The Political Dimensions of Illegal Wolf Hunting: Anti‐Elitism, Lack of Trust in Institutions and Acceptance of Illegal Wolf Killing among Norwegian Hunters

Abstract

Qualitative studies have indicated that the illegal killing of wolves is often attributed a protest dimension. However, we have limited knowledge about the factors that impact this judgement. The present study investigates views on illegal wolf killing among Norwegian hunters and connects these views to background factors, hunting cultures, anti‐elitism and the legitimacy of environmental institutions, probing the existence of a ‘counterpublic’ where killing wolves is seen as justified resistance. Only a minority tolerated the activity, but compared to other hunting‐related offences, killing a wolf illegally was seen as ‘not serious’ by the largest group. Hunters with limited education, living in rural areas, and who were motivated by a ‘tradition and stewardship’ ethos when hunting, were more inclined to accept illegal killing. Anti‐elitism and lack of trust in environmental institutions were even stronger predictors. We conclude that hunting‐related issues are not among the prime drivers of support for illegal wolf hunting. Rather, it is typically part of a worldview that reflects a rural subaltern experience, comprising elements of cultural resistance. While the political dimension is not always articulated, overlooking it and treating illegal killing simply as ‘crime’ may stoke conflicts and fortify an understanding of power relations that already drives resistance.

Modelling stakeholder satisfaction for conflict resolution in wildlife management: a case of wolf population in Sweden

“…Wolves compete with hunters for prey on both small and large wild animals, including deer and moose. Occasionally, they also hurt and kill hunting dogs, causing economic and emotional losses to hunters (Ericsson and Heberlein 2003;Skogen and Krange 2020;Treves et al 2013;Williams et al 2002). There is no compensation to the loss of the prey for the hunters, but they receive compensation for the loss of hunting dogs.…”

“…People living in cities may think people living in the countryside are selfish and undereducated by not realizing the importance of wolf conservation. Besides the economic losses, wolves are also treated as a symbol for people to express the impasse of conflict resolution in the long-standing divide between the city and the countryside (Eriksson 2017a, b;Sjölander-Lindqvist et al 2015;Skogen et al 2017;Skogen and Krange 2020;von Essen and Allen 2015;.…”

“…The conflicts around wolf conservation are partly rational and partly emotional. In most forms of meeting with stakeholders from different perspectives, no matter from which side, emotional debates always upgrade the conflict and distort efforts at consensus building and peace-making (Eriksson 2017a, b;Sandström 2011, 2013;Nilsson et al 2020;Eriksson et al 2015;Skogen and Krange 2020).…”

“…During the last four decades, the reappearance of wolves has induced a series of social problems and contentious debates within the Swedish society (Ericsson and Heberlein 2003;Ednarsson 2006; Karlsson and Sjöström 2007;Eriksson 2013;Stohr and Coimbra 2013;Rogers 2014;Nilsson et al 2020;Skogen and Krange 2020). These debates focus mainly on the impact of wolves on people's lives, primarily hunting and sheep and goat farming, and the necessity and legitimacy of wolf reestablishment.…”

The tourism business operator as a moral gatekeeper – the relational work of recreational hunting in Sweden

“…Nevertheless, there are many potential conflicts associated with hunting. One such issue in Sweden is the controversy surrounding the wildlife policy of predators, which studies of illegal wolf hunting have demonstrated (Eriksson, 2017;Peterson, von Essen, Hansen, & Peterson, 2019;Skogen & Krange, 2020). Wolf hunting has become a symbol of cultural resistance among sections of the Swedish hunting community, related to wider societal issues such as the rural/urban divide and political alienation.…”