attitudes toward wolves presentation at the swedish parliament may 10, 2012 thomas a. heberlein,...

Attitudes Toward Wolves

Presentation at the Swedish Parliament May 10, 2012Thomas A. Heberlein, Environmental SociologistProfessor SLU, Umeå

Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

Tom HeberleinSabbatical year in Sweden 1995-96

◦1995 keynote at Wolf Symposium Regular attendee 1995-2012

2004-present, Professor SLU ◦Dept of Wildlife, Fish, and Environmental

Studies◦Co teaches Human Dimensions of Wildlife

2006 Organized the US Study visit of the Large Predator Special Investigation


Wisconsin nowhas about 800 wolves

Michigan now has over 600 wolves

LP

UP

Minnesota hasabout 3,000 wolves


Meta Analysis of Published StudiesAnalysis of 39 published studies

between 1972-2000Most from the US (27), Canada (2),

Western Europe (3), Norway (3), Sweden (2), Finland (1), Japan (1)

These studies gave us 109 records for analysis because of multiple groups were studied

Published in the Wildlife Society Bulletin


Surveys in Sweden and the USA National Survey of Sweden in 2001

◦1. The public - 1001 persons (73% response)

◦2. Hunters - 631 (84%)◦3. Public, wolf area - 252 (72%)◦4. Hunters, wolf area- 388 (86%)

Surveys in the state of Michigan (USA)Some data from more recent surveys

in Sweden by my SLU colleagues and students


Positive Attitudes toward WolvesPositive Support for Wolves (Meta

Analysis)◦51% positive toward wolves ◦58% positive toward restoration

Attitudes toward wolves in Sweden ◦61% positive◦49% positive in wolf areas

Attitudes in Michigan◦64% support in wolf areas (UP)◦57% support in non-wolf areas (LP)


Many People Don’t Care about Wolves

Average percent neutral or don’t care in Meta Analysis◦24% across all studies

Percent neutral in Sweden◦31% General public◦30% General public in the wolf areas

Michigan◦22% wolf area (UP)◦34% non wolf area (LP)

This among those who returned surveys


Negative Attitudes in MinorityMeta Analysis

◦25% NegativeSwedish Population

◦General Public 8% Negative◦Public in Wolf Areas 21% Negative

Michigan◦Wolf Area (UP) 15% Negative◦Non Wolf Area (LP) 9% Negative


Wolf Population Growth Consistent with Positive Attitudes

Western US ◦ 1976 virtually no wolves in Montana, Idaho, Wyoming◦ Today over 1600 wolves (hunting seasons in Montana

and Idaho)Sweden

◦ 1980 virtually no wolves◦ Today about 225

Michigan◦ 1990 about 20 wolves◦ Today over 600 wolves

Wisconsin◦ 1980 about 25 wolves◦ 2012 about 800 wolves

For the last 40 years there has been good “social habitat”for wolves


Hunters are favorable toward wolves 51% of Hunters were favorable (Meta Analysis)

◦ Of 9 studies that looked at the relationship between hunting and attitudes 5 showed a positive relationship,

Hunters more positive than comparisons groups 1 showed no relationship 3 showed a negative relationship

1976 (One of the five studies mentioned above)◦ 63% of Swedish Hunters supported wolf restoration◦ 51% of the general public

Michigan Hunters◦ 76% supported wolf restoration (highest of all groups)


Swedish Hunters Attitudes 2001

Positive Neutral Negative0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%40%

37%

23%24%

35%

41%

Hunters Hunters in Wolf Areas


Believe Wolves Have the Right to Exist

Public Hunters Public in Wolf Area

Hunters Wolf Area

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%90%

77% 79%

65%


Attitude Change

Naturally Occurring Change

Planned Change


A Little Attitude Theory

Attitudes are generally stableDirect Experience Principle

◦These are stronger and less likely to changeIdentity Principle

◦Attitudes tied to identities are stronger and less likely to change

Attitudes have an emotional component this can be especially true with wolves

Attitudes toward wolves are often linked to broader values and identity based attitudes


Positive AffectLiking Wolves


Attitude DimensionAffect:Fear

But Like-DislikeOver Simplifies

Attitudes


This a ScientisticAttitude—RationalBased More on Beliefs than Affect

Meta Analysis—Variability and Change

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000

AN

DE

L P

OS

ITIV

A

ÅRHeberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012


VariabilityVariability in Support for Wolves

◦Groups that showed less than 16% support Southeast Norwegian residents Cattle ranchers who graze on public land

in Utah Swedish reindeer owners

◦Groups that showed more than 87% support Swedish conservationists New England (US) residents Arizona Environmentalists


Change in Sweden with Direct Experience

40%

51%

61%63%

0%

25%

50%

75%

1976 2001

And

el p

ositi

va ti

ll va

rg

Hunters Non-hunters


Cohort Replacement Change

Older people show less support◦18 of 19 studies showed a negative

relationship with age◦One of the most consistent findings

in the wolf attitude researchAs the old with more negative

attitudes toward wolves die out they are replaced with those with more positive attitudes◦But this is a slow process


BUT RAPID NEGATIVE CHANGE IS POSSIBLE


Adirondack Park in NY

Set as a preserve in 1892

Nearly twice as large as Västerbotten with half as many people

Seen as a good place to reintroduce wolves Bennington


Public Support for Wolves1996

Support 76%Oppose 18%

1997Support 46%Oppose 42%

1999Support 42%Oppose 41%

Thirty point dropin one year!!


How: Discourse reframed

Local politicians tied restoration to broad values of independence and support for home

City people and scientists are “telling us what to do.”

Media picked up framing


Summary

Attitudes toward wolves are positive◦Negative attitudes are in a distinct

minorityEven among hunters and those who

live in wolf areas attitudes are more positive or neutral than negative

Attitudes become less positive with direct experience with wolves

Because of the large neutral component public attitudes can rapidly shift in a negative direction


Changing Attitudes by Educating the Public?Common solution to environmental

problems◦The Cognitive Fix or the Knowledge

Deficiency Model. What kind of information about wolves

will get these groups to hate wolves? Swedish conservationists New England (US) residents Arizona Environmentalists

Strong identity based attitudes don’t change


Changing Attitudes by Educating the Public?Or get these groups to love

wolves? Southeast Norwegian residents Cattle ranchers who graze on public land

in Utah Swedish reindeer owners

What about 25-50% who don’t care about wolves?◦The problem is getting the

information to them◦They skip to the next page in the

newspaper


Even Worse!

In Michigan we found no relation between accurate scientific knowledge about wolves and attitudes◦Those who had the most knowledge had no

more positive attitudes toward wolves Same was true in Sweden

◦In fact some of those who knew the least about wolves had the most positive attitudes

So should we “de-educate” the public to gain support for wolves???


Michigan Wolf StoryFour wolves released in the

1970’s◦All died “at the hand of man” in 6

monthsAbout 20 wolves1990 Surveys show positive attiudesToday there are over 600 wolves

in Michigan


Final Point: Attitudes are UnevenNot all city people have strong positive

attitudes toward wolves◦Those with the least ties to the countryside

3rd generation urbanites Or those who have don’t spend time in the

countryside Are less positive toward wolves than others urban

residents

Not everybody in Dalarna HATES wolves◦Thanks to my student Emma Kvastgård for

these last slides


Support the Right of Wolves to Exist in Sweden

2004 2009

Sweden: 64 %

Dalarna: 63 %

Sweden: 71 % Increase!

Dalarna: 56 % Decrease!

Not everyone in Dalarna hates wolves—Still majority support


Dalarna County 36 % WANT TO DECREASE THE NUMBER

OF WOLVESvs 16% in Sweden as a whole

64 % highest!

23 % lowest!

Above line > 44 % and increasing

Why the differencebetween Älvdalen

and Smedjeback

en?


My experience


Last Conclusions

Attitudes toward wolves are very positiveSimply providing information will not

change attitudesAttitudes are tied to your community,

way of life, and ties to the country sideThey become more negative when

people get experience with wolvesOne needs to look for structural solutions

to make wolves more valuable to all whose lives are affected by wolves


Structural Fixes vs. Cognitive FixesMake wolves valuable for the community

◦ Collective rewards for wolf population increase Collective losses for decreases Has worked well for snow leopard conservation

Make wolves into a resource for the least positive group (Hunters)◦ Through a managed hunting season

Reduces feelings of powerlessness Mitigates effects of urban dominance Hunted populations almost always increase in numbers

And prepare for the eventual wolf attack◦ Which can change the neutral and weak positive

attitudes

Thank You


For more about attitudes and pro-environmental behavior seeforthcoming book, Oxford University Press, August 27, 2012


Does this look like an increase in poaching to you?-Summer farms (predation 6/)

attitudes toward wolves presentation at the swedish parliament may 10, 2012 thomas a. heberlein,...

Documents

swedish hunters attitudes

wolves attitudes

wolf restoration51

wolf areasattitudes

wolf areasmichigan22

swedish parliament

wolf area up34

wolf area lpthis