Named after the protagonist of a classic fairy tale, the Goldilocks Principle alludes to the existence of a middle ground or third way between opposite extremes that is “just right”. The epithet has been applied to wildlife management that seeks to reconcile contrasting beliefs regarding population size, levels of protection and lethal interventions. Conversely, the Anna Karenina Principle, derived from Tolstoy’s novel, asserts that all key factors must be present and work correctly in order to achieve success in a complex endeavour, i.e. there are more ways to fail than to succeed. This presentation explores various aspects of bear management from these two contrasting perspectives, using Slovakia as an example.
Slovakia’s Western Carpathian population of brown bears (Ursus arctos) reached a low point of <100 animals in the 1930s. A 30-year moratorium on hunting enabled ongoing recovery. Regulated harvest, introduced in the 1960s, did not prevent further population growth and ended in 2019 following challenges to its legality. The population continued to increase in range and may have exceeded 2,000 individuals. There is now a widespread belief that bears have been allowed to become over-abundant. Since 2021, bear attacks have increased in frequency as well as prominence in the media and political discourse. Successive governments have pursued highly divergent policies, from minimising management removals while prioritising non-lethal alternatives to apparently indiscriminate culling for population control. Both approaches have prominent supporters and detractors, with bears and their management in Slovakia continuing to give rise to considerable controversy. Positions are highly polarised and entrenched. Nevertheless, some efforts seek reconciliation. One such initiative is the EU Horizon Europe project Co-creating Coexistence (CoCo), which aims to minimise wildlife-related conflicts, ease tensions and achieve a balance that benefits both people and wildlife.