Regulating the Swedish wolf population decreases conflicts?

Controversy and debate still rages over the details of the wolf hunt in Sweden, as this year’s season is drawing to a close. Environmental NGO:s and Commissioner for the Environment Potocnik argue that having a hunting season violates the requirements of the Habitat’s Directive, while targeting specific individuals known to have taken livestock or pets may be permissible. This line of argument disregards the fact that regulating population size will decrease the risk to domestic animals, regardless of the individuals targeted. Also, arguments are being put forward that there is no support for the notion that hunting will increase acceptance for the necessary management actions, which is the rationale for allowing hunting at this stage. Stakeholders have, however, set regulating of the population as an absolute condition for accepting translocations of wolfs into the population. This would seem to refute the position of the NGO:s and Commissioner Potocnik, as increased immigration rates, or translocations, are deemed necessary by all the experts on wolf management.

The Swedish wolf population is highly inbred and there is a broad consensus that the genetic status must be improved. In 2009, Swedish stakeholder groups organizing landowners, farmers, hunters, Sami people and dog owners declared that they were prepared to accept translocations of wolves into the population in order to decrease the level of inbreeding. The consent given to translocations was, however, dependent on regulation of population size through hunting prior to any translocations. This broke the stalemate in the discussions between the stakeholders and the authorities. The Swedish Parliament passed a legislation that combines translocations and regulation of the wolf population through hunting later the same year.

Currently, Sweden allows keepers and owners to kill wolves as a last resort while defending livestock or pets. Furthermore, individual wolves that repeatedly have taken livestock or pets can he hunted after application to the County Administrative Board. These actions are not under scrutiny by the Commission. Additionally, however, Sweden also allows a limited hunt, with set quotas in each county having had reproducing wolf packs during the last three years. In 2011, a total of 20 individuals can be shot in six counties (range 1-6 individuals, depending on local densities). This decision has been strongly opposed by the environmental NGO:s and Commissioner Potocnik, who argue that this hunt is unlawful as the wolf population has not yet reached favourable conservation status. Proponents of the hunt argue that it provides acceptance and support for the actions necessary to reach a favourable conservation status. If this is the case, the hunt would fulfil the derogation criteria under the Habitat’s Directive.

 Concern for domestic animals is the major reason that many people in rural parts of Sweden, where wolves occur, are negative to wolves. There is a widespread national acceptance for regulating wolf numbers in order to reduce problems with livestock and pets taken. Attacks on hunting dogs have been identified as one of the most important conflicts, both by hunters and by the authorities. Data on attack rates and population densities from the Swedish authorities show that there is a direct relationship between the number of wolf packs and the number of attacks on hunting dogs in an area. Consequently, decreasing the population density of wolves is likely to reduce the number of attacks on dogs and the problems perceived. Thus, the underlying reason for the demands to regulate the number of wolves is exactly the same as for targeting specific individuals: concern for livestock and pets. Fewer wolves will, inevitably, lead to a lower risk of attacks on livestock. The aims of both forms of hunting coincide.

Previously, Finland was taken to the European Court of Justice over similar issues. The ruling was that hunting had not been detrimental to the conservation status of the wolf, but Finland was found to have infringed against the Habitat’s Directive as it had not been shown that hunting prevents significant damage and loss of domestic animals. As stated above, clear relationships between wolf densities and attack rates have, however, been shown by the Swedish authorities.

Environmental NGO:s argue that culling of specific individuals known to have taken domestic animals is preferable to having hunting quotas, as individuals causing problems are targeted and removed. There are disadvantages as well, however. First, wolves take livestock and pets all year around and culling wolves when there are pups raises ethical issues. By contrast, culling in January occurs when the pups are ready to leave the territories. Thus, reducing attacks on livestock and pets through regulating the population during a hunting season reduces the ethical problems. Second, hunting wolves without being able to track them on snow is hard, making targeting of individuals causing problems difficult during a large part of the year. As a result, wolf packs may have to be monitored and tracked for weeks, which disturbs them unnecessarily. Third, culling wolves known to have taken domestic animals often involves shooting immigrants or descendents to immigrants. So far, only highly inbred individuals have been shot during the hunting seasons of 2010 and 2011. This is because it is easier to monitor wolves during winter, just prior to the hunting season. In this manner, territories of wolf packs with a valuable genetic make-up can be excluded from the hunting areas. Conversely, several descendants to immigrants are shot every year while targeting individuals causing problems.

Hunting is a management action aimed at simultaneously solving socio-economic problems and providing acceptance for the conservation measures necessary to achieve favourable conservation status. All forms of culling of wolves adopted in Sweden primarily strive to achieve those goals. It is the view of The Swedish Association for Hunting and Wildlife Management that the management plan for the Swedish wolf rests on a sound scientific basis and that all aspects are in accordance with the Habitat’s Directive. A successful and sustainable management of the Swedish wolf population requires that we find ways to decrease conflicts and increase acceptance for the actions taken. The current management plan is a clear step in this direction, as translocations now are accepted by stakeholders that previously opposed them vehemently.

Fredrik Widemo is Associate Professor in Animal Ecology and the Conservation Manager at the Swedish Association for Hunting and Wildlife Management. He is acting as SAHWM:s expert on the effects of wildlife management, and other forms of land use, on biodiversity.

SAHWM is an NGO, but holds a public commission to inform hunters and the public about game, game management and hunting. Also, SAHWM is in charge of game monitoring and of training hunters in Sweden.