Predators That Kill Humans: Myth, Reality, Context

Chapter 17

Predators That Kill Humans: Myth, Reality, Context and the Politics of Wolf Attacks on People John D.C. Linnell and Julien Alleau

Introduction: The Ultimate Conflict Large predators are associated with a wide range of conflicts with human interests. These range from competition with hunters for game, depredation on domestic livestock and/or pets or destruction of property. In addition, many large carnivore species are also periodically associated with a far more serious conflict, the killing of humans. The name “man-eater” and the idea of being killed (and potentially eaten) by a large predator can quite naturally induce fear into people sharing habitat with these species. However, the level of fear that is displayed for any species in any specific area rarely seems to be related to the relevant objective risk of attack. In other words, fear of man-eating is filtered through complex social filters, and may even be cynically manipulated for political goals. In this chapter, we firstly provide an overview of those carnivore species that are associated with killing humans before focusing in detail on the case study of wolves (Canis lupus). No other case is currently so controversial or provides a richer body of historical and contemporary material to explore the myth, the reality and the politics of fear.

J.D.C. Linnell (*) • J. Alleau Norwegian Institute for Nature Research, PO Box 5685 Sluppen, NO-7485, Trondheim, Norway e-mail: [email protected]; [email protected] © Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016 F.M. Angelici (ed.), Problematic Wildlife, DOI 10.1007/978-3-319-22246-2_17

357

358

J.D.C. Linnell and J. Alleau

Which Predators Kill People? There have been two recent reviews of large carnivores that kill humans (Löe and Røskaft 2004; Quigley and Herrero 2005). These reviews identified 12 species that have made multiple predatory attacks on humans, and another 5 species that are associated with anecdotal cases or where they have killed people when provoked. The former include three species of canids (dingo Canis dingo, coyote Canis latrans, grey wolf, Linnell et al. 2002; Fritts et al. 2003), five cat species (tigers Panthera tigris, lion Panthera leo, leopard Panthera pardus, puma Puma concolor, jaguar Panthera onca, Neto et al. 2011; Mattson et al. 2011; Bloomgaard 2001; Dhanwatey et al. 2013; Chomba et al. 2012; Yamazaki and Bwalya 1999; Packer et al. 2005; Athreya et al. 2011; Goyal 2001) and four bear species (polar bear Ursus maritimus, brown bear U. arctos, American black bear U. americanus, sloth bear Melursus ursinus, Bargali et al. 2005; Rajpurohit and Krausman 2000; Fleck and Herrero 1989; Clark et al. 2012; Chestin 1993; Gunther and Hoekstra 1998). However, only tigers, leopards, sloth bears, lions and brown bears kill people on a regular basis (i.e. annually). There are also isolated and anecdotal reports of striped hyaena (Hyaena hyaena) and spotted hyaena (Crocuta crocuta), Asiatic black bear (Ursus thibetanus), sun bear (Helarctos malayanus) and spectacled bear (Tremarctos ornatus) killing people. Spotted hyaenas are reputed to have killed many people in Africa although documentation and reliable statistics are rare. It is important to consider that domestic dogs are also associated with many serious and fatal attacks on humans (Avis 1999; Sacks et al. 2000). Documentation of large carnivore attacks on people is highly variable, as is the level of understanding of their ecology. Although their populations have been greatly reduced in previous centuries, there are still large areas of North America and Europe where large carnivores can come in contact with people. Attacks by brown bears, black bears and mountain lions in North America are well documented and have been subject to a great deal of analysis with respect to identifying patterns, trends and mechanisms (e.g. Herrero 1985; Mattson et al. 2011). In Europe, brown bears and polar bears have attacked people, and these incidents have been studied and summarized (Swenson et al. 1996; Amundsen 2014). The Indian subcontinent is a hot spot for large carnivore attacks on people and there are a number of case studies from specific periods and places (e.g. Barlow et al. 2013; Gurung et al. 2008 for tigers, Bargali et al. 2005; Rajpurohit and Krausman 2000 for sloth bears, Athreya et al. 2011 for leopards) although currently there is no overview of the total situation. The situation from Africa is even more poorly documented, with almost no systematic data compiled from any periods or regions (exceptions are Treves and Naughton-Treves 1999; Kushnir et al. 2014). Thus, it is not possible to develop a conceptual cross-site or cross-species global analysis to assess possible explanations for the existence of man-eaters that have been raised in the popular literature (Corbett 1944; Quammen 2003; Vaillant 2011). For each species and site, it appears that a different combination of human behaviour, ecological context, landscape characteristics and large carnivore behavior seems to

17 Predators That Kill Humans…

359

be involved. Large carnivores are such complex animals that individual experience and personality can potentially play major roles in shaping their behavior (Fagen and Fagen 1996; Linnell et al. 1999) although the role of these traits with regard to the propensity of some individuals to kill people has not been rigorously tested. However, given the relatively defenselessness of humans as compared to the killing capability of these species the question should probably be reversed—why do so few people get killed (Quigley and Herrero 2005)? Fatal attacks on humans are exceptional events, and even in regions with a chronic history of attacks such events represent a miniscule proportion of the actual outcomes of human–predator encounters. That being said, it represents a very serious conflict that has the potential to have dramatic impacts on the well-being of rural communities, raises some serious issues associated with environmental justice and can undermine local support for conservation activities (Bhatia et al. 2013; Siemer et al. 2014). It is therefore very important that more attention be paid to this phenomenon and that effective mitigation be devised. The problem at present is that data on attacks on people, like many such practical conflict issues (Butler et al. 2014), rarely make it beyond public databases or management agency reports into the academic literature and are therefore often overlooked.

Wolf Attacks on Humans: Contested Realities Although there is a great deal that is not understood about the ecology of attacks on people by species like lions, leopards, tigers and bears, at least there is no dispute regarding the fact that these events occur. The situation is very different for the canids. One of the most famous cases surrounds the supposed killing of a baby by a dingo in central Australia in 1980. Initially, it was believed that the mother had killed her own child because it was believed that dingoes did not attack people. However, later evidence cleared her name, and subsequent incidences with dingoes on Fraser Island have established that dingoes can attack people and kill children (Anonymous 2001; Franklin 2012). During the past 100 years, there has also been considerable controversy in Western Europe and North America regarding the danger of wolves to people (Fritts et al. 2003). Historically, western attitudes towards wolves have been negative and have contained elements of hatred and fear, with rumours, legends and myths providing the knowledge basis for public opinion. That wolves were dangerous to people was a common element of these discourses, as epitomized by the role of wolves in folk tales such as Red Riding Hood (Dundes 1989), which was written in a period of frequent wolf attacks on people (Moriceau 2007). Stories like these helped to propagate a mainstreamed and collective belief in the dangers posed by wolves. The first scientists (North Americans) that began to collect objective data about wolf ecology based on original fieldwork and the critical analysis of sources were the first to begin questioning whether the traditional view of wolves actually reflected reality (Young and Goldman 1944; Mech 1970). Based on their experience

360


and examination of contemporary sources, a new narrative emerged that claimed that there were no documented cases of healthy wolves killing adult humans in North America in the twentieth century. This narrative was widely propagated by the media, not least because of the lasting impact of the fictional work Never Cry Wolf by Farley Mowat. This claim may well have been accurate at the time of writing and when considering all the qualifiers in the statements, but it was quickly interpreted by advocates of wolf conservation as an assertion that wolves simply do not kill people. The late twentieth century saw a dramatic change in conservation policy in many countries that facilitated wolf recovery across Europe and North America (Chapron et al. 2014). The message that wolves were not dangerous to people was a standard part of most propaganda presented to the public. However, as wolf recovery has progressed there has been a commensurate increase in negative economic impacts and social conflicts associated with the species (Nie 2003). The potential danger that wolves pose to humans has long been part of this discourse with many stakeholders that have an anti-wolf agenda actively promoting an image of wolves as being potentially dangerous to humans. Against this background of claims and counter claims, there is a real need to clarify the actual evidence for and against wolf attacks on humans. This chapter summarizes the results of two reviews (Linnell et al. 2002; McNay 2002) and more recent literature on this topic. We split the material into two periods, pre- and post-1950, seeing as this represents a transition between major historical periods and the point where scientific publication and modern day ecological studies begin to appear.

Historical Wolf Attacks (Pre-1950) History is repeatedly used by competing factions to legitimize various positions in politics, and wolf conservation is no exception. The relationship between wolves and humans has a rich cultural history with written source stretching back over 2000 years (Lopez 1978; Carbone 1991; Marvin 2012). Accounts of wolf attacks on humans are widespread throughout history. However, a considerable challenge occurs when trying to assess the accuracy of various sources. There is a whole genre of folktales that portray cases of wolves chasing horse-drawn sleights in winter, or attacking soldiers and postal workers as they travel alone through the woods (Carbone 1991; Snerte 2000). Although widespread in local oral traditions, these tales turned up repeatedly across Europe from the nineteenth century and onwards following the rapid expansion in printed materials (precursors to today’s tabloids) in that period which used images and text to generate emotional responses in readers (Sangiovanni 2012). Despite the stories often being portrayed as having occurred locally (in each of many localities), there is no indication that they are based on factual events. In recent years, European historians have studied the administrative archives to gather more robust information about the historical relationships between people and wolves.


361

The most systematic historical studies have been conducted in France, northern Italy, Finland, Estonia and western Russia (Alleau 2011; Comincini 2002; Lappalainen 2005; Moriceau 2007; Rootsi 2003), with additional local studies having been conducted in countries like Germany, Spain and Sweden (Butzeck 1987; Pousette 2000; Teruelo and Valverde 1992). These studies have mainly focused on the period from the fifteenth to early twentieth centuries from which there are fairly complete administrative archives, especially from the eighteenth to nineteenth centuries. Accounts of wolf attacks on people have been found in many of these searches. In fact, when adding up all the accounts, there are several thousand cases scattered across the centuries for hundreds of wolf attack sequences. The veracity of historical sources can always be questioned, but there is nothing to indicate that there is not a real event behind many, or most, of the cases that have been uncovered (Alleau and Linnell 2015). Historians are trained in interpreting the context of the archival material they examine, and in many cases this material is rich, detailed and comes from multiple parallel sources involving administrative sources written by religious (e.g. parish registers of births and deaths) and state authorities (reports, letters, compensation payments, etc.), as well as contemporary newspaper reports (Alleau and Linnell 2015). Unlike folk tales, these records provide multiple concrete details of places, people, dates and events. Several patterns emerge from these historical studies. Firstly, despite the total number of cases being quite high, when considering the long time scales (centuries) and large spatial scales (multiple countries) it is clear that being reported as killed by a wolf was not a common event in historical Europe. It is also important to bear in mind how many countries have no such records although this could indicate either that such events did not occur there or that there was an insufficient effort to search for available historical material. Secondly, most of the wolf attacks tend to fall into two categories: rabid or predatory attacks (Linnell et al. 2002). Rabies was a prevalent and wellknown disease in Europe prior to the mid-twentieth century, having occurred at least since antiquity (Théodoridès 1986), and rural people would have been very familiar with it. The historical material contains many detailed accounts of rabid wolves biting multiple people within a few hours inside a limited area. Characteristics of such attacks include the behavior of the wolf, the biting of multiple people/animals and the failure to consume the victims. The ferocity of the initial attacks and subsequent infections typically killed many people because of the lack of a treatment for rabies prior to the end of the nineteenth century. Attacks by rabid wolves in historical times have been documented across central, southern and Eastern Europe, including Spain, France, Germany and the European part of Russia (Alleau 2011; Butzeck 1987; Comincini 2002; Moriceau 2007; Rootsi 2003; Teruelo and Valverde 1992). The second category of attacks concerns multiple cases of individual attacks on people within a limited area over a period of months or years. In these cases, children tended to be selected and the bodies were normally dragged away and consumed. Usually, the episodes ended after some years, or after intensive wolf hunting killed many local wolves. However, in some regions such episodes tended to reoccur after several decades. These cases received a very different treatment in historical

362


records, as they were viewed as being something extreme and outside the normal (of how wolves were meant to behave). Based on the accounts, it appears that these were predatory attacks where individual wolves/wolf packs learnt that it was possible to kill young humans. It must be born in mind that the landscape context and agricultural practices in which these attacks occurred were very different from today’s Europe. It was a period with an intense human pressure on the landscape, with relatively little forest and little wild prey. Livestock (in addition to carrion and garbage) would have been the main prey of wolves, and the only thing standing between the wolves and this prey would have been unarmed child shepherds in fragmented landscapes with dispersed settlements (Alleau 2011). Firearms were also generally absent. These clusters of predatory attacks have been described from historical sources from Russia, Estonia, Finland, Sweden, France, Spain and Italy (Alleau 2011; Comincini 2002; Lappalainen 2005; Moriceau 2007; Pavlov 1982; Pousette 2000; Rootsi 2003; Teruelo and Valverde 1992). There has been a great deal of discussion about the veracity these historical records, especially among wolf advocates. Popular and uncritical works by amateur historians (e.g. Furuseth 2005; Snerte 2000) run the potential of sowing confusion. Some exceptional cases, such as the “Beast of Gévaudan” in France (1764–1767), have become so infused with popular interpretations that it is particularly difficult to separate myth and reality (Clarke 1971). It is obviously impossible to investigate retrospectively historical cases to exclude confusion between wolf attacks and those of feral dogs or wolf-dog hybrids, or indeed any one of many other causes of mortality that could be mistakenly or deliberately misclassified as wolf caused. However, the richness and detail of the archival material and the fact that similar patterns emerge from many different parts of Europe (with different religious, cultural and political traditions) across so many centuries would all tend to indicate that something real was lying behind these reports. This is especially true when we consider the rabies cases where we can find clear parallels with modern cases (see below). Furthermore, recent reports and studies concerning predatory attacks by wolves also give legitimacy to the historical events. There is little doubt that language has been a substantial barrier to creating a wider awareness of this material before now because almost none of the historical material has been published in English.

Recent Wolf Attacks (After 1950) The role of wolves as a vector of rabies to humans is well documented in the modern medical and veterinary technical literature. This documentation stems from a wide range of Eurasian countries including the former Soviet Union (Cherkasskiy 1988; Kuzmin 2001; Pavlov 1982; Selimov et al. 1978), Turkey (Turkmen et al. 2012), Iran (Bahmanyar et al. 1976; Baltazard and Ghodssi 1954; Beran 1994; Gholami et al. 2014), India (Kumar and Rahmani 1997; Rathod et al. 1997; Shah and Jaswal 1976; Isloor et al. 2014) and China (Fangtao et al. 1988). In addition, there are a number of documented cases of rabid wolves biting people in Canada and Alaska


363

(McNay 2002). These case studies are so well documented that they leave little doubt as to the potential risks that rabid wolves represent for humans. Key characteristics of these modern day cases include (1) the furious behaviour of the wolf that leads to very severe injuries, often involving bites to head and neck, (2) the involvement of single wolves that bite multiple people in a localized area in a very short time and (3) no attempt to eat the people that are killed or attacked. The consistency of these accounts with the historic accounts gives much credibility to the historical observers. The existence of post-exposure treatment for rabies now saves the lives of most people bitten by wolves, although some people die directly from the attacks and others that are bitten in the head and neck region may die of rabies infection before the post-exposure treatment has time to take effect (Turkmen et al. 2012) or via indirect pathways such as infected wounds or organ transplants (Simani et al. 2012). In modern times, there have been relatively few predatory attacks on people, so that there is comparatively little material to study. In Western and Northern Europe, wolf populations were greatly reduced, although larger populations persisted in the south and east. The only cases known from Europe are from northwest Spain in the 1950s and 1970s. In three separate episodes, four children were killed and four injured. These cases were investigated by biologists, and it seems possible that wolves were responsible for the attacks (Teruelo and Valverde 1992). More cases are known from India in the 1980s and 1990s where at least three different episodes of predatory attacks on children have been relatively well documented in Bihar (Shahi 1982; Rajpurohit 1999) and Uttar Pradesh (Jhala and Sharma 1997). These cases consisted of clusters of attacks spread over several years that would indicate that one or a few packs developed this specific behavioural pattern. The series of attacks ended when the responsible pack was eradicated. Most recently, a series of cases of predatory attacks have been reported within a localized region of western Iran (Behdarvand and Kaboli 2015; Behdarvand et al. 2014). While the patterns described are consistent with previous reports, the veracity of the underlying data is unknown as not enough details of the individual attacks has been adequately described to permit critical evaluation of the data quality. North America is striking for its paucity of documented attacks during historical times (Casey and Clark 1996; McNay 2002). However, in the last half century there has been an emerging pattern of attacks where wolves have been showing bold (fearless) behavior around people, sometimes, but not always, in association with food conditioning associated with their use of anthropogenic food sources. In multiple cases, these have led to situations where wolves bite people (McNay 2002; McNay and Mooney 2005). Although not all these cases come from protected areas, several national parks like Denali and Yellowstone have introduced guidelines on how to manage wolves that become fearless or habituated (Anonymous 2003). Until 2005, none of these attacks had been fatal. However, an adult man was killed at a remote mining exploration site in northern Saskatchewan in November 2005 (McNay 2007). It was clear from the site that he had been killed by a large predator, but the crime scene investigation and autopsy were not handled very efficiently leading to some doubt as to the predator species responsible. Early conclusions that he was killed by a black bear were overturned in a later reanalysis

364


of the evidence (McNay 2007). The new analysis concluded that multiple indices all pointed to the most likely explanation being that he had been killed and fed on by wolves. There was also no evidence for the presence of a black bear in the vicinity. Food-conditioned wolves were known to occur around the mining camp and had behaved aggressively towards other workers in previous days. This was the first documented case of a person being killed by non-rabid wolves in North America in a century, although many wolf-advocates have tried to cast doubt on this finding. Another episode occurred in Alaska in March 2010 when an adult female teacher was killed by wolves while jogging outside a remote village. In this case, the forensic evidence from the scene of the kill, from the autopsy of the woman, and of a number of wolves shot after the event provided conclusive proof of this being an unprovoked attack by healthy wolves (Butler et al. 2011). It is important to point out that the victim was short in stature, jogging at the time and wearing headphones playing music so she may not have even been aware of the wolves and could not take any defensive actions. Between them, these two cases have confirmed that nonrabid wolves can kill adult humans, even in North America. Combining these recent events with the ever-expanding body of historical research should certainly force the more extreme wolf-advocates to reconsider their often uncritical and naïve view of the wolf–human relationship. The evidence now clearly points to the fact that both rabid and non-rabid wolves have killed many people during the centuries.

The Dangers of Wolf Attacks in the Twenty-First Century The existence of evidence that wolves have killed people during both historical and recent times does not mean that they represent a great danger. It is very important to view the contexts within which attacks occurred. 1. Rabid wolf attacks only occur in areas where the disease is endemic. Rabies has been eliminated from most of Europe in recent years, and subsequently the only cases of rabid wolf attacks in western Eurasia in recent decades have occurred along the European borders with Russia/Belarus, where rabies is still prevalent. The situation is however, worse in the Middle East, central Asia and India, where rabies is widespread. There is very little information concerning the transmission routes between wolves, other wildlife and domestic dogs, making it hard to identify appropriate responses. 2. The major cases of predatory attacks from historical Europe, Spain in the 1950s and 1970s and India in recent decades are all associated with a very specific set of circumstances. They are linked to landscapes with very fragmented habitat, low densities of wild prey, wolf dependence on livestock and anthropogenic foods and high human densities living poor rural lifestyles. They are also all focused on defenseless children placed in vulnerable situations. It can also be related to specific sociopolitical circumstances such as famine, the pandemics such as bubonic plague (“black death”) or war which created social and economic


365

disorganization with unburied bodies (Alleau 2011; Moriceau 2007). These circumstances change the relationships between wolves and humans and increase the probability of undesirable behavior occurring (Alleau and Linnell 2015). From the perspective of present day Europe and North America, it implies a very low risk of such behaviours emerging. These areas currently have very abundant wild prey populations, increasing areas of forest, and rural populations that are generally not conducting activities that would constitute risks (e.g. using children as shepherds). However, certain risks may still remain in other parts of Eurasia or the Indian subcontinent. 3. Recently, there has been a widespread focus on cases of wolves that are developing fearless behavior (i.e. not showing fear when directly confronted with humans). Although there are some historical precedents (Pousette 2000) it is widely reported as an emerging issue from recent decades (e.g. Lescureux and Linnell 2013). There is a lack of robust scientific data on the topic, and there is certainly a need for more research to understand the behavioural mechanisms and processes that lead to the development of risky situations. Wildlife managers dealing with urban coyotes that attack domestic dogs and occasionally people have come a long way in developing conceptual models to understand the habituation process (Schmidt and Timm 2007; Timm and Baker 2007), and these could make a useful starting point to examine the question for wolves. Experience from domestic dog attacks can also provide valuable insights (Avis 1999; Sacks et al. 2000). Developing a more detailed theoretical and empirical understanding, the process is essential before it is possible to determine whether methods like hazing or lethal control are likely to reduce risks. Despite the need to recognize that the potential for wolf attacks on people is greater than zero and management plans and procedures should take these into account, it is still so small that it is impossible to calculate in a meaningful manner. To put it into context, there are currently >12,000 wolves in Europe and >50,000 wolves in North America, many of which are living in proximity to millions of humans, and yet we only find evidence for a handful of attacks in recent decades.

The Politics of Fear Despite the low level of objective risk that wolves represent for people, large segments of the public express fear of wolves (Røskaft et al. 2003; Zimmermann et al. 2001). Fear is also frequently used as an argument by anti-wolf advocates in efforts to undermine conservation legislation and reduce the current level of legal protection offered to wolves as well as frequently being used in the media and mentioned in social media discourses. Understanding the reason for this mismatch between objective assessment of risk and the public discourse around risk requires an understanding of the psychology and sociology of human–large carnivore conflicts

366


(Bjerke et al. 2002). Central to this is the idea that many of the conflicts associated with large carnivores are more related to social conflicts between different groups of humans rather than the direct impacts that carnivores per se may have on people (Redpath et al. 2013). With respect to wolves, these conflicts include those between rural and urban areas, traditional vs modern lifestyles and values, hunting vs nonhunting interests and experience-based vs academic knowledge systems (Skogen et al. 2013). Wolves have become potent symbols of these wider conflicts in Europe and North America, such that opposition to the wolf has become a form of social opposition to the changes influencing rural life (Nie 2003; Skogen and Krange 2003). Within this context, fear has just become one more element in a wider political struggle. Unfortunately, it is not just the fear based on individual experience (which would actually confirm that the risk from wolves is low) which is entering the debate. In contrast, fear is being actively used by certain leading individuals within the anti-wolf advocacy world to build up an opposition to wolves (Geist 2014). These individuals are very active in spreading what at best is a highly biased and very selective discourse around wolves, but which also contains a large amount of misinformation and fabrication. The popular media is also picking-up on these messages and giving them wide coverage. On the other hand, the widespread denial of wolf attacks that is voiced by many wolf advocates increases the knowledge gap. Given the wider social and political conflicts for which wolves have become symbolic, this combination of fear mongering and denial falls onto fertile ground within social groups that are respectively united in their opposition to, or support for, wolves. The result has been an escalation in social conflicts over wolves (Brox 2000) and a reduction in the extent to which scientific knowledge serves as a basis for decision-making.

Managing the Fear of Wolves Although the risk of people being attacked by wolves is incredibly low in the modern world, the risk is not zero. Global efforts to combat rabies will clearly help to reduce the incidences of rabid wolf attacks, and improvements in health care that make post-exposure treatment more widely available will clearly help to save lives. Rabies is still a major global disease, responsible for over 50,000 deaths annually, with domestic dogs being responsible for most cases (e.g. Gholami et al. 2014). Wolves are the responsible vector in only a tiny proportion of these deaths; however, there is little doubt that the specific aggressive nature of these cases has greatly shaped human attitudes towards wolves during historical times. The situations where predatory attacks occur are not widespread in Europe and North America although they persist in areas like India and Central Asia. There is a clear need to better understand the mechanisms and processes that leads a few individual wolves to develop the unusual behavior of killing people; however, the fact that this so rarely happens makes it very hard to study. In reality, the most important strategy is probably to be able to respond rapidly and remove individuals who develop unacceptable


367

behavioural patterns. In this context, it is important to underline the need for agreeing on what are considered acceptable and unacceptable behaviours. Wolves living in proximity to people are not automatically a danger. The difference is only evident in direct encounters between wolves and people and is most obvious when wolves begin to actively approach people. There would be considerable benefits from an expert process to develop guidelines for dealing with such wolves. A holistic strategy must also contain a focus on putting wolf attacks into context against other more familiar risks, such as that posed by domestic dogs. This example is also useful because the recommended responses are broadly similar. While the previous actions focus on dealing with the real risks posed by wolves, the far greater challenge lies in managing the fear of wolves. As long as wolves remain politicized symbols for wider conflicts it is going to be hard to bring observed levels of fear down to levels more in line with the objective risk they pose. However, a first step at least will be to build a broader agreement about the knowledge base on wolf attacks. For many decades, wolf-advocates have tried to deny or trivialize the facts that wolves have killed people in both historical and modern times. This has led to a situation where many stakeholders have felt that there is a battle-of-knowledge between their own experience, what they hear within their own social circles, and what the so-called external experts claim, creating a credibility-gap and an active opposition to much academic knowledge. Openly admitting that wolves have killed people in specific settings and explicitly coming up with procedures to manage these situations will at least be a first step towards building trust and approaching a common knowledge base for further discussions. Hopefully, this will be based on an objective analysis of the situation rather than one on cynical fear mongering and myth (Bjerke et al. 2002). Unfortunately, this manner of explanation, underlining the complexity of contexts in which attacks happens is far less media-friendly than the more simplified, sensationalized and polarized versions that currently dominate in the press. Acknowledgements The author was financed by the Research Council of Norway and the Norwegian Environment Agency during the production of this chapter.

References Alleau J (2011) Garder ses distances: une histoire des relations homes-loups dans les Alpes occidentales (XVIe–XVIIIe siècle). PhD thesis, Caen University, France Alleau J, Linnell JDC (2015) The story of a man-eating beast in Dauphiné, France (1746–1756). In: Masius P, Sprenger J (eds) A fairytale in question: historical interactions between humans and wolves. White Horse Press, Isle of Harris, pp. 79–100 Amundsen B (2014) Uten nåde: isbjørn og mennesker på Svalbard. Vigmostad and Bjørke, Oslo Anonymous (2001) Risk assessment: risk to humans posed by the dingo population on Fraser Island. Queensland Environmental Protection Agency. www.env.qld.gov.au/cgi-bin/w3-msql/ environment/park/fraser/msqwelcome.html?page=dingo_risk.pdf

368


Anonymous (2003) Management of habituated wolves in Yellowstone National Park. Yellowstone National Park, Yellowstone Athreya V, Odden M, Linnell JDC, Karanth KU (2011) Translocation as a tool for mitigating conflict with leopards in human-dominated landscapes of India. Conserv Biol 25(1):133–141 Avis SP (1999) Dog pack attack: hunting humans. Am J Forensic Med Pathol 20(3):243–246 Bahmanyar M, Fayaz A, Nour-Salehi S, Mohammadi M, Koprowski H (1976) Successful protection of humans exposed to rabies infection. JAMA 236(24):2751–2754 Baltazard M, Ghodssi M (1954) Prevention of human rabies: treatment of persons bitten by rabid wolves in Iran. Bull World Health Organ 10:797–803 Bargali HS, Naim Akhtar A, Chauhan NPS (2005) Characteristics of sloth bear attacks and human casualties in North Bilaspur Forest Division, Chhattisgarh, India. Ursus 16(2):263–267 Barlow ACD, Ahmad I, Smith JLD (2013) Profiling tigers (Panthera tigris) to formulate management responses to human-killing in the Bangladesh Sundarbans. Wildl Biol Pract 9(2):30–39 Behdarvand N, Kaboli M (2015) Characteristics of gray wolf attacks on humans in an altered landscape in the west of Iran. Hum Dimens Wildl 20(2):112–122 Behdarvand N, Kaboli M, Ahmadi M, Nourani E, Mahini AS, Aghbolaghi MA (2014) Spatial risk model and mitigation implications for wolf-human conflict in a highly modified agroecosystem in western Iran. Biol Conserv 177:156–164 Beran GW (1994) Rabies and infections by rabies related viruses. In: Beran GW (ed) Handbook of zoonoses. Section V: Viral. 2nd ed. CRC Press, London, pp 307–358 Bhatia S, Athreya V, Grenyer R, Macdonald DW (2013) Understanding the role of representations of human-leopard conflict in Mumbai through media-content analysis. Conserv Biol 27(3):588–594 Bjerke T, Røskaft E, Skogen K, Torgersen S (2002) Hva påvirker folks frykt for ulven? In: Linnell JDC, Bjerke T (eds) Frykten for ulven: en tverrfaglig utredning, vol 722, NINA Oppdragsmelding., pp 75–100 Bloomgaard P (2001) Frontiers of fear: tigers and people in the Malay world, 1600–1950. Yale University Press, London Brox O (2000) Schismogenesis in the wilderness: the reintroduction of predators in Norwegian forests. Ethnos 65(3):387–404 Butler L, Dale B, Beckmen K, Farley S (2011) Findings related to the March 2010 fatal wolf attack near Chignik Lake, Alaska, ADF&G/DWC/WSP-2011–2. Wildlife Special Publication Butler JRA, Linnell JDC, Morrant D, Athreya V, Lescureux N, McKeown A (2014) Dog eat dog, cat eat dog: social-ecological dimensions and implications of dog predation by wild carnivores. In: Gompper M (ed) Free-ranging dogs and wildlife conservation. Oxford University Press, Oxford, pp 117–143 Butzeck S (1987) The wolf Canis lupus L. as a mediator of rabies to the German population in the 16th and 17th century. Z Gesamte Hyg 33(12):666–669 Carbone G (1991) La peur du loup. Decouvertes Gallimard Histoires Naturelles. Kapp Lahore, Jombart Casey D, Clark TW (1996) Tales of the wolf: fifty-one stories of wolf encounters in the wild. Homestead, Moose Chapron G, Kaczensky P, Linnell JDC, von Arx M, Huber D, Andrén H, López-Bao JV, Adamec M, Álvares F, Anders O, Balčiauskas L, Balys V, Bedő P, Bego F, Blanco JC, Breitenmoser U, Brøseth H, Bufka L, Bunikyte R, Ciucci P, Dutsov A, Engleder T, Fuxjäger C, Groff C, Holmala K, Hoxha B, Iliopoulos Y, Ionescu O, Jeremić J, Jerina K, Kluth G, Knauer F, Kojola I, Kos I, Krofel M, Kubala J, Kunovac S, Kusak J, Kutal M, Liberg O, Majić A, Männil P, Manz R, Marboutin E, Marucco F, Melovski D, Mersini K, Mertzanis Y, Mysłajek RW, Nowak S, Odden J, Ozolins J, Palomero G, Paunović M, Persson J, Potočnik H, Quenette P-Y, Rauer G, Reinhardt I, Rigg R, Ryser A, Salvatori V, Skrbinšek T, Stojanov A, Swenson JE, Szemethy L, Trajçe A, Tsingarska-Sedefcheva E, Váňa M, Veeroja R, Wabakken P, Wölfl M, Wölfl S, Zimmermann F, Zlatanova D, Boitani L (2014) Recovery of large carnivores in Europe’s modern humandominated landscapes. Science 346(6216):1517–1519


369

Cherkasskiy BL (1988) Roles of the wolf and the racoon dog in the ecology and epidemiology of rabies in the USSR. Rev Infect Dis 10(Suppl 4):S634–S636 Chestin IE (1993) Brown bear aggressiveness towards humans in Russia. In: Bears of Russia and adjacent countries—state of populations. Proceedings of the 6th conference of specialists studying bears, Moscow. Central Forest Reserve, pp 89–94 Chomba C, Senzota R, Chabwela H, Mwitwa J, Nyirenda V (2012) Patterns of human-wildlife conflicts in Zambia, causes, consequences and management responses. J Ecol Nat Environ 4(12):303–312 Clark DA, van Beest FM, Brook RK (2012) Polar bear—human conflicts: state of knowledge and research needs. Can Wildl Biol Manage 1(1):1–9 Clarke CHD (1971) The beast of Gévaudan. Nat Hist 80:44–51, 66–73 Comincini M (2002) L’uomo e la “bestia antropofaga”: storia del lupo nell’Italia settentrionale dal XV al XIX secolo. Unicopli, Italy Corbett J (1944) Man-eaters of Kumaon. Oxford University Press, London Dhanwatey HS, Crawford JC, Abade LAS, Dhanwatey PH, Nielsen CK, Sillero-Zubiri C (2013) Large carnivore attacks on humans in central India: a case study from the Tadoba-Andhari Tiger Reserve. Oryx 47(2):221–227 Dundes AE (1989) Little Red Riding Hood: a casebook. University of Wisconsin Press, Madison Fagen R, Fagen JM (1996) Individual distinctiveness in brown bear, Ursus arctos L. Ethology 102:212–226 Fangtao L, Shubeng C, Yinzhon W, Chenzhe S, Fanzhen Z, Guanfu W (1988) Use of serum and vaccine in combination for Prophylaxis following exposure to rabies. Rev Infect Dis 10(Suppl 4):S766–S770 Fleck S, Herrero S (1989) Polar bear conflicts with humans. In: Bromley M (ed) Bear-people conflicts: proceedings of a symposium on management strategies. Northwest Territories Department of Renewable Resources, Yellowknife, Northwest Territories, pp 201–202 Franklin AS (2012) Dingoes in the dock. New Sci 213(2852):28–29 Fritts SH, Stephenson RO, Hayes RD, Boitani L (2003) Wolves and humans. In: Mech LD, Boitani L (eds) Wolves: behavior, ecology, and conservation. University of Chicago Press, Chicago, pp 289–316 Furuseth A (2005) Drept av bjørn og ulv: en historisk oversikt over mennesker drept og skadet av rovdyr i Norge de siste 400 år. Landbruksforlaget, Oslo Geist V (2008) Death by Wolves and the power of Myths: the Kenton Carnegie Tragedy. Fair Chase 23(4):29–33 Gholami A, Fayaz A, Farahtaj F (2014) Rabies in Iran: past, present and future. J Med Microbiol Infect Dis 2(1):1–10 Goyal PS (2001) Man-eating leopards—status and ecology of leopard in Pauri Garhwal, India. Carnivore Damage Prev News 3:9–10 Gunther KA, Hoekstra HE (1998) Bear-inflicted injuries in Yellowstone National Park, 1970–1994. Ursus 10:377–384 Gurung B, Smith JLD, McDougal C (2008) Factors associated with human-killing tigers in Chitwan National Park, Nepal. Biol Conserv 141:3069–3078 Herrero S (1985) Bear attacks: their causes and avoidance. Nick Lyons Books, New York Isloor S, Marissen WE, Veeresh BH, NithinPrabhu K, Kuzmin IV, Rupprecht CE, Satyanarayana ML, Deepti BR, Sharada R, Neelufer MS, Yathiraj S, Abdul Rahman S (2014) First case report of rabies in a wolf (Canis lupus pallipes) from India. J Vet Med Res 1(3):1012 Jhala YV, Sharma DK (1997) Childlifting by wolves in eastern Uttar Pradesh, India. J Wildl Res 2(2):94–101 Kumar S, Rahmani AR (1997) Status of Indian grey wolf Canis lupus pallipes and its conservation in marginal agricultural areas of Solapur District, Maharashtra. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 94(3):466–472 Kushnir H, Weisberg S, Olson E, Juntunen T, Ikanda D, Packer C (2014) Using landscape characteristics to predict risk of lion attacks on humans in south-eastern Tanzania. Afr J Ecol 52(4):524–532

370


Kuzmin I (2001) Rabies in Russia 1960–1998. RABNET. www.who.int/emc/diseases/zoo/Russia_ data/russiarabies index.html Lappalainen A (2005) Sudet jäljet. Metsäkustannus, Hämeenlinna Lescureux N, Linnell JDC (2013) The effect of rapid social changes during post-communist transition on perceptions of the human—wolf relationships in Macedonia and Kyrgyzstan. Pastoralism 3:4 Linnell JDC, Odden J, Smith ME, Aanes R, Swenson JE (1999) Large carnivores that kill livestock: do “problem individuals” really exist? Wildl Soc Bull 27(3):698–705 Linnell JDC, Løe J, Okarma H, Blancos JC, Andersone Z, Valdmann H, Balciauskas L, Promberger C, Brainerd S, Wabakken P, Kojola I, Andersen R, Liberg O, Sand H, Solberg EJ, Pedersen HC, Boitani L, Breitenmoser U (2002) The fear of wolves: a review of wolf attacks on humans. NINA Oppdragsmelding 731:1–65 Löe J, Røskaft E (2004) Large carnivores and human safety: a review. Ambio 33(6):283–288 Lopez BH (1978) Of wolves and men. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York Marvin G (2012) Wolf. Reaktion Books, London Mattson D, Logan K, Sweanor L (2011) Factors governing risk of cougar attacks on humans. Hum Wildl Interact 5(1):135–158 McNay ME (2002) Wolf–human interactions in Alaska and Canada: a review of case history. Wildl Soc Bull 30:831–843 McNay ME (2007) A review of evidence and findings related to the death of Kenton Carnegie on November 8, 2005 near points north, Saskatchewan. Alaska Department of Fish and Game, Fairbanks McNay ME, Mooney PW (2005) Attempted predation of a child by a gray wolf, Canis lupus, near Icy Bay, Alaska. Can Field Nat 119:197–201 Mech LD (1970) The wolf: the ecology and behavior of an endangered species. American Museum of Natural History, New York Moriceau JM (2007) Histoire du méchant loup : 3000 attaques sur l’homme en France (XVe–XXe siècle). Fayard, Paris Neto MF, Garrone Neto D, Haddad Junior V (2011) Attacks by jaguars (Panthera onca) on humans in central Brazil: report of three cases, with observation of a death. Wilderness Environ Med 22(2):130–135 Nie MA (2003) Beyond wolves: the politics of wolf recovery and management. University of Minnesota Press, London Packer C, Ikanda D, Kissui B, Kushnir H (2005) Lion attacks on humans in Tanzania. Nature 436:927–928 Pavlov M (1982) [Wolf]. Moscow Pousette E (2000) De måanniskoätande vargarna. Bjørkelangen Bok and Papir, Bjørkelangen Quammen D (2003) Monster of god: the man-eating predator in the jungles of history and the mind. W.W. Norton, London Quigley H, Herrero S (2005) Characteristics and prevention of attacks on humans. In: Woodroffe R, Thirgood S, Rabinowitz A (eds) People and wildlife: conflict or coexistence? Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 27–48 Rajpurohit KS (1999) Child lifting: wolves in Hazaribagh, India. Ambio 28(2):162–166 Rajpurohit KS, Krausman PR (2000) Human-sloth bear conflicts in Madhya Pradesh, India. Wildl Soc Bull 28(2):393–399 Rathod NJ, Salunke S, Bawiskar VR (1997) Clinical profile of wolf bite cases in Jalgaon District. J Assoc Phys India 45(11):866–867 Redpath SM, Young J, Evely A, Adams WM, Sutherland WJ, Whitehouse A, Amar A, Lambert RA, Linnell JDC, Watt A, Gutierrez RJ (2013) Understanding and managing conservation conflicts. Trends Ecol Evol 28:100–109 Rootsi I (2003) Rabid wolves and man in Estonia of the 18th and 19th centuries. Acta Zool Lith 13:72–77


371

Røskaft E, Bjerke T, Kaltenborn BP, Linnell JDC (2003) Patterns of self reported fear towards large carnivores among the Norwegian public. Evol Human Behav 24:184–198 Sacks JJ, Sinclair L, Gilchrist J, Golab GC, Lockwood R (2000) Breeds of dogs involved in fatal human attacks in the United States between 1979 and 1998. J Am Vet Med Assoc 217(6):836–840 Sangiovanni A (2012) Le parole e le figure: storia dei media in Italia dall’età liberale alla Seconda Guerra mondiale. Donzelli Editore, Italy Schmidt RH, Timm RM (2007) Bad dogs: why do coyotes and other canids become unruly? Proc Wildl Damage Manage Conf 12:287–302 Selimov MA, Klyueva EV, Aksenova TA, Lebedeva IR, Gribencha LF (1978) Treatment of patients bitten by rabid or suspected rabid wolves with inactivated tissue culture rabies vaccine and rabies gammaglobulin. In: IABS W (ed) Symposium on the standardization of rabies vaccines for human use produced in tissue cultures (rabies III). S. Karger, Basel, pp 141–146 Shah U, Jaswal GS (1976) Victims of a rabid wolf in India: effect of severity and location of bites on development of rabies. J Infect Dis 134(1):25–29 Shahi SP (1982) Status of the grey wolf (Canis lupus pallipes Sykes) in India—a preliminary survey. J Bombay Nat Hist Soc 79(3):493–502 Siemer WF, Decker DJ, Shanahan JE, Wieczorek Hudenko HA (2014) How do suburban coyote attacks affect residents’ perceptions: insights from a New York case study. Cities Environ 7(2):7 Simani S, Fayaz A, Rahimi P, Eslami N, Howeizi N, Biglari P (2012) Six fatal cases of classical rabies virus without biting incidents, Iran 1990–2010. J Clin Virol 54(3):251–254 Skogen K, Krange O (2003) A wolf at the gate: the anti-carnivore alliance and the symbolic construction of community. Sociol Ruralis 43(3):309–325 Skogen K, Krange O, Figari H (2013) Ulvekonflikter: en sosiologisk studie. Akademika forlag, Oslo Snerte K (2000) Ulvehistorier. Samlaget, Oslo Swenson JE, Sandegren F, Heim M, Brunberg S, Sørensen OJ, Söderberg A, Bjärvall A, Franzén R, Wikan S, Wabakken P, Overskaug K (1996) Er den skandinavisk bjørnen farlig? NINA Oppdragsmelding 404:1–26 Teruelo S, Valverde JA (1992) Los lobos de Morla. Circulo de Bibliotilia Venatoria, Madrid Théodoridès J (1986) Histoire de la rage. Masson, Paris Timm RM, Baker RO (2007) A history of urban coyote problems. Proc Wildl Damage Manage Conf 12:272–286 Treves A, Naughton-Treves L (1999) Risk and opportunity for humans coexisting with large carnivores. J Hum Evol 36:275–282 Turkmen S, Sahin A, Gunaydin M, Tatli O, Karaca Y, Turedi S, Gunduz A (2012) A wild wolf attack and its unfortunate outcome: rabies and death. Wilderness Environ Med 23(3):248–250 Vaillant J (2011) The tiger: a true story of vengeance and survival. Vintage Depatures, New York Yamazaki K, Bwalya T (1999) Fatal lion attacks on local people in the Luangwa Valley, Eastern Zambia. S Afr J Wildl Res 29(1):19–21 Young SP, Goldman EA (1944) The wolves of North America. Dover, New York Zimmermann B, Wabakken P, Dötterer M (2001) Human-carnivore interactions in Norway: how does the re-appearance of large carnivores affect people’s attitudes and levels of fear? For Snow Landsc Res 76(1/2):137–154