Northern Prairie Wildlife Research Center
Assessing Factors That May Predispose Minnesota
Farms To Wolf Depredation on Cattle
Introduction
Wolf (Canis lupus) depredations on livestock are a serious concern to
Minnesota farmers, resource managers, agricultural officials, environmentalists,
and state legislators. The wolf in Minnesota is currently on the federal endangered
species list in the "threatened" category. However, because wolf numbers there
have exceeded recovery levels (B. Berg and S. Benson, unpublished report, 1999),
the federal government will soon propose removing the wolf in Minnesota from
the endangered species list. Minnesota will then be responsible for wolf management,
and continued control of wolves preying on livestock will be one of the greatest
management needs (Mech 1998).
Although the total proportion of farms in wolf range that suffer verified
wolf depredations is only about 1% per year (W. J. Paul, unpublished report,
1998), several factors must be considered to provide a more complete understanding
of the importance of wolf depredations: 1) because it is difficult to verify
wolf depredations, far more livestock may be lost to wolves than are verified
(Roy and Dorrance 1976, Fritts 1982); 2) to farmers who do suffer damage,
the loss is real and significant economically, even though partially offset
by state compensation payments for verified losses; 3) over a period of years,
livestock from hundreds of farms have been preyed upon; 4) number of farms
sustaining such damage is increasing at an accelerating rate (Mech 1998);
5) wolf range is currently expanding into some of Minnesota's greatest densities
of livestock (Minnesota Agriculture Statistics 1997); and 6) the wolf population
has reached a level at which standard hunting and trapping techniques may
be unable to prevent increases (Mech 1998).

The wolf has reached federal recovery levels in Minnesota,
Wisconsin, and Michigan. |
Since 1978, when the wolf in Minnesota was downlisted from federally endangered
to threatened, the United States Fish and Wildlife Service and then the United
States Department of Agriculture's Wildlife Services (WS) have conducted lethal
control of wolves around farms where depredations have been verified (Fritts
1982, Fritts et al. 1992), a program costing $300,000 in 1998. In addition,
the Minnesota Department of Agriculture currently pays about $67,000/year in
compensation for livestock confirmed lost to wolves. Conservative projections
of these 2 costs exceed $400,000/year for the next few years (Mech 1998).
Concurrent with the increase in wolves and wolf range, the number of wolves
killed for depredation control has increased dramatically from 6 in 1979 to
216 in 1997. Projections show that a conservative estimate of the number of
wolves that may need to be killed for depredation control by 2005 might exceed
400/year (Mech 1998), a serious concern to wolf advocates and environmentalists
(Anderson 1999).

This study attempted to find animal husbandry or habitat
factors that distinguished farms suffering chronic depredations to wolves
from those that did not. The calf in foreground was killed by a wolf. |
There has long been a belief that wolves prey on livestock because of poor husbandry
practices by farmers. This could be a misinterpretation of the claim that "many
instances of wolf depredation on livestock in Minnesota seem to be related to
animal husbandry practices" (Fritts 1982:7), a statement which implicates poor
husbandry practices but does not place sole blame on them for wolf depredations.
Acknowledging that "data collection on these issues was not extended beyond
that taken for the earlier report," Fritts et al. (1992:14) indicated that "any
further conclusions are subjective" and that "research is needed to . . . determine
the causes of the onset of stock-killing behavior." Fritts (1982) and Fritts
et al. (1992) identified 3 factors as potentially predisposing livestock to
wolf depredations: 1) pasturing in wooded-brushy areas, 2) calving in wooded-brushy
areas or in remote open range rather than in or near barns, and 3) improper
disposal of carcasses, which can attract carnivores; this practice could affect
the farm involved or even neighboring farms. Similarly, livestock depredations
in western Canada seem to be related to the forest-agricultural edge (Gunson
1983, Bjorge and Gunson 1985), livestock production in forested areas (Gunson
1983), and improper carcass disposal (Tompa 1983). Gunson (1983) also stated
that livestock depredations at these edges are influenced by the number of livestock
present, animal husbandry practices, and potentially relative abundance of natural
prey.
We sought to assess the role of suspected major factors that may predispose
cattle to wolf depredations and to attempt to elucidate any unknown factors.
We did not intend to examine such basic husbandry practices as maintaining
herds in good health and nutrition and taking reasonable care of them.
Return to Contents
Next Section -- Methods