Wolves – an open letter from naturalists

Open letter of those living and working in the Bieszczady Mountains specialists involved in research, monitoring and observation of wildlife on reports of “growing wolf problem” in the Czarna Municipality

We feel obliged to comment on the material published in the local media regarding the alleged “growing threat from wolves” in the Czarna Municipality and the letter of the Czarna Municipality addressed to the General Director of Environmental Protection. Our position is a grassroots initiative based on our knowledge of local realities.

We feel that the aforementioned media coverage and the content of the above-mentioned letter create a threat picture that does not correspond to reality, is not supported by scientific facts, monitoring data, and may unnecessarily heighten the fear of residents and lead to decisions not supported by solid evidence. It also affects tourists’ negative perception of the Bieszczady Mountains as a dangerous and unpredictable place. As a result, it has a real impact on lowering the attractiveness of the region and decreasing the number of visitors, which was evident in the statistics of 2025. These are real numbers that raise concerns for the tourism industry, including those operating in the Czarna Municipality.

This post is not intended to polemicize with residents’ concerns – which should always be addressed when warranted – but to point out proven, effective and scientifically sound ways to resolve conflict situations.

We understand and take seriously the residents’ concerns. However, we believe that the failure of GDOŚ to respond to the letter of the Head of Czarna Municipality No. OC.5532.09.2025 dated 29.05.2025 is unacceptable. We will send a separate letter to the GDOŚ on this issue.

Below are solid explanations and proposed solutions.

1. wolves do NOT “lose their skittishness,” but use the resources that we ourselves make available to them.

Current scientific knowledge says:

• Wolves do not seek contact with humans, and their brief presence near buildings is not evidence of tameness;
• many wolf registrations are due to the development of surveillance technology and the ubiquity of car and home cameras, while instantaneous dissemination of images is being used by social networks;
• Young wolves learn and accumulate experience through exploration of the environment – these behaviors are not aggressive in nature.

The disappearance of skittishness in wolves is defined by a group of experts from the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe in their report(https://lciepub.nina.no/pdf/637423653359535374_Reinhardt_REP_bold_wolves.pdf) as:

“the repeated, deliberate approach of a particular individual wolf to a human unobscured by any obstacle (such as glass or sitting in a vehicle) at a distance of less than 30 meters.” The primary cause of this behavior is strong habituation, or taming of the wolf by humans.

None of the cases described in the media and in the letter to GDOŚ meet this definition.

Wolves avoid contact with humans, and entrances to property are extreme events, usually resulting from:

• the presence on the property of unsecured kitchen waste, slaughterhouse waste or animal carcasses;
• leaving dog and cat food outside;
• Inadequate protection of livestock;
• interest in a dog that is allowed to go outside the property and run freely around the neighborhood without human supervision (wolves may treat such dogs as intruders in their territory).

According to expert knowledge derived from many years of direct observation of animal behavior, wild wolves do not show aggression toward humans, and the cases of “lack of skittishness” described in the media require analysis of the causes in the first place, rather than frightening the public. It seems obvious that the media use the so-called “clikbait” strategy in their coverage, consisting in generating content that exaggerates facts in order to arouse the reader’s curiosity and thus compel him to click and read the content.

2 The number of incidents (34 incidents) reported by the Black Municipality in 2025 needs to be verified, not automatically considered a “threat.”

In Poland, incidents involving wolves are classified as:

• observations;
• close encounters;
• livestock damage;
• abnormal behavior, such as sick individuals (scabies, very rarely rabies) or severely injured as a result of inter-individual aggression, traffic collisions or poaching.

Most of the incidents reported in the Bieszczady – including those cited by the Municipality – fall into the category of observation, which in itself does not constitute a threat.

The presence of wolves in the fields is not a threat to crops or people, but a concrete support for farmers, as wolves there hunt roe deer, wild boar and deer that prey on crops and do severe damage to them.

A very close observation of a wolf by a person sitting in a car also does not constitute an “incident” or evidence of the predator’s audacity, since wolves do not know that a human is sitting in and driving any moving vehicle. Wild animals have limited perception regarding the presence of a human in a moving object.

Many “attacks on dogs” occur when animals run loose outside the property, which is for wolves natural defense of territory against an intruder. In addition, some dogs – those left behind poor-quality fences, on chains or in pens of improper construction – are sometimes easy prey and food for the wolf. It is worth recalling that, from the point of view of the law (Article 77 § 1 of the Code of Offenses), acquiescing to a dog going unattended outside the property is an offense punishable by restriction of liberty or a fine of up to PLN 1,000 for the owner, depending on the dog’s behavior.

3 The claim of “necessity of culling” is inconsistent with the current law and scientific knowledge.

The wolf is a species:

• strictly protected under national law,

Its killing (including shooting) is possible only on the basis of a permit issued at the request of a person (e.g., a breeder or veterinarian) or local government by the General Director of Environmental Protection in strictly defined situations, after an extended analysis of the circumstances and the impact of possible shooting on the state of protection of the wolf population in the region. Therefore, along with the application, it is necessary to provide the GDOŚ:

• evidence in the form of a description of the situation and photographic and video documentation depicting the disturbing behavior of the wolf(s);
• number and an indication of which individuals should be eliminated;
• data on damage done by specific wolves to livestock, reported to the RDEP and compensation paid;
• data on the condition of sick individuals requested to be killed and veterinary documentation.

The culling of three undefined individuals “to improve the sense of security” does not solve any of the existing problems – as confirmed by all available studies. Shooting is not a cure for conflict situations unless a specific animal exhibiting risky behavior is killed. The shooting of random individuals can, if a parental pair is shot, lead to a breakdown of the family group, with a consequent increase in juvenile activity. Deprived of care and food supply, they will seek out readily available food of anthropogenic origin, such as livestock and dogs, near buildings.

4. real problems need solutions, not scaring residents.

Instead of sham measures, such as requesting a cull, we propose implementing effective and proven prevention methods that significantly reduce the level of conflict:

🔹 (a) proper electric fences, fladers and guard dogs, namely our native Highland sheepdogs;

They are proving themselves all over Europe.

🔹 b) securing kitchen waste, disposal of livestock and game carcasses and slaughterhouse leftovers;

This is the most important element – wolves look for easily accessible food sources.

🔹 c) elimination of periodic predator baiting sites (including those located in the immediate vicinity of Czarna Górna);

Baiting sites with livestock waste (e.g., from slaughterhouses) and game scraps teach wolves, who, thanks to their exquisite sense of smell, know the origin of meat in such places, that humans are the providers of food and such resources should be sought in their vicinity.

🔹 d) limit free running of dogs outside the properties;

Dogs running around unsupervised provoke wolves to attack, as they may be perceived by predators as intruders.

🔹 e) securing dogs on the property by locking them indoors or in appropriate pens at night;

🔹 f) monitoring with video cameras at the sites of reported incidents;

Allows you to determine whether behavior deviates from the norm (e.g., a sick or mutilated individual).

🔹 f) education of residents and students.

The most effective form of reducing fear and misunderstanding.

5 The entrance of the wolf on the property does not indicate “aggression,” but is due to another cause that needs to be determined.

Past analysis of such incidents shows that usually the animal followed the scent of food or a dog, taking advantage of an amenity such as a leaking fence, an open gate, etc. There is no confirmed case in Poland of a healthy wild wolf entering a property to attack a human.

6 We urge restraint in making public accusations against wild animals.

The authorities have a responsibility to present the facts fairly. The media theoretically should too, but very often they generate “sensations” that are part of a marketing strategy.

Scaring residents with unauthorized warnings about “wolf attacks” does not help, and can lead to:

• panic outbreak,
• illegal activities against predators,
• decline in public confidence.

Instead, we need:

• documented scientific data;
• in-depth analysis of each case;
• cooperation between residents, local government and specialists.

Summary

Wolves are a natural part of the Bieszczady landscape and pose no threat to humans. The alarming sightings of wolves near buildings can be reduced by proper management of kitchen waste and proper disposal of carrion and leftovers of livestock and game animals. Damage to livestock is a phenomenon that occurs regardless of the wolf’s legal status in the region, both where it is a protected and game species. In Poland, as long as the wolf is protected, the injured rancher will receive compensation, but when it becomes a game species, the existing compensation system will cease to function. Research indicates that damages can be significantly reduced by introducing livestock protection methods that are adequate to the specific breeding. A guide with methods can be found at the following link: https://www.polskiwilk.org.pl/images/pliki/2020_Poradnik_och_zwierz_hod.pdf

After analyzing the available data and scientific knowledge, the principles of current law, and the information made available by the municipality and local media, we conclude:

1 There is no evidence that wolves in the Czarna Municipality pose a “special threat” to humans. Similar cases – although disturbing to residents – also occur in other parts of the Polish Carpathians. They are a result of the deep encroachment of the development of villages and larger towns into the mountain basins and the typical Polish development stretched in strips along roads and watercourses. These phenomena mean that wild animals, in order to move between feeding grounds on opposite slopes of the mountains, have to pass in small gaps between villages and even through the villages themselves.

2 There is no basis for the decision to shoot three individuals. The conditions necessary for the issuance of a permit require documentation of which specific animals pose a real risk – and no such evidence has been provided.

3 The situation calls for preventive measures, not culling. This is the only way that leads to a real increase in the sense of security of the population, because shooting, without the application of measures to reduce the risk of conflict, will have zero or short-lived effect. The place left by the shot wolves will be taken by others, who will quickly learn to take advantage of unprotected food resources, including those used presumably to lure wolves to be shot.

4 We are ready to support the municipality in any practical measures that will reduce damage, reduce the risk of conflicts and ensure peaceful coexistence between humans and wildlife. In addition, taking concrete, effective measures to mitigate conflicts will contribute to increasing the tourist attractiveness of the region, whose symbols and assets include the existence of a “set” of large carnivores and unique natural values.

Dr. Andrzej Czech – biologist, member of the Commission for the Protection of Species and the Commission for the Protection of Ecosystems of the State Council for Nature Protection, Carpathian Nature Foundation

Robert Gatzka – biologist and nature educator, member of the Carpathian Brown Bear Project and co-initiator of the creation of the “Bieszczady Wildlife Conservation Park”

Dr. Bartosz Pirga – biologist, specialist in large carnivores and nature educator, employee of the Bieszczady National Park

---

pic. main: colfelly/Pixabay