Human-wolf interactions: the importance of hands-on meetings. By Anna Chowdhury

1. Human-wolf interactions: the importance of hands-on meetings. By Anna Chowdhury Behavioural study. Attitude survey Further implications and conclusion Prejudices about wolves stem from long tradition of using the animal as negative symbol, in fables, pagan religions and Christianity, children stories and proverbs in use still today. Has been a way to rectify the torture, poisoning, mutilation and mass destruction of wolves done by man throughout times. Now however, peoples attitudes begin to change, and with greater knowlegde of the wolves comes higher tolerance and acceptance. Social communication between individuals is partly done by visual signals, which include behavioural patterns (passive submission (D); active submission (G); playinvite (H)), body posture, tail and ear positions. Signals of submission and dominance deflects aggression and ultimaly lead to a more harmonised pack. Further studies are needed to compare and determine wether or not the amount of social interactions in the focal group differs from other captive packs, both human and non human socialized, and what benefits this yields for the group. Do hands-on meetings between captive wolves and people have the power to alter peoples negative attitudes towards the wolf, and do they affect the wolves behaviour? No statistically significant difference in social behaviours were found. 12% of the groups time were spent in social interactions with each other, 70% of their time resting. In general the frequency of resting behaviours were higher when no humans were present, leading to higher frequency of moving around and socially interacting during hands-on meetings. The omega standing for 30% of the groups social interactions, while the third ranking male, the one engaging the most in dominance and aggressive behaviours, due to uncertainty or highest motivation to climb up the hierarchy ladder, stand for 23% of social interactions. For further implications see last page. To determine if the hands-on meetings really has the power to alter peoples negative attitudes a selection of other target groups, hunters, livestock holders, company conference groups, are needed. Some statistically significant differences were found for some questions, although this due to diffrences in amount of respondents in classification levels rather than diffreences in answers depending on classification levels. Behavioural study (see next page): Video recordings of bachelor group at Kolmården Zoo were made, during times with humans present in the enclosure and without. Frequency of different social behavioours and activities were recorded to detemine the effects of hands-on meetings Of 128 respondents 75% knew before hand how many wild wolves live in Scandinavia today, and 70% felt it was very nice that wild wolves existed in Sweden. 85% were first timers, and all respondents felt their meeting had been a positive experience. 85% claimed they had learnt something new, and 92% felt the wolves were good ambassadeurs for their species, although 43% said the wolves felt more like dogs than wild wolves. The main motis making it acceptable to hunt and kill wolves was if the wolf acts fearless of humans and start vacating urban areas. 78% also felt that media represented the wolf wrongly, and as more dangerous than in actual life. For further implications see next page. These studies suggest that hands-on meetings could be a tool for conserving and preserving the wolf, and that it also could be if not beneficiary for a captive pack in any other way, it could be considered as an environmental enrichment, increasing activity in a pack and enlightening the animals days by having them interact with different people and exposing them to different smells. Attitude survey (see page 3): Questionnaire with 38 questions of peoples previous knowlegde, experience, attitudes and evalutations of meetings were handed out to 16 different groups. Some questions were answered before the meeting began, others afterwards. Focal group, Kolmården Zoo Tromb (alpha) Korax (beta) Isor (3rd) Atlas (4th) Zeke (omega)