Register      Login
Wildlife Research Wildlife Research Society
Ecology, management and conservation in natural and modified habitats
Shopping Cart: ( empty )
You are here: Home > Journals > WR > WR10022
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Contents Vol 37(8)

Biological, technical, and social aspects of applying electrified fladry for livestock protection from wolves (Canis lupus)

N. J. Lance A B C , S. W. Breck A E , C. Sime C , P. Callahan D and J. A. Shivik A B
+ Author Affiliations
- Author Affiliations

A US Department of Agriculture, Wildlife Services, National Wildlife Research Center, 4101 La Porte Avenue, Fort Collins, CO 80526, USA.

B Department of Wildland Resources, Utah State University, 163 BNR Building, Logan, UT 84322-5295, USA.

C Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, 1820 Meadowlark Lane, Butte, MT 59701, USA.

D Wildlife Science Center, 5463 West Broadway, Forest Lake, MN 55025, USA.

E Corresponding author. Email: stewart.w.breck@aphis.usda.gov

Wildlife Research 37(8) 708-714 https://doi.org/10.1071/WR10022
Submitted: 11 February 2010  Accepted: 3 July 2010   Published: 22 December 2010

Abstract

Context. Wolf predation on livestock can cause economic hardship for livestock producers as well as reduce tolerance for wolves. Lethal control of wolves is often controversial; thus, development of effective non-lethal methods for reducing wolf–livestock conflict is important. Electrified fladry is a new tool that is similar to fladry (i.e. a barrier system that scares wolves), but electrified fladry also incorporates an electric shock designed to decrease the potential for wolves to habituate to the barriers.

Aim. Evaluation of electrified fladry requires understanding of its effectiveness relative to fladry and the costs and benefits of applying it in the field.

Methods. By using captive wolves, we compared the effectiveness of electrified fladry v. fladry for protecting a food resource during 2-week trials. We then performed a field trial with electrified fladry for managing wolves in Montana, USA. We measured livestock depredation and wolf activity on six treatment and six control pastures, calculated the cost of installation and maintenance, and surveyed all study participants about application of electrified fladry.

Key results. We found electrified fladry 2–10 times more effective than fladry at protecting food in captivity and that hunger increased the likelihood of wolves testing fladry barriers. In field trials, we installed 14.0 km of EF systems in treatment pastures and detected wolves twice in control pastures but never in the treatment pastures. No livestock were killed by wolves in treatment or control pastures. A completed electrified fladry system cost $2303 for the first km and $2032 for each additional km, and required 31.8 person-hours per kilometre to install. We observed 18 failures (i.e. electrified system stopped working) during a total of 394 days of use. In total, 83% of ranchers who used fladry would continue to use it under certain conditions, indicating some psychological benefit to users.

Conclusions and implications. The present study has demonstrated that electrified fladry offers superior protection compared with non-electrified fladry; however, further field tests are warranted to help determine whether benefits outweigh costs.


Acknowledgements

Funding was provided by the USDA-Wildlife Services-National Wildlife Research Center, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, USDA-Natural Resource Conservation Service and the Animal Welfare Institute. Logistical support was provided by USDA-WS-Montana Program, Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks and the Confederated Salish and Kootenai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation. We thank S. Durham and M. Lewis for their valuable statistical and survey-design expertise, J. Fischer for help with GIS, and K. Malsom, M. Row, M. Buckman, J. Cade and B. Ebson for long hours and patience during daunting captures. In addition, we thank S. Courville for help with landowner relations, F. Provenza and two anonymous reviewers for input on earlier drafts, and many volunteers for help in the field.


References

Bangs, E. E. , and Shivik, J. (2001). Managing wolf conflict with livestock in the northwestern United States. Carnivore Damage Prevention News 3, 2–5.
Breck S. W. (2004). Minimizing carnivore–livestock conflict: the importance and process of research in the search for optimal solutions. In ‘Predators and People: From Conflict to Conservation’. (Eds N. A. Fascione, A. Delach and M. E. Smith.) pp. 13–27. (Island Press: Washington, DC.)

Burnham K. P. , and Anderson D. R. (2002). ‘Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach.’ 2nd edn. (Springer: New York.)

Ciucci, P. , and Boitani, L. (1998). Wolf and dog depredation on livestock in central Italy. Wildlife Society Bulletin 26, 504–514.
Lance N. J. (2009). Application of electrified fladry to decrease risk of livestock depredation by wolves (Canis lupus). M.Sc. Thesis. Utah State University, Logan, UT.

Mech L. D. (1970). ‘The Wolf: The Ecology and Behavior of an Endangered Species.’ (Doubleday/Natural History Press: Garden City, NY.)

Mech, L. D. (1996). A new era for carnivore conservation. Wildlife Society Bulletin 24, 397–401.
Phillips M. K. , Bangs E. E. , Mech L. D. , Kelly B. T. , and Fazio B. B. (2004). Extermination and recovery of the red wolf and grey wolf in the continuous United States. In ‘Biology and Conservation of Wild Canids’. (Eds D. W. MacDonald and C. Sillero-Zubiri.) pp. 297–309. (Oxford University Press: New York.)

Reiter, D. K. , Brunson, W. , and Schmidt, R. H. (1999). Public attitudes toward wildlife damage management and policy. Wildlife Society Bulletin 27, 746–758.
Sime C. A. , Bangs E. E. , Bradley L. , Steuber J. E. , Glazier K. , Hoover P. J. , Asher V. , Laudon K. , Ross M. , and Trapp J. (2007). Gray wolves and livestock in Montana: a recent history of damage management: 1987–2006. In ‘Proceedings of the 12th Wildlife Damage Management Conference’. (Eds D. L. Nolte, W. M. Arjo and D. H. Stalman.) pp. 16–35. (USDA-WS-National Wildlife Research Center: Fort Collins, CO.)

Sime C. A. , Asher V. , Bradley L. , Laudon K. , Ross M. , Trapp J. , Atkinson M. , and Steuber J. E. (2008). Montana gray wolf conservation and management 2007 annual report. Montana Fish, Wildlife & Parks, Helena, MT.

Treves, A. , Jurewicz, R. R. , and Naughton-Treves, L. (2002). Wolf depredation on domestic animals in Wisconsin, 1976–2000. Wildlife Society Bulletin 30, 231–241.


White, G. C. , and Burnham, K. P. (1999). Program MARK: survival estimation from populations of marked animals. Bird Study 46(Suppl.), 120–139.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Wilson, D. S. , Coleman, K. , Clark, A. B. , and Biederman, L. (1993). Shy bold continuum in pumpkinseed sunfish (Lepomis-Gibbosus) – an ecological study of a psychological trait. Journal of Comparative Psychology 107, 250–260.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |

Wilson, D. S. , Clark, A. B. , Coleman, K. , and Dearstyne, T. (1994). Shyness and boldness in humans and other animals. Trends in Ecology & Evolution 9, 442–446.
| Crossref | GoogleScholarGoogle Scholar |