Carnivores also sometimes impose costs on some of the people who coexist with them.
Enter a mailing address in the search field top center. Zoom in using mouse or ‘+’ button upper left. Switch between risk maps, satellite view, or street view at upper left.
Wolf Risk Maps
Estimated risk of wolf attack on livestock within 100 km of any Wisconsin wolf pack (2006 risk map based on wolf-years 1999-2006 validated with data from wolf-years 2007-2009; 2011 risk map uses the same model on wolf-years 2009-2011; wolf-year 2011 ended 15 April 2012). The model is >90% correct in predicting 235 sites of wolf attack on livestock. Black areas represent the lowest risk category where livestock are predicted to be unaffected (bearing in mind the 9% error rate of the model). Other colors represent even distributions of risk from blue (low risk) to red (highest-risk). overall 43% of wolf attacks on livestock fell in red areas (6.2% of the map). Risk was not estimated for gray areas. Risk is estimated from distance to the nearest wolf pack, distance to forest, and percent area under grass, hay, or pasture, as explained in Treves, A., Martin, K.A., Wydeven A.P., Wiedenhoeft, J.E. (2011) Forecasting Environmental Hazards and the Application of Risk Maps to Predator Attacks on Livestock. Bioscience 61:451-458. The map also predicts wolf lethal control locations (84%).
Preventive intervention can be more focused and cost effective when high-risk clusters are targeted than when risk is assumed to be ubiquitous. First, private citizens may be able to modify activities, animal husbandry, or habitats to reduce their vulnerability with a diverse array of antipredator deterrents. Second, managers can work proactively with residents on cost-effective preventions in areas where conflicts are most likely. Third, policymakers may use risk maps to promote selective treatment of both problem predators and problem properties.
Please visit our Publications webpage to see scientific articles on these topics.