Managing European Wolves – Views of Future Decision Makers

Wolves have been recolonizing in Germany since the beginning of this millenium and have recently started to move back into the Netherlands. Management strategies are required in both countries to protect wolves as required by... [ view full abstract ]

Wolves have been recolonizing in Germany since the beginning of this millenium and have recently started to move back into the Netherlands. Management strategies are required in both countries to protect wolves as required by legislation and also to mitigate potential human-wolf conflicts. However, management interventions are often controversial and their support varies among stakeholder groups. This study explored views held by young people (mean age = 22 years) in both countries given that their opinions will inform future wildlife policy directions. An 8-page survey was designed to test i) the acceptability of management interventions across different problem levels presented by wolves, ii) to what extent wildlife value orientations and emotions (valence and arousal) predict acceptability of wolf management interventions; and to iii) estimate discrete emotions towards wolves. University students were surveyed from courses in natural, environmental and social sciences from the Netherlands (n= 369) and Germany (n = 229). In both countries, we found that acceptability of wolf management interventions varied across three different scenarios (wolf is seen; wolf kills sheep; wolf kills human); depending on the severity of the situation. Lethal control was very unacceptable (in the scenario wolf is seen) to moderately unacceptable (wolf kills human). Educating the public was moderatly acceptable (wolf kills sheep) to very acceptable (wolf is seen and wolf kills human). Doing nothing was not considered to be acceptable in all three scenarios. Wildlife value orientations predicted acceptability of lethal control (R² = .25), with domination (Beta = .36) having a larger predictive value than mutualism (Beta = -.21). The emotion dimension ‘valence‘ showed a stronger predictive value for the acceptability of lethal control (Beta = -.25) than mutualism. For the acceptability of doing nothing, valence was the only significant predictor (Beta = .23). In both countries, negative emotions of anger, sadness and disgust were hardly felt towards wolves while positive emotions of joy and interest, as well as surprise, were moderately to strongly felt. Fear was the only negative emotion that was moderately felt, yet less strongly than the positive emotions. Our results show that management interventions are clearly desired by students likely to work in wildlife management or related fields in the future. Further, emotions (valence) held by stakeholders can help us understand the acceptability of management interventions next to cognitions (wildlife value orientations). Lastly, while managers and policy makers tend to predominantly address negative emotions in relation to wolves, positive emotions are often overlooked which calls for critical reflection on how people view wildlife and how best to manage complex wildlife management issues.