An Isolated Wolf Population in Central Wisconsin

  • Richard P. Thiel
  • Wayne Hall
  • Ellen Heilhecker
  • Adrian P. Wydeven


Pack Size Territory Size Gray Wolf Wolf Population Deer Density 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.



We acknowledge the work of numerous summer howl and winter track survey volunteers, various personnel of the US Fish and Wildlife Service at Necedah National Wildlife Refuge, US Department of the Army personnel, officials at Wood County and Jackson County Forestry, numerous Bureau of Wildlife Management staff within the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources, and Matthew Schuler who performed the statistical calculations.


  1. Ballard, W. B., Whitman, J. S., and Gardner, C. L. 1987. Ecology of an exploited wolf population in south-central Alaska. Wildlife Monographs. 98: 1–54.Google Scholar
  2. Curtis, J. T. 1959. The vegetation of Wisconsin. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  3. Finley, R. W. 1976. Geography of Wisconsin: a content outline. Madison, WI: Regents of the University of Wisconsin System.Google Scholar
  4. Fritts, S. H. and Mech, L. D. 1981. Dynamics, movements, and feeding ecology of a newly protected wolf population in northwestern Minnesota. Wildlife Monograph. 80: 1–79.Google Scholar
  5. Fuller, T. K. and Sampson, B. A. 1988. Evaluation of a simulated howling survey for wolves. Journal of Wildlife Management. 52: 60–63.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Fuller, T. K., Mech, L. D., and Cochrane, J. F. 2003. Wolf population dynamics. In Wolves: behavior, ecology, and conservation, eds. L. D. Mech and L. Boitani, pp. 161–191. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  7. Grange, W. B. 1948. Wisconsin grouse problems. Madison, WI: Wisconsin Conservation Department.Google Scholar
  8. Harrington, F. H. and Mech, L. D. 1982. An analysis of howling response parameters useful for wolf pack censusing. Journal of Wildlife Management. 46: 686–693.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hayes, R. D. and Harestad, A. S. 2000. Demography of a recovering wolf population in the Yukon. Canadian Journal of Zoology. 78: 36–48.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Heilhecker, E., Thiel, R. P., and Hall, W., Jr. In Press. Wolf, Canis lupus, behavior in areas of frequent human activity. Canadian Field-Naturalist. Google Scholar
  11. Heisey, D. M. and Fuller, T. K. 1985. Evaluation of survival and cause-specific mortality rates using telemetry data. Journal of Wildlife Management. 49: 668–674.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Martin, L. 1965. The physical geography of Wisconsin. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  13. Mech, L. D. 2006. Prediction failure of a wolf landscape model. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 34: 874–877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Mech, L. D. and Boitani, L. 2003. Wolf social ecology. In Wolves: behavior, ecology, and conservation, eds. L. D. Mech and L. Boitani, pp. 1–34. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
  15. Mech, L. D. and Nowak, R. M. 1981. Return of the gray wolf to Wisconsin. American Midland Naturalist. 105: 408–409.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Mech, L. D., Fritts, S. H., and Paul, W. J. 1988. Relationship between winter severity and wolf depredations on domestic animals in Minnesota. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 16: 269–272.Google Scholar
  17. Millspaugh, J. and Marzluff, J. M. 2001. Radio tracking and animal populations. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.Google Scholar
  18. Mladenoff, D. J., Sickley, T. A., Haight, R. G., and Wydeven, A. P. 1995. A regional landscape analysis and prediction of favorable gray wolf habitat in the Northern Great Lakes Region. Conservation Biology. 9: 279–294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Mladenoff, D. J., Sickley, T. A., and Wydeven, A. P. 1999. Predicting gray wolf landscape recolonization: logisitic regression models vs new field data. Ecological Applications. 9: 37–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mladenoff, D. J., Clayton, M. K., Sickley, T. A., and Wydeven, A. P. 2006. L. D. Mech critique of our work lacks scientific validity. Wildlife Society Bulletin. 34: 878–881.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Schultz, G. 1985. Wisconsin’s foundations: a review of the state’s geology and its influence on geography and human activity. Cooperative Extension Service, University of Wisconsin. Dubuque, IA: Kendall/Hunt Publishing Company.Google Scholar
  22. Thiel, R. P. 1993. The timber wolf in Wisconsin: life and death of a majestic predator. Madison, WI: The University of Wisconsin Press.Google Scholar
  23. Thiel, R. P. and Welch, R. J. 1981. Evidence of recent breeding activity in Wisconsin wolves. American Midland Naturalist. 106: 401–402.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Thiel, R. P., Hall, W. H., and Schultz, R. N. 1997. Early den digging by wolves, Canis lupus, in Wisconsin. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 111: 481–482.Google Scholar
  25. Thiel, R. P., Merrill, S., and Mech, L. D. 1998. Tolerance by denning wolves, Canis lupus, to human disturbance. Canadian Field-Naturalist. 112: 340–342.Google Scholar
  26. Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources. 1999. Wisconsin wolf management plan. Madison, WI: Author. Google Scholar
  27. Wydeven, A. P., Schultz, R. N., and Thiel, R. P. 1995. Monitoring of a recovering gray wolf population in Wisconsin, 1979–1991. In Ecology and conservation of wolves in a changing world, eds. L. N Carbyn, S. H. Fritts, and D. R. Seip, pp. 147–156. Edmonton, AB: Canadian Circumpolar Institute.Google Scholar
  28. Wydeven, A. P., Mladenoff, D. J, Sickley, T. A, Kohn, B. E, Thiel, R. P., and Hansen, J. L. 2001. Road density as a factor in habitat selection by wolves and other carnivores in the Great Lakes region. Endangered Species Update. 18: 110–114.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Richard P. Thiel
    • 1
  • Wayne Hall
    • 2
  • Ellen Heilhecker
    • 3
  • Adrian P. Wydeven
    • 4
  1. 1.Department of Natural ResourcesUSA
  2. 2.Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesUSA
  3. 3.New Mexico Department of Game and FishUSA
  4. 4.Wisconsin Department of Natural ResourcesUSA

Personalised recommendations