The Norwegian wolf controversy
Essay for Wildlife Ecology and Management 2003
By: Tonje Trinterud and Simon A. Michelet
The wolf is the largest within the Canidae species, with a bodyweight
of about 30-80 kg. It lives in the northern territory, in packs of up
to 32 animals (during winters with little available prey). They have a
hierarchy system with an alpha male and an alpha female which are the
only reproducing individuals within a pack. The litter size range from
2-10 cubs.
The wolves are carnivores, they hunt in packs for large prey as moose,
elk, roe, reindeer, and as individuals they survive by catching rabbits,
beavers, rodents and other small prey. In rural areas they may occasionally
attack livestock, which can result in large losses for the local farmers.
In Norway wolves which kill sheep have caused increasing economic losses
during recent years. The permanent Norwegian wolf population consists
of 13 to 16 grown individuals, estimated after tracking on snow during
the winter of 2002. Norway has a policy of maintaining a symbolic but
sustainable number of wolves. No official hunting of wolves has yet been
granted in Norway, due to the few individuals. Now the population seems
to be on the rise, and there has been, and still is, an ongoing debate
about the management of these wolves.
It seems to be a big issue if the hunting for wolves should be allowed
or prohibited in Norway. Several organisations, for instance “Fellesaksjonen
for ulv”, and “Foreningen Våre Rovdyr”, have gathered
evidence to prove that hunting on this species still should be prohibited.
The organisations argue that the wolf population is still too small, and
not strong enough to survive if hunting is allowed.
The wolf is not dangerous to humans, but still has an undeserved bad reputation.
In Norway there has been no documented evidence of wolves attacking humans
since the end of the 18th century. In those cases where there have been
attacks in other countries, it is most likely that the wolves were infected
with rabies, or they were hybrids or semi-socialised confused animals
(semi-tame). The problem with the expanding wolf population is that the
wolves attack sheep, which seems to be an easy prey, as they are no longer
adapted to being victim to carnivores. The law opens for the shooting
of wolves and other endangered carnivores when they are causing a direct
threat to humans or livestock. On the other hand, proving this has practically
been impossible. Many farmers have been given severe fines and some even
jail. The conservation organisations have proposed some alternative solutions
which they claim to be beneficial to the state, the farmers, and of course
the wolf population. Among the ideas some were to make use of guard llamas,
shepherd dogs and electric fences to prevent confrontations between sheep
and wolves. The results of the trials have been positive, but not widely
accepted among the farmers.
Today the farmers get economical compensation for their losses to carnivores.
In some cases the compensation even exceeds the actual market price. “Fellesaksjonen
for ulv” does not agree with this solution. Due to the compensation
the conflict has become more severe, and it has also led to the increase
in livestock in areas designated for wolf. There are no requirements for
securing sheep or taking precautions. The compensation is paid unconditionally
as long as the causes of death have been properly documented. The organisation
claims that such kind of compensations has a reversed effect on the conservation
of wolves, instead of stimulating the farmers to adjust to the predators
by taking precautions which should reduce the damage to grazing livestock.
Last summer 800 sheep were assumed killed by wolves, but “only”
13 % of the killings were proven to be done by wolf.
Norway and Sweden share the south Scandinavian wolf population. These
countries also have to share the responsibility for the population, and
work towards common goals concerning management. Today there is set a
limit of about 8-10 wolf families within the region. The “wolf-organisations”
seem to think that instead there should be a main goal to maintain a sustainable
wolf population independent of borders and designated regions. They would
like to see the South-Scandinavia population to reach a number of about
500 wolves. Today the entire Scandinavian wolf population consists of
100 to 120 individuals, gathered in about 10 families in addition to some
roaming animals and couples.
To meet the demands of a sustainable wolf-population, a so called “wolf-zone”
is established. The zone is in a remote, forested and mountainous area.
This is theoretically a good solution, but not unproblematic in real life.
Due to the huge territorial needs of wolves (130 to 13 000 square kilometres),
it is impossible to make them stay within the zone. As we all know, wild
wolves can not be conditioned to behave in such a way. The Norwegian Government
has therefore come to the conclusion that it will be hard to keep a large
wolf population throughout the country. The wolf population is “encouraged”
to settle down in the densely forested border regions between Norway and
Sweden (the “wolf-zone”). This supposedly decreases the risk
of unwanted confrontation with sheep.
In 2001 two packs were outside the zone. A hunting team, with great experience,
was gathered by the authorities, and given permission to shoot 6 wolves
belonging to one of the packs outside the zone. Considering the actual
number of wolves established within the borders of Norway, this is a great
blow to the population.
Most likely there will always be disagreements concerning this controversy,
especially as long as the wolf population is as small as it is today (less
than 20 animals). The parts concerned in this conflict seem to be very
emotionally involved, farmers feeling the agony of their animals and seeing
their livelihood being slaughtered, and the conservationists who see it
as their duty to save these animals from “certain” extermination
and\or extinction. Both groups are extremes within a wide spectre of opinions.
Hopefully the future will bring more balance to the conflict where all
can live with a reasonable amount of sacrifice and effort to sustain an
important part of our natural heritage.
Please note: although it might be useful to read essay
examples on the Internet, do not use them as your source. Copy-paste patchworks
are not torelated.