEFEND TERRITORIES ARE NOT WELL KNOWN"........So before we abandon the Red Wolf program, this study (MORPHOMETRICS OF CANIS TAXA IN EASTERN NORTH CAROLINA) DOES STRONGLY SUGGEST THAT THE FEDS STAY THE COURSE AND CONTINUE TO BUILD UP THE RED WOLF POPULATION TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL ECOLOGICAL FUNCTIONS HISTORICALLY CARRIED OUT BY RED WOLVES IN THE USA WILL CONTINUE TO BE FULFILLED JUST AS THEY CONTINUE TO BE FULFILLED BY EASTERN WOLVES(MANY FEEL THE SAME SPECIES AS RED WOLVES) IN ALGONQUIN PROVINCIAL PARK IN CANADA(those wolves are also surrounded by eastern coyotes yet continue to maintain species integrity inside that Park)

http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/08/29/4105981/federal-officials-seek-public.html

Feds seek input on

 maintaining red wolf

recoveryBY JONATHAN DREW

Associated PressAugust 29, 2014 

Federal wildlife officials asked the public Friday to
 weigh in as

 the government reviews whether to continue
 maintaining the

 world's only wild population of the red wolf in eastern
North Carolina.

The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service announced that it
had awarded

 a contract to the Virginia-based nonprofit Wildlife
 Management

 Institute to evaluate its 27-year experiment to
restore the

 endangered species to the wild.

Read more here: http://www.newsobserver.com/2014/08/29/4105981/federal-officials-seek-public.html#storylink=cpy

"Once we receive the final evaluation, we will review it and make a decision to continue, modify, or terminate the red wolf recovery program," said Leopoldo Miranda, an assistant regional director for the Fish and Wildlife Service

Asked about what terminating the program would entail, Miranda said during a conference call that no decisions have been made. When a program to restore the wolves to the Smoky Mountains in the western part of the state ended in 1998, the agency tried to capture all of the animals and bring them back to captivity, he said.

Sierra Weaver, a lawyer with the Southern Environmental Law Center, said the public should be given longer than two weeks to comment, especially considering the announcement came at the start of a holiday weekend. She also said that the federal agency failed to put a notice of the review in the Federal Register as required.

"The agency has failed to comply with the process outlined in the Endangered Species Act for this type of review and we are concerned it is not taking seriously its responsibilities to save the red wolf from extinction," she said.

A spokesman for the federal agency didn't immediately respond to an email seeking comment on Weaver's criticism Friday afternoon.

In May, the Southern Environmental Law Center helped convince a federal judge to block the hunting of coyotes near the red wolf habitat. They argued that the animals look similar and are easily confused, leading to the wolves being shot.

The judge issued a ban on hunting until a trial takes place on a lawsuit by the environmental group seeking to permanently end coyote hunting in several eastern North Carolina counties. The lawsuit is pending.

In all, eight of the wolves have died in 2014, including two killed by gunshot. Several of them died from car accidents or health issues.

Miranda said Friday that none of the wolves have been shot to death since the ban was enacted.

The Sept. 10 and Sept. 11 public meetings will be in Columbia and Swan Quarter, respectively. The meetings are open to the public and will involve moderators interacting in discussions with the participants.

------------------------------------------------------

Journal of Mammalogy 95(4):855-861. 2014
doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1644/13-MAMM-A-202

Morphometrics of Canis taxa in eastern North Carolina

Joseph W. Hinton* and Michael J. Chamberlain

Warnell School of Forestry and Natural Resources, University of Georgia, Athens, GA 30602, USA

* Correspondent: jhinton@uga.edu

Associate Editor was Roger A. Powell.

Abstract

We describe the external morphological characters of red wolves, coyotes, and their hybrids from North Carolina and assess if morphology could be an accurate discriminator among the 3 canid taxa. We used body measurements from 171 red wolves (Canis rufus), 134 coyotes (Canis latrans), and 47 hybrids in a polytomous logistic regression analysis to assess if they could be used to identify canids as red wolves, coyotes, or hybrids. Polytomous logistic regression analysis of 7 morphometric variables was able to correctly allocate 86% of canids to their a priori taxa groups. Using Akaike's information criterion, we judged hind-foot length, body mass, width of head, and tail length as variables to best separate taxa. Among the 3 sympatric Canis taxa in eastern North Carolina, red wolves are clearly the larger canid with hybrids intermediate to coyotes and red wolves in body size. Our results suggest that red wolves represent a unique Canis phenotype in the southeastern United States.

Received: August 19, 2013; Accepted: April 8, 2014

Keywords: Canis latrans, Canis rufus, coyote, hybrid, morphology, red wolf

Literature Cited

Adams, J. R. 2006. A multi-facet molecular approach to red wolf (Canis rufus) conservation and management. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Idaho, Moscow.

Arnold, S. J. 1983. Morphology, performance and fitness. American Zoologist 23:347–361.

Bekoff, M., and E. M. Gese. 2003. Coyote (Canis latrans). Pp. 467–481 in Wild mammals of North America: biology, management, and conservation (G. A. Feldhamer, B. C. Thompson, and J. A. Chapman, eds.). 2nd ed. Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, Maryland.

Bohling, J. H., J. R. Adams, and L. P. Waits. 2013. Evaluating the ability of Bayesian clustering methods to detect hybridization and introgression using an empirical red wolf data set. Molecular Ecology 22:74–86. CrossRef, PubMed

Burnham, K. P., and D. R. Anderson. 2002. Model selection and multimodel inference: a practical information theoretic approach. 2nd ed. Springer-Verlag, New York.

Carbone, C., A. Teacher, and J. M. Rowcliffe. 2007. The cost of carnivory. PLoS Biology 5:363–368. CrossRef

Chambers, S. M., S. R. Fain, B. Fazio, and M. Amaral. 2012. An account of the taxonomy of North American wolves from morphological and genetic analyses. North American Fauna 77:1–67. CrossRef

Donadio, E., and S. W. Buskirk. 2006. Diet, morphology, and interspecific killing in Carnivora. American Naturalist 167:876–885. CrossRef

Gier, H. T. 1968. Coyotes in Kansas. Kansas State College, Agricultural Experiment Station Bulletin 393:1–118.

Gittleman, J. L. 1985. Carnivore body size: ecological and taxonomic correlates. Oecologia 67:540–554. CrossRef

Gittleman, J. L., and P. H. Harvey. 1982. Carnivore home-range size, metabolic needs and ecology. Behavioral Ecology and Sociobiology 10:57–63. CrossRef

Gompper, M. E., and J. L. Gittleman. 1991. Home range scaling: intraspecific and comparative trends. Oecologia 87:343–348. CrossRef

Hinton, J. W., M. J. Chamberlain, and Rabon, D. R. Jr. 2013. Red wolf (Canis rufus) recovery: a review with suggestions for future research. Animals 3:722–744. CrossRef

Hosmer, D. W., and S. Lemeshow. 2000. Applied logistical regression. John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York.

Hutchinson, G. E. 1959. Homage to Santa Rosalia or why there are so many kinds of animals? American Naturalist 93:145–159. CrossRef

Kelly, B. T., P. S. Miller, and U. S. Seal. 1999. Population and habitat viability assessment workshop for the red wolf (Canis rufus). Conservation Breeding Specialist Group (SSC/IUCN), Apple Valley, Minnesota.

Kishida, O., G. C. Trussell, A. Mougi, and K. Nishimura. 2010. Evolutionary ecology of inducible morphological plasticity in predator–prey interaction: toward the practical links with population ecology. Population Ecology 52:37–46. CrossRef

Leopold, B. D., and M. J. Chamberlain. 2001. Carnivorous furbearers. Pp. 248–277 in Wildlife of southern forests: habitat and management (J. D. Dickson, ed.). Hancock House Publishers, Blaine, Washington.

MacLeod, N. 2004. Phylogenetic signals in morphometric data. Pp. 100–138 in Morphology, shape and phylogeny (N. MacLeod and P. L. Forey, eds.). Taylor & Francis Group, New York.

MacLeod, N., and P. L. Forey. 2004. Introduction: morphology, shape, and phylogenetics. Pp. 1–7 in Morphology, shape and phylogeny (N. MacLeod and P. L. Forey, eds.). Taylor & Francis Group, New York.

Miller, C. R., J. R. Adams, and L. P. Waits. 2003. Pedigree-based assignment tests for reversing coyote (Canis latrans) introgression into the wild red wolf (Canis rufus) population. Molecular Ecology 12:3287–3301. CrossRef, PubMed

Nelson, G. 1989. Species and taxa: systematics and evolution. Pp. 63–81 in Speciation and its consequences (L. F. Marcus, M. Corti, A. Loy, G. J. P. Naylor, and D. E. Slice, eds.). Plenum Press, New York.

Nowak, R. M. 1979. North American Quaternary Canis. University of Kansas Museum of Natural History Monograph 6:1–154.

Nowak, R. M. 2002. The original status of wolves in eastern North America. Southeastern Naturalist 1:95–130. BioOne

Palomares, F., and T. M. Caro. 1999. Interspecific killing among mammalian carnivores. American Naturalist 153:492–508. CrossRef

Rabon, D. R., R. Bartel, and A. Beyer. 2013. Red wolf adaptive management plan FY13–FY15. United States Fish and Wildlife Service, Manteo, North Carolina.

R Development Core Team. 2013. R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. http://www.R-project.org. Accessed 1 November 2012.

Rosenzweig, M. L. 1966. Community structure in sympatric Carnivora. Journal of Mammalogy 47:602–612. CrossRef

Rutledge, L. Y., P. J. Wilson, F. C. Klütsch, B. R. Patterson, and B. N. White. 2012. Conservation genomics in perspective: a holistic approach to understanding Canis evolution in North America. Biological Conservation 155:186–192. CrossRef

Sikes, R. S., W. L. Gannon, and the Animal Care and Use Committee of the American Society of Mammalogists. 2011. Guidelines of the American Society of Mammalogists for the use of wild mammals in research. Journal of Mammalogy 92:235–253.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1989. Red wolf recovery plan. United States Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 2007. Red wolf (Canis rufus) 5-year status review: summary and evaluation. United States Wildlife Service, Atlanta, Georgia.

Wainwright, P. C. 1996. Ecological explanation through functional morphology: the feeding biology of sunfishes. Ecology 77:1336–1343. CrossRef

Way, J. G. 2007. A comparison of body mass of Canis latrans (coyotes) between eastern and western North America. Northeastern Naturalist 14:111–124. BioOne

Wayne, R. K., and S. M. Jenks. 1991. Mitochondrial DNA analysis implying extensive hybridization of the endangered red wolf Canis rufus. Nature 351:565–568. CrossRef

Wilson, P. J., et al. 2000. DNA profiles of the eastern Canadian wolf and the red wolf provide evidence for a common evolutionary history independent of the gray wolf. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78:2156–2166. CrossRef

Article Views

» Abstract & References

Full Text
PDF (252 KB)