Jens Karlsson

Support for hunting as a means of wolf Canis lupus population control in Sweden

The recolonising wolf Canis lupus population has created conflicts in Scandinavia, and it will eventually be necessary to control wolf numbers if the population continues to grow. One mechanism for this is hunting. Under what circumstances will the Swedish public support hunting of wolves? We examined this question for the general public and for three stakeholder groups: all hunters, the public living in areas with wolf populations and hunters living in wolf population areas. A majority of all four groups found it acceptable to hunt wolves to reduce the risk of livestock depredation (53–91%), and if wolves had been coming into populated areas (54–86%). However, about one fifth of the Swedish public was neutral to any justification, so an extreme or a well-publicised event could alter the current levels of support. The majority in all groups did not support wolf hunting merely because people were afraid of them (22–46%), or because wolves compete with humans for game (11–45%). A majority of all hunters found wolf hunting to be justified if wolves were a threat to dogs in the area, but the majority of the general public even in the wolf population areas did not find this to be appropriate justification. Our study shows the importance of surveying stakeholder groups as well as the general public to develop sound and acceptable conservation and management plans for rebounding populations of large carnivores such as wolves.

Factors governing human fear of brown bear and wolf

This article analyzes peoples subjectively experienced fear in areas with presence of brown bear or wolf. Departing from the Human-Environment Interaction Model (Küller, 1991), a hypothetical model of environmental and individual antecedents of fear was tested using structural equation modeling of survey data (n = 391). In the model of fear of brown bear, the main predictor was the appraisal of the species as dangerous/uncontrollable and unpredictable. In the model of fear of wolf, the greater experience with the species and a stronger appraisal of wolf as dangerous, uncontrollable, and unpredictable led to low social trust and this, together with the appraisal of wolf as dangerous/uncontrollable and unpredictable, increased the likelihood of fear. Efforts to reduce human fear of wolves should focus on building trust between the public and authorities, whereas efforts to reduce fear of brown bear should focus on the individuals appraisal of the species.

Is Human Fear Affecting Public Willingness to Pay for the Management and Conservation of Large Carnivores

From an interdisciplinary approach, this study aims at analyzing self-reported animal fear, specifically large carnivore fear, in relation to public willingness to pay to fulfill a governmental policy on large carnivore-induced costs. In a survey in Sweden involving more than 2,000 respondents, it was found that people whose animal fear was directed particularly toward large carnivores were less likely to be willing to pay these costs, or were likely to be willing to pay a lower amount of money. In the prediction of willingness to pay (WTP), the contribution of the fear variable was as equally important as previously addressed socioeconomic factors.

Fear of Wolves and Bears: Physiological Responses and Negative Associations in a Swedish Sample

Human fear is important in wildlife management, but self-reported fear provides only partial information about fear reactions. Thus, eye movements, skin conductance, and changes in heart rate were assessed during picture viewing, visual search, and implicit evaluation tasks. Pictures of bears, wolves, moose, and hares were presented to participants who self-reported as fearful of bears (n = 8), fearful of bears and wolves (n = 15), or not fearful of bears or wolves (n = 14). The feared animal was expected to elicit strong physiological responses, be dwelled upon, and be associated with negative words. Independent of fearfulness, bear pictures elicited the strongest physiological responses, and wolf pictures showed the strongest negative associations. The bear-fearful group showed stronger physiological responses to bears. The bear- and wolf-fearful group showed more difficulty in associating bears with good words. Presence of a feared animal in the search task, resulted in prolonged response time.

Resource selection by sympatric free-ranging dairy cattle and brown bears Ursus arctos

Abstract Livestock depredation is an important factor that contributes to low public acceptance of large carnivores, and it is often used as an incentive to reduce large carnivore populations. In central Sweden, brown bears Ursus arctos coexist with a traditional cattle husbandry system that allows daytime free-ranging of dairy cattle. Despite a growing brown bear population, depredation on cattle remained stable during the last decade and is among the lowest rates reported worldwide. Nevertheless, major stakeholders argue for a substantial reduction in brown bear numbers, among other reasons, to safeguard the traditional husbandry system. Based on satellite tracking data, we assessed and correlated the resource selection of nine brown bears that were sympatric with six daytime free-ranging cattle herds during the free-ranging season (i.e. June-August) in 2008. We found a significant and negative relationship between resource selection of brown bears and free-ranging cattle during the study period, mainly because of inverse relationships between the species towards vegetation density and human-related infrastructure, such as forest roads, buildings and settlements. We predict that the probability of an encounter between these species, given that there is no directed predation, is highest in dense vegetation patches close to the human habitation-related variables. Because of the low reported depredation rates and the apparent habitat segregation between the species, our results provide no support for the argument to reduce brown bear numbers to safeguard the traditional cattle herding system.

Direct use values and passive use values: implications for conservation of large carnivores

We made a quantitative analysis of the responses of urban and rural residents in Sweden to arguments supporting and opposing conservation of large carnivores. The most important arguments in favour of conservation were: “I want them [the large carnivores] to exist in Sweden, even if I will never see any of them”, “Sweden should share the responsibility of conserving the large carnivores” and “We owe it [conservation of large carnivores] to future generations”. We found only small differences between rural and urban residents. For arguments opposing conservation, the difference between rural and urban areas was slightly greater. The most important arguments opposing conservation of large carnivores were: “They may have serious negative impact on livestock farming”, “They may have serious negative impact on reindeer husbandry” and “May inflict suffering on injured livestock”. We conclude that there seems to be less support for direct use values such as hunting, ecotourism or just experiencing large carnivores, this may imply that the minimum viable population size can be used as a long-term management goal for large carnivore populations, possibly with an exception for bears. We also conclude that a separate conservation or management plan is needed for each species, since the conflicts with human interests vary greatly between the different carnivore species.

Beware of the wolf: Is animal fear affecting willingness to pay for conservation of large carnivores?

From an interdisciplinary approach, this study aims at analysing self-reported animal fear, specifically large carnivore fear, in relation to public willingness to financially contribute to fulfil a governmental policy on large carnivore-induced costs. In a survey of 2 455 Swedes, it was found that people whose animal fear was directed particularly towards large carnivores, were less likely to be willing to pay (WTP), or were likely to be willing to pay a lower amount of money. In the prediction of WTP, the contribution of the fear variables was equally important as the socio-economic factors. From a management point of view it seems urgent to understand what kinds of measures that may reduce human fear of large carnivores. It is also suggested that further studies should include standardised measures of anxiety and fear in order to be able to closer link the results of large carnivore fear to the psychological literature on human fears.