2. Attitudes Toward Wolves Presentation at the Swedish Parliament May 10, 2012 Thomas A. Heberlein, Environmental Sociologist Professor SLU, Umeå

3. Tom Heberlein Sabbatical 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

4. Wisconsin now has about 800 wolves Michigan now has over 600 wolves LP UP Minnesota has about 3,000 wolves Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

5. Meta Analysis of Published Studies Analysis of 39 published studies between 1972-2000 Most 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

6. Surveys in Sweden and the US A 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

7. Positive Attitudes toward Wolves Positive 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) Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

8. 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

9. Negative Attitudes in Minority Meta Analysis ◦ 25% Negative Swedish Population ◦ General Public 8% Negative ◦ Public in Wolf Areas 21% Negative Michigan ◦ Wolf Area (UP) 15% Negative ◦ Non Wolf Area (LP) 9% Negative Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

10. 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

11. 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) Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

12. Swedish Hunters Attitudes 2001 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

13. Believe Wolves Have the Right to Exist Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

14. Attitude Change Naturally Occurring Change Planned Change Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

15. A Little Attitude Theory Attitudes are generally stable Direct Experience Principle ◦ These are stronger and less likely to change Identity 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

16. Positive Affect Liking Wolves Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

17. Attitude Dimension Affect:Fear But Like-Dislike Over Simplifies Attitudes Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

18. This a Scientistic Attitude—Rational Based More on Beliefs than Affect Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

19. Meta Analysis—Variability and Change Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

20. Variability Variability 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

21. Change in Sweden with Direct Experience Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

22. 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 research As 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

23. BUT RAPID NEGATIVE CHANGE IS POSSIBLE Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

24. 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

25. Public Support for Wolves 1996 Support76% Oppose18% 1997 Support 46% Oppose42% 1999 Support42% Oppose 41% Thirty point drop in one year!! Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

26. 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

27. Summary Attitudes toward wolves are positive ◦ Negative attitudes are in a distinct minority Even 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

28. 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

29. 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

30. 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??? Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

31. Michigan Wolf Story Four wolves released in the 1970’s ◦ All died “at the hand of man” in 6 months About 20 wolves1990 Surveys show positive attiudes Today there are over 600 wolves in Michigan Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

32. Final Point: Attitudes are Uneven Not all city people have strong positive attitudes toward wolves ◦ Those with the least ties to the countryside  3 rd 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

33. Support the Right of Wolves to Exist in Sweden 20042009 Sweden: 64 % Dalarna: 63 % Sweden: 71 % Increase! Dalarna: 56 % Decrease! Not everyone in Dalarna hates wolves— Still majority support Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

34. Dalarna County Dalarna County 36 % WANT TO DECREASE THE NUMBER OF WOLVES vs 16% in Sweden as a whole 64 % highest! 23 % lowest! Above line > 44 % and increasing Why the difference between Älvdalen and Smedjebacken? Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

35. My experience My experience Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

36. Last Conclusions Attitudes toward wolves are very positive Simply providing information will not change attitudes Attitudes are tied to your community, way of life, and ties to the country side They become more negative when people get experience with wolves One needs to look for structural solutions to make wolves more valuable to all whose lives are affected by wolves Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

37. Structural Fixes vs. Cognitive Fixes Make 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 Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012

38. Thank You Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012 For more about attitudes and pro-environmental behavior see forthcoming book, Oxford University Press, August 27, 2012

39. Does this look like an increase in poaching to you?  Summer farms (predation 6/) Heberlein Swedish Parliment 2/10/2012