Conservation Evidence strives to be as useful to conservationists as possible. Please take our survey to help the team improve our resource.

Providing evidence to improve practice

Individual study: No trespassing: using a biofence to manipulate wolf movements

Published source details

Ausband D.E., Mitchell M.S., Bassing S.B. & White C. (2013) No trespassing: using a biofence to manipulate wolf movements. Wildlife Research, 40, 207–216


This study is summarised as evidence for the intervention(s) shown on the right. The icon shows which synopsis it is relevant to.

Use scent to deter predation of livestock by mammals to reduce human-wildlife conflict Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

A replicated, before-and-after study in 2008–2011 in three forest-dominated sites in Idaho, USA (Ausband et al. 2013) found that marking grey wolf Canis lupus territories with lines of scent from other wolf packs restricted wolf movements in some but not all cases. Results were not tested for statistical significance. Overall, the proportion of location fixes indicating that wolves had crossed scent lines was variable after scents were deployed (0–23%) and before scent deployment (1–12%). No incursions across scent lines were recorded in single years for two wolf packs (out of five pack/year combinations). In other cases, there was less evidence of scent lines reducing incursions. Two parallel 10–36-km lines were marked across wolf pack territories in 2010 (two packs) and 2011 (three packs). Lines were marked with 3 ml of urine from a different wolf pack, every 500 m and with 6 ml of urine every 750 m, and scats every km. Scent marks were refreshed every 10–14 days in June–August. Wolf packs (8–14 wolves) were monitored by satellite tracking of 2–4 wolves in each pack for 3–4 years during May–September of 2008–2011.

(Summarised by Ricardo Rocha)