Re - Frontenac News Wolves

Mar 21, 2018

Media reports should clarify a complex issue not add to the confusion. The header "Protecting a species that may not exist – Algonquin Wolves" attempts to add a confusing bias before the article begins.

Statements that the Eastern Wolf has been re-named the "Frontenac Wolf" and that most of them live "within or near Frontenac Park" are important errors when the issue being addressed has a basis in geography.

Such errors make the reader wonder whether they stemmed from the reporter or the cited authority. Hannah Barron is not a researcher in the sense of scientific or biological research. She was a Masters graduate student at Trent University with a history of brief jobs including 6 months as manager of the Eastern Wolf Surveys ending in 2014. The Eastern Wolf Survey is an outreach and education program, affiliated with but not part of a scientific research program She does not appear on their current website. Introductions of speakers at "Friends of" meetings is one thing; citing people as authorities in debating an issue is something else. The two should be distinguished in media reports.

Debating a complex issue that combines population genetics, evolution, behavioural modification and trapping for profit requires absolute neutrality and accuracy in reporting findings. The article cited in "Science" by Virginia Morelli actually refers to a news report by Virginia Morell, a writer for National Geographic, reporting on a research paper by Bridgett M. vonHoldt, et al. 2016. Science Advances Vol.2, No. 7. (http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2016/07/how-do-you-save-wolf-s-not-really-wolf). That study tested whether eastern (Algonquin) wolves evolved from a mixture of grey (timber) wolf genetic lines and coyote genetic lines or evolved from a separate ancient genetic line. The study concluded that Great Lakes region wolves, including the Algonquin Wolf, evolved from a mix of grey (timber) wolf and coyote genetic lines possibly as little as 10,000 years ago. This question was important only with regard to the wording and the application of the U.S. endangered species legislation. The conclusion in no way changes the value we place on the Algonquin Wolf as a natural resource.

The other authority cited is the Fur Management Association who say openly that they depend on coyotes for a supply of marketable furs. Does the Fur Management Association have any evidence in support of their doubt of the existence of the Algonquin Wolf?

Arriving at a clear understanding of a complicated issue such as the evolution of wolf relatives can only be achieved by using comparable sets of evidence, not notions, not anecdotes and not confused media reports.