Any journalist criticizing Swedish wildlife management is used to getting a written scolding from the ‘Swedish Association for Hunting and Wildlife Management’. In their old-world view, man is made to rule over and manage nature and its animals as he pleases. My article about the lack of legal protection for Swedish wildlife was met with apparent fury in their rebuttal but fury is meagre if not backed up by facts.
Sweden is the only country in the EU that allows culling of wolves (apart from minor exceptions), in something the country calls ”licensed hunting”. It is a population decreasing method that kills off innocent animals in an arbitrary fashion, instead of focusing on particular individuals that have actually showed problematic behaviour. The latter method is called ”protective hunting” and it is also widely used in parallel to the population decreasing culling. Because of this, Sweden has an ongoing infringement procedure since 2011.
Our neighboring country Finland also used to cull wolves but has ceased since the Tapiola case in 2019 which contains a strict interpretation of the EU’s Habitats directive, precluding the adoption of decisions granting derogations from the prohibition on the deliberate killing of wolves. All member states are expected to apply it in their national courts.
All states do except for Sweden. This has led to the recent discovery that the already extremely fragile, inbred and threatened Swedish wolf population has dropped by almost 20 percent in just a year to 375 individuals.
Are 375 wolves a lot? Yes, if it were in Luxemburg or Andorra but Sweden happens to be Europe’s fifth largest country. Comparing to Italy, that houses roughly 9 times more wolves on a much smaller area, the Swedish population seems miniscule indeed. Romania also has around 3 000 wolves in a much denser country and population.
So, what is the big deal with the Swedish hunters’ aversion towards the wolf? As in all of Europe, populism enticing rural voters is one aspect but since the wolf causes attacks on a marginal 0.08 percent of the Swedish sheep population, it is nothing more than a scapegoat, pun intended.
Death warrant on wolves
Their malice towards this canine engineer of biodiversity is based on their passion for hunting with loose dogs, a much-debated practise that was banned in the UK already in 2004. It does not take a biologist degree to understand that having a dog running into a wolf territory will cause friction, but the blame somehow always falls on the wolf, often just trying to protect its home, instead of on the intruding dog, bred for hunting.
This is why the Swedish hunting regulation §28 allows a hunter to kill a wolf without permission if found attacking a dog, even if the wolf is merely exercising self-defence in its own territory. This is utilized by the hunting lobby to indoctrinate beliefs of predators being vermin, totally neglecting all biological knowledge of their importance and rooting young hunters with ideas such as ”predator control” where smaller carnivores are learned to be detested and hunted by the thousands in tournaments.
Ironically, several key stake holders, including the hunting association itself, have admitted that loose running dogs cause larger damage to livestock than wolves but that assessment does not seem to save the dog’s ancient predecessor from the onslaught.
The hunting association mentioned European Commission president von der Leyen’s comments, but an important note is her recent bias and change of heart after her aging pony was attacked by a wolf. This does not mean the whole Commission favours Sweden’s blatant disregard for the Habitats directive. The fact that the infringement case from 2011 is still open and monitored is a clear indication in the seriousness of the matter.
Reintroducing lynxes
Another error concerns the other three large predators which they claimed ”not having been challenged by the Commission”. The Swedish Carnivore Association actually filed a new infringement case to the EU in March concerning the culling of the lynx, where 188 and 139 of the feline carnivore (also red-listed) have been killed during the two last years. The lynx stands for minimal damage to sheep, even less than the wolf, but the desire to acquire its skin for a trophy combined with the heavy majority of hunting interest in the authorities dealing out the culling decisions, keeps making the culling a yearly tradition.
Looking at other European countries, Poland and Croatia are reintroducing the mystical feline carnivore and Belgium is opening for the same intention. Spain and Portugal have increased their Iberian lynx population threefold during only three years to over 2 000 individuals. Meanwhile, Sweden’s 1400 lynx are yearly being hunted by the hundreds.
True, the hunting association has during the years aided several species in their reintroduction to the Swedish fauna. However, the motives are perhaps not as valiant as they might want to portrait since most of these species were introduced in order to be hunted. Meanwhile, the inofficial national symbol of Sweden, the moose, is on a rapid decline and faces being red-listed next year.
The main reason is the massive forest industry that pushes for an extended hunt on the antlered creature that tends to eat young pine plants since the industry focuses on mono crops and forest farms instead of varied forestry. Even though the hunters association openly disagrees with the forestry in this matter, one must remember that it is hunters that finally push the trigger and if they would truly protest in this case, the forestry would not be able to have the mooses killed. Once again, something is not right in Swedish wildlife management.
The fact remains that public opinion is turning against the hunting interest in Sweden which has become a trophy hunter’s paradise, rather than a model of responsible wildlife management. The latest and saddest example was two moose calves that recently were found strolling in central Stockholm. The animals acted calmly and instead of being ushered back to the forest, they were shot by hunters employed by the city, to many citizens despair.
Swedish wild animals belong to all the country’s citizens, not only the ones intent on hunting them. It seems that Swedish wildlife management has forgotten that.
