(Note: this is from the 1990 version the action plan
Click here for the 2004 version of the Canid Action Plan)

Forewords and Acknowledgements

(from Foxes, Wolves, Jackals, and Dogs,
the IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group's 1990 Action Plan)

Perhaps it is insight into their individualism won through our association with domestic dogs, perhapourrie of reasons that blend into their appeal, the 34 species that comprise the family Canidae are special. They are special because they have, as perceived friend or foe, preoccupied the imaginations of mankind for millennia. They are special because the breadth of their adaptations makes them enthralling to science. They are special because the contradictory facets of their relations with people perplex the conservationist. The possibility that we are heedlessly, perhaps needlessly, mismanaging many of them is saddening; the probability that our negligence will force several more to extinction should fill us with bottomless dismay. It demands action, and that is why we have written the Canid Action Plan.

Species action plans are produced by the Specialist Groups of the Species Survival Commission (SSC), a branch of the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN). The idea is that they should focus on the conservation priorities for a particular group of animals. By highlighting problems, debating priorities and suggesting action, the authors of these plans aspire to stimulate the conservation of their group of species. More often than not, the task of preparing these plans points more to the breadth of our ignorance than to the depth of our knowledge, but even that can be stimulating and useful. This booklet, "'The Canid Action Plan," has grown from the deliberations of the IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group. The Group was formed in 1981. Fearing the unwieldiness of large committees, its core membership is small approximately one dozen international specialists (see Appendix 1). However, the Group is supported by an army of affiliates around the world, whose efforts have produced the data on which this action plan is based (see Appendix 2).

The Canid Specialist Group has held major meetings in Helsinki (1982), in Edmonton (1985), and in Rome (1989), each time in conjunction with the International Theriological Congress. We also met in Krakow, Poland, in 1988 in association with the International Union of Game Biologists. These meetings have been very fruitful, each introducing a flush of new experts to join those stalwarts who have managed to attend them all. At each, we have benefited from spoken papers and stimulating discussion. Nonetheless, I think it honest to conclude that we have felt frustrated that our efforts have led to nothing more substantial than debate.

To combat this, our first endeavour was to compile a Canid Conservation Dossier. This involved the compilation of species-specific papers which were added to the growing dossier and circulated quite widely. Notable amongst those early members of the Canid Specialist Group for the effort they put into the dossier were James Dietz, Lory Frame, Pall Hersteinsson, A.J.T. Jonsingh, James Malcolm, and Patti Moehlman. Our plan had been for the Dossier to grow to a point at which it could be published as a book. However, that plan was overtaken by events as the top priority became completion of this action plan, which has, in some respects, usurped some of the role originally envisaged for the Canid Conservation Dossier. Time will tell how best we should proceed from here, but the important point is to acknowledge how the efforts of those who prepared dossier papers contributed to the evolution of this action plan.

In writing this action plan, Joshua Ginsberg and I have, time and again, been thwarted in our efforts to phrase simple conclusions, although we have been vividly aware that, to be effective, the action suggested in such a document should be straightforward. This dilemma is at least partly a reflection of the nature of the Canidae and their diverse dealings with people. The Simien jackal appears to need seclusion from people and their dogs, if it is to survive in its highland refuges. The African wild dog's intolerance of human intrusion, and its need for vast space spell certain conflict with modem man. The bush dog is so rarely seen that we have no idea about its circumstances, but fear the worst. On the other hand, red foxes are notorious for their success in urban settings, and plenty of other canids, ranging from coyotes to crab-eating zorros, seem able to thrive amidst human settlements. Management of various canids (largely prompted by rabies control and fur harvest, along with attempts to limit perceived depredation upon domestic stock) leads to the slaughter of hundreds of thousands of foxes annually, thousands of wolves and a handful of African wild dogs. But then, there are many foxes and a fair number of wolves to withstand this onslaught (ill-conceived although it may sometimes be), whereas there is scarcely a handful of wild dogs left. When the issues are so disparate, what logical rules are we to use in assigning priorities between the management of the many and the conservation and management of the few? The logical morass thickens with the realization that the fox trotting across your field of view may be, simultaneously, a resource for the trapper, a health hazard to the rabies official, a quarry to the huntsman, a subject to the photographer, vermin to the poultry farmer, and a joy to behold to the aesthete. What is more, their judgements are neither right nor wrong according to some self-appointed prophet--each could argue a case, but would do so using incomparable currencies (how are we to equate units of jobs versus units of cultural heritage versus units of suffering versus money etc?). Again and again, scientific judgement trips over ethical judgement.

In writing this booklet we have tried at least to untangle these issues, even if we could not resolve them. For me, progress in

this task took a major bound forward with the arrival in Oxford of Dr. Joshua Ginsberg. Dr. Ginsberg joined the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit at Oxford University in 1988, and soon afterwards became Deputy Chairman of the Canid Specialist Group. His energy and clarity of thought have had an enormous impact on this text. He and I would both like to acknowledge especially Miss Lynn Clayton, whose groundwork laid the foundations for our writing. Wolves are watched over by a separate Specialist Group, and we are grateful to that group and, in particular, its chairman, Dr. David Mech, for supplying the information we present on wolves. Furthermore, we are grateful for grants from the International Fur Trade Federation, the People's Trust for Endangered Species and from the IUCN through the good offices of Dr. Simon Stuart, without which this work could not have been done. Preparation of the Plan has involved a mountainous correspondence, the burden of which fell largely on Dr. Ginsberg's shoulders. He received much able assistance from Karen da Silva. We list in Appendix 2 the names and addresses of all those around the world who have corresponded with us, and we thank them all. In addition, we thank Amie Bräutigam, Jeff McNeely, Ulie Seal, Simon Stuart and Rosemary Woodruff for their help with various chapters, and Juliet Clutton-Brock for proofreading the final version.

Clearly it is my aim, as Chairman of the Group, and coauthor of the Plan, to foster sensitive and scientific conservation of the Canidae. The road to this aim involves considerations of many turnings: there are the special roles of disease, depredation on stock, and fur harvests in canid conservation; there is the difficulty of inter-specific competition between similar species, and the perplexing issue of hybridization with domestic dogs. We have raised each of these issues in Chapters 9 to 12. We have been unimpressed by some of the cases made against canids, and by the unimaginative nature of many traditional solutions. Yet we have been heartened by some innovative ideas (such as the oral vaccination of foxes against rabies, and the use of aversive conditioning to forestall predation). However, before deciding which turn to take along the road to conservation of canids, one must first ask why travel that road at all. I could answer with comments on the stability of communities, the diversity of gene pools, the minimum sizes of viable populations and other more or less abstruse notions. But at the bottom of it, I want canids conserved because I like them. If you like them too, then hopefully you will find some merit in our recommendations. If you do not like them, then my task is to change your mind, and because I suspect that this is more likely the more you learn about canids, I am hopeful that this booklet may speed your conversion.

David W. Macdonald, Chairman
IUCN/SSC Canid Specialist Group
and Wildlife Conservation Research Unit

One of the species this action plan covers is the grey wolf ( Canis lupus). As a species, the wolf still survives in large numbers. However, that is only because it happens to have had the most extensive original range of any land mammal. The wolf has been exterminated from most of western Europe, the United States, and Mexico.

Wolf conservation efforts, then, must be devoted both to bolstering remnant populations that are threatened or endangered, and to restoring wolves to ecosystems intact enough to support them. In the United States, Yellowstone National Park, where wolves were wiped out over 50 years ago, stands out as a prime example of the latter. Central Scandinavia represents a similar challenge in Europe; less than 10 remain there, including only a single breeding female. The closely related red wolf (Canis rufus) of the southeastern United States is gone from the wild except for a few animals recently reintroduced to North Carolina.

Thus this Action Plan proposes such efforts as these, but it also calls attention to the many other wolf populations throughout the northern hemisphere whose status is tenuous or unknown. The human population pressures anticipated during the next few decades may well threaten several of these poorly known wolf populations.

This makes the Action Plan especially timely. If the wolf recovery and research efforts proposed herein can be carried out during the next decade, they probably will make the difference between further loss of the wolf and holding the line against such a loss.

L. David Mech
Chairman
IUCN/SSC Wolf Specialist Group

Return to Canid Action Plan Table of Contents or the CSG Home Page.