As I have been reading case studies of wolf packs, I have noticed a tendency whereby some packs seem to produce individuals who are more eager to wander for long periods on their own and who cover greater distances during their dispersal.
Meanwhile, the majority of the dispersers seem content enough if they can settle near their natal range or on the edge of the wolf population in the area.
These behavioural differences may be affected by many factors other than genetic, individual, natal pack cultural influences.
For example, in dense populations individuals might be forced to disperse further and if the individual’s dense natal population is surrounded by inhospitable land and then attached to other equally dense populations, the individual might have to roam for months or even years over great distances to finally find a breeding vacancy in an existing pack or a territory vacancy.
However, on some occasions, individuals have dispersed far or have made ‘unnecessarily’ (not very pragmatic) challenging dispersal decisions without a clearly identifiable cause.
I believe that some wolves (due to genetic reasons but also through social learning and personality traits) are better adapted to take on long distance dispersal that might lead them into unknown areas, that might leave them isolated from other wolves for long periods of time and, eventually, when they settle, they might have not reached an established wolf population but they might have had to start a new population (if they have been lucky enough to find a mate in the remote area).
Meanwhile, I also believe there are other wolves who prefer keeping close to other wolves (their natal families or their natal population, or, indeed, any wolf population).
These might be individuals who will not venture out on no-wolf’s land (at least not far) as they are perhaps not as well adjusted to spend great amount of time away from other wolves and their social interactions.
Such individuals perhaps even find it hard to start a new family unless they are surrounded or at least spatially attached to other wolf packs.
Their ability to reproduce or to establish territories might be impaired unless they are exposed to some wolf social life elements.
For example, the establishment of a new territory is linked to scent-marking and scent-marking is largely a social activity of social significance (lone wolves do not scent-mark due to avoidance behaviour but perhaps also because they are not motivated to).
Scent-marking probably depends on hormonal drive but also impacts hormones and, consequently, reproduction.
Accordingly, I believe there might be wolves who can start new packs and reproduce successfully even if they are in isolation and very novel settings.
And there might be wolves who would fail to start a family and to reproduce unless the area already has some resident packs.
These differences might be crucial in determine the success of reintroduction projects not only where wolves are being reintroduced into entirely unoccupied regions but also where individuals are added to existent populations but very remotely to where they have come from.
I think that many wolves (the majority) experience stress if they have been removed from their familiar habitats and/or if they have not travelled the distance to the new place and therefore they cannot mentally map the new location with respect to other wolf populations.
Thereby, even if these wolves are brought to smaller or larger populations, the lack of data between their former home and the new home might cause them to feel troubled because they cannot estimate how far they are from other wolf populations.
The effect of isolation, thereby, might work even under circumstances when there are wolves around (but the individual is not sure how many wolves and where other wolf populations are).
This might lead to exploration behaviour whereby the individuals roam away in order to understand the distribution of other wolf populations.
Or else, wolves might feel a pressure to produce a large number of offspring in order to grow their population quickly so that it connected with other wolf populations or came close to them.
Most wolves are translocated, e.g., by air and therefore they might have a sense of direction and the distance travelled but they have not been able to actually explore the area between the two locations.
It might be more advantageous to choose individuals for such translocation projects whose family histories (e.g., the dispersal behaviour by their parents and siblings) have demonstrated adaptations to isolation, long-distance travel, ability to settle in new places far from other wolves etc.
I believe that wolves are even aware of this and that once they arrive at the new location, their choice of mates might be impacted by the ability of the partner to adjust to the circumstances.
They might either choose mates who are equally adapted to settle in no-wolf land, far from home and its familiar habitat without clear understanding of how they got there; or they might choose mates who are not adapted but who feel familiar because they are in need of psychological familiarity with the social group and the place.
This could lead to the situations observed, for example, during recolonization of California or reintroduction of wolves to Isle Royale.
In California, two siblings mated (and, indeed, most individuals there are more or less related as direct or indirect descendants of Imnaha Pack).
Their mating choice was definitely impacted by lack of options (no other wolves around) but I find it equally possible that they selected close kin because Imnaha Pack was extremely well equipped to handle long-distance dispersal, isolation and the rest of the conditions for recolonizers.
As there are not many such ‘Imnaha Packs’ (because humans largely select against the traits exhibited by wolves who are the most capable adventurers, explorers and founders of new populations), they might have had to mate with one another because, despite the downsides of inbreeding, they were the best fit (from the perspective of psychology, i.e., the individual’s ability to deal with the challenges that are implied within starting a new population).
Indeed, most wolves might not only be less adapted to start a whole new population.
Most wolves might prefer to stay close to their familiar population and its type of habitat and they might suffer slight psychological discomfort (although not overly so because they have had to evolve disperse far) upon replacing their natal population for another one, especially, if these populations are distant from one another and if these populations inhabit very contrasting habitats.
In the case of Isle Royale wolves, where a brother also mated a sister despite having other mate choices available among the reintroduced wolves, I believe that they might have either picked a partner whom they deemed fit to make sense of this strange situation they have found themselves in; or they might have picked someone familiar because they might have been psychologically incapable of starting a family under circumstances where absolutely everything is unfamiliar and they have lost most of the connection with their home (apart from a vague sense of direction).
Being able to locate home in one’s mind might be important to wolves because they also have the opportunity to return.
Some wolves disperse several times and they can come back home between these dispersal attempts even after longer absence.
Wolves might keep in mind where home is and the physical journey between the home and any new given locations might be important because it might inform the wolf on some risks they are taking and how far they are retreating from the opportunity to go back and find solace and shelter.
The connection with the home might give the wolf a sense of security and so might the connection with its familiar habitat and familiar population.
If this connection is severed in a way that is too confounding for the individual, they might not be able to adapt equally well as other individuals who are genetically and socially prepared to handle separation from what is familiar to them.
I believe that reintroduction efforts would be more successful and less traumatic if these potential differences between ‘psychological types of wolves’ were first studied and then taken into account.
Moreover, it could be important that wolves were encouraged to travel by themselves rather than being transported.
The distance of the journey and even the direction etc. might be highly informative to the wolf.
The wolf might wish to make assessments regarding the proximity of other wolf packs as such estimates are essential with regard to mating prospects for the individual and the individual’s future offspring.
In fact, one of the reasons why wolves might perhaps choose mates differently under some ‘less typical’ circumstances could be related to their evaluation of the situation.
Their mate should be able to withstand the initial isolation and together they should produce offspring that can also travel great distances, prove themselves self-reliant and psychologically unharmed while on their own for longer periods.
Also, as the wolf travels, it might take into account the gradual environmental changes in the habitats.
The further the wolf retreats from their natal area, the greater the differences in the prey basis and behaviour, climate and other variables might become.
While wolves are known to travel far (although it is not clear to us how ‘natural’ this behaviour truly is because the long dispersal might have also be the result of historical persecutions of the wolves), as they arrive in new regions, they might encounter conditions that they are not genetically well adapted to handle.
Journeying down from boreal to more desert habitats, wolves would change their diet from, e.g., large moose to smaller ungulates or even rodents.
The individual would prefer to decide whether it is within their scope to hunt the prey that resides in any particular place and whether they can figure out the prey behavioural patterns and use of habitat.
If the individual is family-oriented, they might not want to invest a significant amount of time in order to acquire a whole new skill level to navigate the new habitat and learn to find the prey and to kill it.
On the other hand, individuals who are more inclined to explore and to take it slow, might not feel pressured to get it all figured out at once.
Thus, the former individuals might prefer to settle close to known wolf populations because it allows them to sooner find a mate and to apply the knowledge they have acquired in their natal pack which resided in similar environment.
The latter individuals might not suffer psychological discomfort if they did not get to breed right after reaching sexual maturity and, indeed, if several years were passed in studies and adventures.
This could stem from the genetic potential of longevity in different individuals.
I have not read much about genetic impact on lifespan in wolves but I have noticed that there are wolves who live up to about 5 – 6 years (or even less) or up to 10 – 11 years.
While the lifespan is often determined by other factors (population density, prey availability etc.), I have come to suspect that there could be genetic basis to the longevity potential, as well, because it seems to me that some wolves are more ‘chill’ than others and do not attempt to rush their dispersal and reproduction.
If the wolf inherently trusts that they would have years to build a family even if they spent a a few travelling and exploring, and adapting first, they might not suffer stress under circumstances where they are unsure how to handle the new habitat and the new social situation in a manner that benefits the family they wish to start as soon as possible.
There could be even population cultures that arise based on prey type, habitat type, population density and the ability to figure these cultures out might be important for the individual.
Some wolves might be better able to ‘infiltrate’ different types of societies while others might be more ‘traditional’ seeking out familiar patterns.
There could be other reasons I cannot think of presently but I wonder if there might be an effort to ‘herd wolves’ toward some target populations, first selecting wolves who befit the long dispersal, exploration type, long-lived pattern and then perhaps assisting them (unnotably to the dispersing individual) on their way by, e.g., strategically placing carcasses along their route in order to divert them on the path chosen by the reintroducers.
Notes by Ieva 