Roughly translated by TWIN Observer
STOCKHOLM / TT , the Swedish wolf hunt is based on questionable grounds. This claim is made by a French researcher in the journal Science. But his Swedish colleagues reject the criticism.
“The last wolf hunting in Sweden is an abuse of science,” says Guillaume Chapron, carnivore ecologist with experience with wolves in France and Sweden.
Since 2007 he has been an assistant professor at Grimsö research station in Bergslagen. He has thus followed the Swedish wolf policy in place in recent years.
In the letter to Science, he turns specifically to the scientific arguments used to justify this year’s hunt. The search is called targeted and selective, as the idea was to shoot 16 wolves away from the most inbred pairs. This would cause inbreeding in the population to be decreased.
“Nonsense”
“It is nonsense to kill animals in order to reduce inbreeding. Would we do the same if it had been about woodpeckers? Of course not. People would think you were crazy,” says Chapron.
He argues that the Swedish authorities capitulated to the special interests who want to reduce the wolf population. Besides, it has confused the terms “favorable conservation status” and “minimum viable population”. This led to the government going out and advocating a wolf population of no more than 180 animals.
“A strain of 180 animals does not have a favorable conservation status. If Sweden gets away with this, there is a risk that other special interests in Europe exploiting the situation,” says Chapron.
Crack in the research leadership
Criticism in Science has revealed that there is a crack in the wolf research leadership. Some of Chaprons Swedish colleagues in the Scandinavian wolf research Skandulv has provided the scientific basis for the wolf hunt. He believes that they should have been more careful.
“Scientists will of course answer questions from authorities, but they should ensure that the results are not abused, he said.
Olof Liberg, coordinator of Skandulv, was one of those who developed the scientific evidence. He dismisses Chaprons criticism.
“In the short term, selective hunting can reduce the inbreeding level. And “favorable conservation status” is not a biological concept that Guillaume believes, but a political one. No one knows exactly what it means,” says Liberg.