Reactive regulation, as we saw earlier, is based on shooting individuals displaying "undesirable behaviours", such as attacking livestock in a protected situation or predating protected (or difficult to protect) livestock, at a higher intensity than "normal". It therefore concerns the removal of the individual who committed the predation or, within packs that have exceeded victim quotas, of young wolves (up to 75% of cubs, if proof of reproduction in the current year, or subadults). More rarely, one of the members of the breeding pair may be shot, if it is found "guilty" of the majority of predations over the previous two years. The goal is to try and put an end to attacks on solitary individuals or, in the case of packs, to reduce the pressure. But, as you will soon discover, the shooting of these two categories of individuals is not effective if the aim is to reduce losses on livestock. This fact has already been studied and demonstrated many times, including in Switzerland if we look at recent years and the shots already carried out in these situations.
In practice, therefore, shooting only serves to "reduce" quotas of individuals within packs, in the hope of cutting short the spread of undesirable behaviour. These behaviours can be learned within the pack in which the young wolves are born, but also after they have dispersed. But they can also be learned at any time throughout a wolf's life, through experience, learning, encounters with future partners, etc. As a reminder, a wolf is a unique individual, with its own personality, character, upbringing and experience, and it learns, just like us humans, throughout its life. The only case in which we observe a significant drop in attacks, but over a relatively short period of time (i.e., until the return of another wolf), is the shooting of solitary individuals. In the other cases, the effects of regulation are much more irregular, and the number of attacks does not fall drastically as expected, or only slightly, in well-defined circumstances and over a very limited period of time. We'll explain the reasons why later.
Proactive regulation, on the other hand, has a completely different aim, far removed from any scientific or even logical consideration : reducing wolf numbers at regional and national level, through the elimination of entire packs or by taking quotas of individuals that may not yet have committed attacks. This goes against the grain of the reactive regulation, since individuals are arbitrarily shot, without any hindsight as to the possible consequences, not only for the species but also for attacks on livestock. A map has been drawn up by the Federal Office for the Environment (OFEV), through the Ordinance, where only twelve packs are considered "tolerated" in Switzerland, whereas this figure provided until 2023 was a minimum of 20 packs. For example, Valais, the "Pre-Alps of Vaud" and the canton of Berne should/could only have...three packs between them ! When we consider the territories in this part of the Alps, the reservoirs of prey, the need to regulate prey and the health of the forests, we can only wonder how such a number could have been established and what the scientific basis there is for it !
Consequently, despite the fact that the law only provides for the shooting of entire packs in exceptional cases, the new Ordinance has given the green light to the elimination of almost 60% of Swiss packs, over several years (shooting period between September and January, i.e. for 5 months, every year from 2024). This is possible as soon as the pack has killed a single animal in a protected area, which is an aberration and therefore allows mass culling. The first shooting period is already underway, from December 1, 2023 to January 31, 2024, and involves the total elimination of two packs in Graubünden (two others will have 50 to 75% of their young removed) and... seven packs in Valais ! This is highly questionable when you consider the damage caused by these packs to livestock in 2023 ! The "Hauts-Forts" pack (Valais) killed only three sheep, two of them in a protected area (on the only part of the mountain pasture that is difficult to protect, as the farmer has acknowledged and accepted). The Arsene pack killed 9 sheep, 4 of which were protected. The 4 other victims were killed by a male from outside the pack, possibly having joined it between mid-August and early September (we'll explain all this in the official report to be published in spring 2024). In terms of wolf management and regulation, if we want to get the job done right, then it's mandatory to have solid knowledge of the pack in question, how it works, to establish in-depth genetic monitoring of the individuals and then entrust the interpretation and analysis of all this data to someone who knows perfectly the wolf subject, inside out.. Looking at the situation as a whole in the French-speaking Valais region, it would appear that the notion of "buffer" zones, as well as the absence of DNA that could identify one or other of the packs responsible for attacks on adjoining territories, are not taken into account, and that the interpretation of the data is very approximate, not in-depth, leading to clear errors.
In all the studies available on wolf regulation using "quotas", which we'll call "hunting", there has never been any mention of any drastic reduction in attacks on livestock, or even of any improvement over the medium/long term. The example of certain French "states", where the wolf has been present and definitively established since 1992, shows that the consequences of any drastic reduction in attacks are more than questionable and, above all, highly ephemeral. Despite the intensification of shooting since 2018 (63 shots between 2018 and 2022, in the Alpes de Haute Provence department, for example), losses fell only slightly, for an average of two years, then picked up again, despite a clear increase in shooting between 2020 and 2022. However, it is vital to understand that this drop may also be due to factors other than shooting, such as farms having increased or adapted their protection. It cannot therefore be attributed 100% to regulation shooting (called "tirs de défense" in France). It's vital to understand that absolutely nothing that happens in nature or with living being is due to a single factor. Indeed, everything is multifactorial and will differ from one situation to another, at every level (environment, topography, farming methods, protection used, wolf/wolf pack numbers, their functioning/organization, evolution over the months/years, the form of regulation implemented, poaching etc.).
In Switzerland, for the Valais department, one statistic alone shows the nonsense of thinking that shooting quotas and entire packs will reduce attacks and relieve farmers. It couldn't be more telling :
2018 - 10/15 wolves present throughout the canton - 1 official pack - 310 livestock killed - 85% in unprotected situations (or on unprotectable pastures).
2023 - 100-120 wolves present throughout the canton - 12 official packs - 389 livestock killed - 74% in unprotected situations (or on unprotectable pastures).
In 5 years, the number of wolves has multiplied by 8-10 and the number of packs by 12, but losses differ by only 79 animals, which remains fairly similar despite the clear and high increase in wolf numbers. However, protection is better in the French-speaking Valais than in the Upper Valais, where it remains more basic (fewer guard dogs and human presence, numerous unprotected pastures, etc.).
The elimination of entire packs, but above all the arbitrary shooting of individuals without identification or hindsight, can represent a real problem in terms of future attacks on livestock. The death of one of the members of a breeding pair will trigger a reorganization of the pack, and the arrival of a new wolf may, depending on its personality, character, experience and learning, lead to organizational and functional changes. If the pack has not previously been too "interested" by attacking livestock, as was the case with the Hauts-Forts pack, the presence of a new breeder, with different and possibly more "problematic" habits, may lead to an increase in attacks. This was the case in the Jura Vaudois with the Mont-Tendre pack in 2023. The disappearance of both members of the breeding pair will, in turn, lead to a rapid dispersal of the remaining young wolves, which, as proven by American and European scientific studies, can also and logically lead to an increase in predation on herds (disorganization, inexperience, need to feed, greater opportunism and facility etc.), over an even wider spectrum.
Not to mention that such intensive regulation, since we're talking about seven packs in Valais, can lead to more intensive reproduction, a logical reaction that has already been studied in parts of Europe and the USA. This is a logical reaction, already studied in some parts of those continents, to counter the rapid disappearance of a large number of individuals and ensure the survival of the species. It is likely to happen, however, if a proactive, heavy-handed regulation system is put in place. The genetics of wolves can also be affected when entire packs disappear and regional and national numbers weaken considerably. Nor is this good news in terms of maintaining a healthy population, as required by Swiss and international law.
In conclusion, proactive regulation is not based on the main, primordial element necessary for any form of coexistence between man and wolf : the management of conflicts/attacks on livestock. It is applied on the assumption that a reduction in the number of wolves automatically goes hand in hand with a reduction in attacks on livestock. However, a number of studies, which we'll be quoting throughout this series of articles, clearly show that this way of thinking is far removed from the reality on the field.
In this article, we regret to inform you that the Arsene pack has been totally decimated by proactive control shooting in december 2023. It is the only Swiss pack to have completely disappeared, in 16 short days... We knew it was in the firing line, not least because of our study, which was disturbing because of its "uncontrollable" nature. What was supposed to be a nice, serious project, a collaboration in which we agreed to hand over our data, if need be, to the competent authorities, ended up in the "Grand Council of Valais", with requests for sanctions...! Laughable though it may be, this just goes to show that studying wolves poses real problems in the field, so much so that some people are firmly opposed to it. But we're not going to give up, and can now count on the support of a large number of members - other projects are already underway ! Our study has enabled us to gather a great deal of data in 2 years, so we'll be able to pay a posthumous tribute to Arsene's pack and try to add a small stone to the edifice of wolf knowledge in Switzerland.
Related studies
Oksana Grente - "Points chauds de déprédation du loup en France, analyses de regroupement en tenant compte de la disponibilité du bétail" - 2022
Kira Cassidy - "Human-caused mortality triggers pack instability in gray wolves" - 2023
Agrita Zunna - "Genetic Monitoring of Grey Wolves in Latvia Shows Adverse Reproductive and Social Consequences of Hunting" - 2023
Article : TT - Wolf Mission
Photo : Paul Browning
