THEY'RE STILL KILLING WOLVES; NOW THEY'RE ALSO LOOKING FOR VOLUNTEERS IN ASTURIAS SOS SOS, HELP!!! T

PUBLIC PROTEST: HOW CAN THE KILLING OF WOLVES BE JUSTIFIED WHEN SCIENCE WARNS OF THE RISKS TO THEIR CONSERVATION?
333 packs throughout Spain. A minimum of 500 is considered necessary to ensure long-term genetic viability. And yet, some government agencies continue to rely on lethal controls. Where is the precautionary principle?
In June 2025, the Ministry for Ecological Transition and the Demographic Challenge (MITECO) published the results of the national census of the Iberian wolf for the 2021–2024 period: 333 breeding packs in Spain, compared to the 297 recorded in the previous census.
The Ministry itself noted that scientists consider 500 packs necessary to ensure the species’ long-term genetic viability—a figure we are still far from reaching.
Source: MITECO, 2021–2024 National Wolf Census.
Given these figures, it is legitimate to ask a question that the authorities responsible for wolf management must answer transparently: Why is there a continued insistence on culling wolves when significant doubts still exist regarding the species’ conservation status?

Asturias, Cantabria, and other regions have promoted or announced measures to cull wolves. But a decision of this magnitude should not be justified solely by social pressure, conflicts with the livestock industry, or electoral interests. It must be based on rigorous scientific assessments, up-to-date data, and real guarantees that the conservation of the species will not be compromised.
Wildlife management cannot become a race to satisfy certain sectors while scientific warnings are ignored.
Defending the wolf does not mean ignoring the problems faced by livestock farmers. It means demanding solutions that address those problems without making the culling of wildlife the automatic response.
Why aren’t more resources allocated to preventing attacks, improving herd protection, supporting the use of guard dogs and adequate fencing, and evaluating which measures actually work?
Why isn’t there a demand for a public and transparent assessment of the results of each authorized cull, its effects on wolf packs, and its actual contribution to reducing damage?
And, above all, why isn’t the precautionary principle applied when the future of a species so emblematic of our natural world is at stake?

We cannot claim that all political decisions are driven by electoral interests without evidence to support that claim. But we can demand transparency, accountability, and scientific explanations when public decisions affect our natural heritage.
The Iberian wolf does not belong to any government, political party, or economic sector. It is part of the biodiversity and natural heritage that we have a responsibility to conserve.
We are not asking for special privileges for the wolf. We are asking that its management be based on science, that prevention be prioritized, and that its conservation not be subordinated to interests unrelated to the common good.
A species should not have to pay with its life for the inability to find lasting solutions to a human conflict.
Through this page, we call on the relevant authorities to provide:
▪️ Transparency regarding the scientific criteria justifying each culling.
▪️ Up-to-date assessments of the species’ conservation status and the cumulative effects of culling.
▪️ Priority for preventive measures and effective support for livestock farmers who protect their herds.
▪️ Compliance with legal obligations regarding the conservation of the species.
▪️ Responsible management that ensures future generations can also encounter and observe the Iberian wolf in the wild.
The wolf’s future cannot be decided solely by counting votes. It must be decided with knowledge, responsibility, and respect for life.
🐺 FOR THE CONSERVATION OF THE WOLF