HOME | DD
mysteriouswhitewolf β Mates for Life
by-nc-nd
Published: 2011-04-13 14:53:23 +0000 UTC; Views: 3019; Favourites: 167; Downloads: 27
Redirect to original
Description
"Mates for Life"I percieve the ppl in my life as animals, i believe we all have something in common to our own respective animal and i love to express this through my artwork. This one represents me and my (fiance?) lol. n.n A redo of the original. This is probebly my favorite drawing i have ever done so i had to fix it up now that i know a little bit more. I darkened the lines in the original drawing so it would be much more clear. [link]
Related content
Comments: 85
π: 0 β©: 0
Wow....This is amazing! Its.... Extraordinary!Β
I can't even...
It takes my breath away!
π: 0 β©: 1
Awe thanks man. ^^
I havent been able to top this one yet.
π: 0 β©: 1
You're welcome. ^^
Its awesome how you drew this with pencil.
π: 0 β©: 0
This makes me so nostalgic ^^ I remember one of my bookΒ with a photo quite similar to it
π: 0 β©: 1
It may be the same book I referenced from, I just changed the colors of the wolves.
π: 0 β©: 0
Than you very much!
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you.
π: 0 β©: 1
ur welcome
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you so much!
π: 0 β©: 1
Thank you.
π: 0 β©: 0
SO CUTE! I love all the details you put into it!
π: 0 β©: 1
^v^ thank yous.
I finally was able to scan everything, instead of blurry ass photo's.
π: 0 β©: 1
Welcome!
And yay! Scanners FTW!
π: 0 β©: 0
Wolves aren't monogamous, but this drawing is wonderful. Very nice work. c:
π: 0 β©: 1
Thanks so much for the compliment.
And actually, the majority are. As it has been recorded. However, they 'can', mate with more
than one inside the pack, or even outside the pack.
Its more circumstantial. But the majority are monogamous.
This shows in an article written by "Living With Wolves" Garrick Dutcher:
"In North America, without exception, wild wolf packs only reproduce once a year, in the spring, if at all. It is well documented that it is very unusual for more than one female to breed in a pack. This simple fact of wolf biology is the case in Idaho, as it is everywhere.
Fish and Game and the Nez Perce Tribe have carefully documented breeding since reintroduction 17 years ago. In the past seven years, Fish and Game has recorded an average of 55 packs breeding each year. Only twice in these seven years did two females breed within a pack."
Here's the link if you want to read yourself. [link]
It is typically the Alpha pair that have pups, and even if another female in the pack does have
pups, the Alpha female will likely either kill them, or raise them as her own and allow only
limited contact with their birth mother. Punishing her every time she has contact with her pups.
As shown in the documented "Growing Up Wolf" on Animal Planet.
So its not really a desired thing to do.
So its incredibly unlikely the majority of the time, and most of the time if this happens,
its usually due to a switch in pack dynamics, where an Alpha is replaced.
Or where a male in one pack who isnt dominate, will 'wander off' so he can mate, sometimes with
a wolf from another pack. As recorded in the documentary "In the Valley of the Wolves." Where a
black wolf from another pack mated with a young female in the Druid pack, and then was chased
off by the Alpha's.
And also showed that it was a serious offence as the young female alone cowered before her
mother in a sort of 'apology' for the act.
Point being, wolves form bonds, thats a fact, generally only the alpha's will mate, thats why
they are also called 'the breeding pair', and unless something changes within ranks, or one
dies, they will typically only mate with eachother, and it is unusual for them to breed with
another otherwise. As it has been recorded. So they are considered monogamous.
Sorry for this horridly long post but i dont like arguing, going round and round about this
stuff, as i have before with other people so i just put all the info on the table. 
Regardless, i appreciate your compliment and the fact that you even bothered to look at my art.
And hope i didnt frustrate you. Thank you.
π: 0 β©: 1
Not an argument, just an exchange of thoughts and ideas. I like debating with people, but if you should want this discussion to cease, you only need to ask.
After some of the things Dutcher has done, I wouldn't say he's a very credible source. You're trying to say that only the top two breeding pair in wolf packs breed, and that "wolves breed once a year, if at all." If that were true, how did the wolf population in the Rockies go from 30 to over 5,000 in 14 years? Even with the conservative minimum number of 1,700, it seems to make no sense.
Lemme just pull out my handy dandy Common Wolf Misconceptions guide...
"Wolf pairs mate for life."
This is a nice, fuzzy idea, but it simply isn't true. Wolves, like most mammals of the animal kingdom, do not practice "serial monogamy". If a wolf dies, they will have no quarrels finding a new mate, and in areas where there is a high wolf density, such as the Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem, they have the most variations in their social structure when compared to other wolf packs in real life. For example, other wolves besides the top two breeding pair are allowed to mate for pups. Males have been noted to have more than one breeding female in his pack. Biologists have also seen in some wolf packs more than one male breed in a wolf pack as well as more than one female breeding. This increases the complexity of the pack structure. The reason for these opportunities is due to the close proximity of other wolves in the park. Another great example is a female leaving her pack to mate with either a rival pack male or a lone male and then rejoining her pack.[32] Wolves are also known for performing incest, which is actually sometimes the only thing they are able to do in order to survive. Great examples of this are the wolves of Ellesmere Island and Isle Royale where there is only one female in the whole family.[33]
Sources
32: Wolf pack structure in Yellowstone National Park with wolf biologist, Doug Smith
33: Wolves: Behavior, Ecology and Conservation edited by L. David Mech and Luigi Boitani
Page 58: "The term 'plural breeding' is used by researchers studying cooperative breeding in other mammals (Solomon and French 1997) and is synonymous with the term 'multiple breeding'. [...] When the breeding female accepted a mate from within the family, a second pair also successfuly copulated (Peterson 1977, 80-84)."
π: 0 β©: 1
Im not sure what wrong with him as a source?
But regardless..
Its unethical to mate with your family members,
as that would create a poor genetic gene pool.
It happens, but it doesnt happen often.
And in a populace like the Isle Royal it doesnt really count,
they dont have much of a choice because their populations are so low, and they have suffered great genetic price for it. Like twisted spines due to lack of genetic diversity.
Interbreeding is kept at a minimum in all species.
Considering that the majority of a pack consists of family members
it makes no sense that they would all breed together, besides, it is also
difficult to raise more than one litter per pack.
Which is why generally only the Alpha pair mate in the first place.
And again while it doesnt happen often, i didnt say it doesnt happen at all.
Its something circumstantial in most packs.
And my fiancee did some math:
Part 1:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Rough minimum estimate 3 pups a litter overall, considering some will die, and some litters will be large, and some small. And wolves will roughly only breed for 5 years and roughly will die at 5-6yrs of age or other causes. So this is a low minimum count. And 7-8 wolves a pack.)
From 30 wolves there will be roughly 4 packs of 7-8 wolves living within them, from the 4 packs if only 1 pair of wolves bred a year, after one year of breeding for the 4 packs only 12 pups would be born for that first year, after 5 years of breeding the 4 packs would produce 60 pups.
-----------
From the 60 wolves there will be only 8 packs of 7-8 wolves living within them, from the 8 packs only 1 pair of wolves would breed a year , after one year of breeding for the 8 packs 24 pups would be born for that first year, after 5 years of breeding the 8 packs would produce 120 pups.
----------
From the 120 wolves there would be 15 packs of 7-8 wolves living within them, from the 15 packs only 1 pair of wolves will breed a year, after one year of breeding for the 15 packs 45 pups would be born for that first year, after 4 years of breeding the 8 packs would produce 180 pups.
SUM: After 14 years of breeding and 90 wolves die of old age the total wolf count is 300
180 pups + 120 wolves = 300 wolves at the end of 14 years.
Part 2:
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(Rough maximum perfect estimate 6 pups a litter, all survive. And wolves will roughly only breed for 5 years and roughly will die at 5-6yrs of age or other causes. And only 4-5 wolves a pack.)
From 30 wolves there would be roughly 6 packs of 4-5 wolves living within them, from the 6 packs if only 1 pair of wolves bred a year, after one year of breeding for the 6 packs 36 pups would be born for that first year, after 5 years of breeding the 6 packs would produce 180 pups.
-----------
From the 180 wolves there will be only 36 packs of 4-5 wolves living within them, from the 36 packs only 1 pair of wolves would breed a year , after one year of breeding for the 36 packs 216 pups would be born for that first year, after 5 years of breeding the 36 packs would produce 1,080 pups.
----------
From the 1,080 wolves there would be 216 packs of 4-5 wolves living within them, from the 216 packs only 1 pair of wolves will breed a year, after one year of breeding for the 216 packs 1,2096 pups would be born for that first year, after 4 years of breeding the 216 packs would produce 5,184 pups.
SUM: After 14 years of breeding and 210 wolves die of old age the total wolf count is 6,264.
5,184 pups + 1,080 wolves = 6,264 wolves at the end of 14 years.
________________________________________________________________________________________________
These 2 are rough estimates, but even with this you can easily see that the population could naturally and reasonably reach anywhere in between 1,000 and 5,000.
And we werent even counting the wolves that have been documented trickling in from Canada. Aswell as the fact that 'SOME' would breed with more than one wolf a season.
Again, i said it does happen, but not often.
Again, -debating - arguing- we're going round in circles now... D:
π: 0 β©: 1
"Im not sure what wrong with him as a source?"
He's useless as a source considering he killed a perfectly healthy wolf just for the sake of money.
"Its unethical to mate with your family members, as that would create a poor genetic gene pool. It happens, but it doesnt happen often. And in a populace like the Isle Royal it doesnt really count, they dont have much of a choice because their populations are so low, and they have suffered great genetic price for it. Like twisted spines due to lack of genetic diversity."
Obviously you didn't read what she wrote, as this is stated in her response.
"Considering that the majority of a pack consists of family members..."
Wrong. Wolf packs, especially in the Rockies, are NOT just composed of family members. If you had watched the YouTube video she linked, the wolf biologists of YNP acknowledge this is happening due to close proximity to other wolf packs in the region.
"...besides, it is also difficult to raise more than one litter per pack."
Tell that to Mollie's pack, YNP's largest wolf pack (among others) that has been known to have more than one litter.
"Which is why generally only the Alpha pair mate in the first place."
The term "Alpha" is outdated. Please, for the sake of sounding intelligent, use correct terminology. [link]
"And again while it doesnt happen often, i didnt say it doesnt happen at all."
Stop trying to backpedal. The fact is that all wolves take on more than one mate. Wolves are not serial monogamous. READ Cynical's post.
"And my fiancee did some math:"
Wow, you have no idea what the word "variable" means, do you? Or the fact that interspecific mortality includes 40% offtake, correct? Wolves increase at around a 32-34% annually, and this includes that offtake. These statistics alone debunk your made up lie about how wolf populations double every year. The fact is that wolves are the fastest reproducing animal protected under the ESA. And people wonder why they are considered "endangered"? LOL.
π: 0 β©: 1
Okay this was supposed to be a civil 'discussion' as she called it.
You dont have to act rude and call me a lair for simply being unaware of how to add up population numbers like a professional we were trying to figure it up ourselves as an attempt to 'see' if it could be possible, to get a rough idea. And to say i didnt read what she was saying, and saying i sound un-intelligent, again is rude.
I didnt say they were JUST composed of family members, i said the 'majority' of a pack consists of family members.
Regardless of only a handful of packs, it can be done but it adds pressure for the other wolves to find more food. So for most packs it wouldnt be a smart thing to do. That is the point i was trying to get across. That it is difficult.
Okay, so im sorry, but just because somebody has had a job for a long time doesnt mean that they are ALWAYS right. This time hes so wrong its surprising, dominance is a natural part of canine behavior,
just because one becomes Alpha simply because the pack consists of his and hers pups, doesnt mean that when the pups are grown they arent challenged for dominance every time they eat and etc. This is all plainly evident everywhere even in domestic dogs... you dont have to be a professional to call him out on it. You can watch any wolf documentary and see them all testing dominace for eachother, if the Alpha at any point was weak to respond to their challenge he/she would by overtaken by another who would be the new alpha in his/her place.
If Garrick Dutcher did do that i most certainly dont agree with it, but at the same time David Mech traps minks does that make him an unreliable source too?
Sorry im not backpedaling, i said it since the beginning of this "argument-discussion" because i feel i have to keep reminding since people like to twist words around, as i am well aware that IT DOES HAPPEN. But it is uncommon.
ALL wolves do not do this... and actually it says on his web site that its 'rare': "In the rare packs that include more than one breeding animal-" [link] ..contradicting.....
Again, i really dont want to argue as it is pointless.
Neither of us are ever going to agree, and we are just going to go round and round like this... :/
I disagree with you, and you disagree with me. Point blank...
π: 0 β©: 1
You dont have to act rude and call me a lair...
Where in the hell did I call you a liar? I simply stated that you have no clue what you're talking about, because you don't. That much is painfully clear.
I didnt say they were JUST composed of family members, i said the 'majority' of a pack consists of family members.
This is false, especially when concerning the wolves of the Rockies.
Regardless of only a handful of packs, it can be done but it adds pressure for the other wolves to find more food. So for most packs it wouldnt be a smart thing to do. That is the point i was trying to get across. That it is difficult.
Not for Canis lupus occidentalis, the largest subspecies of wolf. They are built for wiping out elk herds and breeding at such an excessive rate. When it comes to the smaller subspecies, obviously yes, considering they only stick to pairs.
Okay, so im sorry, but just because somebody has had a job for a long time doesnt mean that they are ALWAYS right.
Where on Earth am I saying that?
This time hes so wrong its surprising, dominance is a natural part of canine behavior,
just because one becomes Alpha simply because the pack consists of his and hers pups, doesnt mean that when the pups are grown they arent challenged for dominance every time they eat and etc. This is all plainly evident everywhere even in domestic dogs... you dont have to be a professional to call him out on it. You can watch any wolf documentary and see them all testing dominace for eachother, if the Alpha at any point was weak to respond to their challenge he/she would by overtaken by another who would be the new alpha in his/her place.
Lmao, you are actually proving my point by saying this. Packs that consist of MORE THAN ONE BREEDING PARENT have "alphas" (this is even explained in the video), this is the only time when wolves will FIGHT for dominance. The same happens in captive wolf packs when the wolves aren't related so they need to establish a hierarchy. The term "alpha" does NOT exist in a wolf pack when it is simply a mother-father-offspring situation, because there is no reason to fight for dominance. The parents EARN their ranking and by the time the pups are old enough, they disperse. So, you essentially just admitted you know absolutely nothing about what you're talking about.
If Garrick Dutcher did do that i most certainly dont agree with it, but at the same time David Mech traps minks does that make him an unreliable source too?
What does trapping minks have to do with anything? 
But it is uncommon.
No, it's not. On the contrary, what you're describing is uncommon.
ALL wolves do not do this... and actually it says on his web site that its 'rare'
Dr. Mech has only studied two wolf packs in his 50 year career. He has no idea what "rare" is. Speak with people who actually live in wolf-infested areas, or Canadian wolf biologists. Wolves are NOT monogamous.
π: 0 β©: 1
Omg sir i am not arguing with you anymore.. you are accusing me of not reading posts and then you dont even read what i say.. This conversation is over do not comment on my page anymore please.
π: 0 β©: 1
I read what you said. It's obvious you are just completely ignorant on the subject.
π: 0 β©: 0
Thank you.
π: 0 β©: 0
holy popsicle sticks! that is tied for first on my list of best drawings!!!!
π: 0 β©: 1
Aww thank you so much!
π: 0 β©: 1
I really love this, you captured the scene so well... How Much time did you spend on this piece? the details of the fur are incredible, really really awesome work.
Keep it up!
π: 0 β©: 1
When i first started it it took only around an hour,
but i visited it again to add more details wich im guessing took anywhere from half an hour to an hour, so possibly two hours all in all?
^^ thank you so much. I appreciate the encouragement.
π: 0 β©: 0
This is absolutely adorable, I mostly like the white oneΒ΄s tongue!
They remind me of Larka and Fell in the book "The Sight", which is one of my ever favourite books!
π: 0 β©: 1
The sight? Hmm sounds interesting i'll have to check it out. ^^
Thank you for commenting! I appreciate your compliment. ^^
π: 0 β©: 1
itΒ΄s a really awesome book!
π: 0 β©: 0
COOL JUST LOVE IT
I ALSO BELIEVE WE ALL HAVE SOMETHING IN COMMON WITH OUR RESPECTIVE ANIMAL THATS WHAT MAKES IT OUR "FAV" ..(WE WILL ALWAYS LIKE SIMILAR ANIMALS OR CHARACTERS TO OUR SELVES)
AND YEAH I LOVE WOLVES TOO
π: 0 β©: 1
omg thats amazing I wish I could draw as good as you, love it.
π: 0 β©: 1
Practice! They say it all the time cuz it works haha.
Thank you~
π: 0 β©: 0
Haha thank you. I'm glad you like it.
π: 0 β©: 0
i love your signature! hahaha
π: 0 β©: 1
| Next =>