The good bad wolf—wolf evaluation reveals the roots of the Finnish wolf conflict

Abstract

This article focuses on the roots of the Finnish wolf conflict by using stakeholder evaluations of the wolf as a tool. The recent growth of the wolf population has highlighted stakeholders_ contradictory objectives and revealed a conflict between the two main stakeholders, conservationists and hunters, in wolf management. The question of hunting emerges as the core of the conflict. The negative evaluation of the wolf by hunters reflects a competitive situation, which is typical of the historical development of wolf management in Finland. In areas with the most abundant wolf populations, hunters view the wolf most negatively. This study clearly demonstrates that the Finnish wolf conflict is rooted in the values of modern society and carries a long historical, practical and ecological background in which humans and wolves compete over resources, mainly the moose. The conflict between hunters and conservationists in wolf management is connected to the appreciation of moose as game and stems from competition between humans and wolves over their prey and the historical presence or absence of the wolf.

The Implications of Victimhood Identity: The Case of ‘Persecution’ of Swedish Hunters

“…The coding scheme for the analysis clustered hunters' experiences of their perceived persecution at the hands of the state, local state agencies and other Environmental Non-Governmental Organisations (ENGO) they accused of being powerful lobbyists, agenda-setters and ultimately persecutors in the current wildlife conservation regime in Sweden. The findings from interviews strongly cohere with concurrent empirical findings about hunters from Norway and Finland (Bisi et al 2010;Krange and Skogen 2011;Linnell 2013;Risvoll, Fedreheim and Galafassi 2016). Hunters' reflections are presented phenomenologically in line with the research's objectives, meaning that we understand their claims and experiences of persecution as a priori truthful.…”

Rurality and Collective Attitude Effects on Wolf Policy

“…In general, people in rural areas perceive wolves as a negative influence, a traditional enemy to rural culture that limits day-to-day activities [2]. Avoiding wolves is also often seen as necessity in order to perceive rural culture: both in a sense of maintaining traditional rural industry and defending political autonomy against urban interests [12,13].…”

“…Proximity to wolves [7] and direct experiences with wolves [5] have been found to make people less positive towards wolves, and thus growing wolf populations are likely to increase the attitude divide between urban and rural people over time [8]. Living close to wolves means reduced opportunities to hunt and a heightened fear for the safety of dogs, livestock, and people [2,8]; thus, wolf presence has a negative impact on attitudes towards wolves and wolf policy. The demographic structure of rural areas in Sweden further reinforces the attitude differences between rural and urban people, as factors more common among the Swedish rural population, such as hunting, a lower education level, old age, and being male, have been found to correlate with less positive attitudes towards wolves [1,5,9].…”

“…Consequently, how policies and institutions are designed to guide governance and management is key to the future development of the wolf as a species. This fact emphasizes the need for an increased understanding of the interaction between social and ecological change, and public attitudes towards wolf policy, in order to develop policies and methods of wolf conservation that are perceived as legitimate [2,3].…”

Conflicts and Compromises in Lynx Lynx lynx Conservation and Management in Finland

“…With regard to hunters' attitudes these studies arrive at different conclusions. Many studies have identified an association between hunting and negative attitudes towards large carnivores (Zeiler et al 1999, Naughton-Treves et al 2003, Ericsson et al 2004, Karlsson and Sjöström 2007, Bisi et al 2010). Yet other research has shown that hunters do not generally hold negative attitudes towards large carnivores and can even be more supportive than non-hunters (Bjerke et al 1998, Williams et al 2002, Ericsson and Heberlein 2003, Kaczensky et al 2004, Bath et al 2008.…”