Visit to Prague Zoo

A few days ago, on July 6th, I visited Prague zoo, for the first time, along with some colleagues (including biosemioticians, and wolf socializers). We observed a couple of examples of stereotypical behavior (in a hyena, and an elephant), but the wolves appeared very relaxed.

17th gathering in biosemiotics to be held in Lausanne

At the 16th gathering in biosemiotics, in Prague, which has just been completed, it has been decided/announced that the 17th gathering in biosemiotics will take place at the University of Lausanne, Switzerland, June 6-10th 2017, convened by Ekaterina Velmezova.

Annual editorial meeting of Biosemiotics held

Today, at the 16th gathering of biosemiotics, at Charles University in Prague, I took part in the annual editorial meeting of Biosemiotics, which I co-edit with Alexei Sharov and Timo Maran. Some 30-35 people were present.

”Fear not! Socialization of captive wolves” presented in Prague

Today, along with Laura Kiiroja, I presented our paper ”Fear not! Socialization of captive wolves” at the 16th gathering in biosemiotics (Prague July 4-8). Some 45 people were present.

History of cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep paper presented in Prague

Here at the 16th gathering in biosemiotics, in Prague, I have just presented my paper "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep". Some 45 people attended.

Work cited in three Gathering in biosemiotics abstracts

Articles that I have authored or co-authored are referred to in three abstracts in the Book of abstracts for the 16th gathering in biosemiotics, which is currently held in Prague:

 * Christophe Menant: "Meaning generation for constraint satisfaction. An evolutionary thread for biosemiotics"

* Don Favareau: "The biosemiotic glossary project: intentionality"

* Filip Jaros: "The semiotic life of cats: a journey into the feline mind"

To chair session at GiB16 in Prague

I have been scheduled to chair a session at the 16th gathering in biosemiotics, to be held in Prague July 4th to 8th, on Friday July 8th from 11.00 to 12.30 (three presentations), cf. abstract book with programme.

Two wolf-related papers scheduled for presentation at 16th gathering in biosemiotics, Prague

My presentation with Laura Kiiroja "Fear not – socialization of captive wolves" has been scheduled for presentation at the 16th gathering in biosemiotics, to be held in Prague July 4th to 8th, on Wednesday July 6th at 12.00-12.30. My presentation "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep" has been scheduled for presentation the same day at 10.00-10.30.

Abstract book for 16th gathering in biosemiotics now online - my two abstracts

The book of abstracts for the 16th gathering in biosemiotics, to be held in Prague July 4th to 8th, has been uploaded online. I am involved in two abstracts, "Fear not – socialization of captive wolves" (p. 34) along with Laura Kiiroja, and "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep" (p. 56) as sole presenter.

"Socialization of captive wolves" paper accepted for GiB16 (Prague)

I have been informed that the Program Committee of the Sixteenth Annual Gatherings in Biosemiotics (Prague, 4 – 8 July) has accepted our paper "Socialization of captive wolves" (joint paper with Laura Kiiroja) for oral presentation.

"A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep" accepted for GiB16 (Prague)

I have just been informed that the Program Committee of the Sixteenth Annual Gatherings in Biosemiotics (Prague, 4 – 8 July) has accepted my paper "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep" for oral presentation.

Paper abstract with Laura Kiiroja for GiB16: "Socialization of captive wolves"

For the 16th Annual Gathering in Biosemiotics (Prague, 4-8 July 2016), Laura Kiiroja and I submitted the abstract below.

***

Socialization of captive wolves

Laura Kiiroja & Morten Tønnessen  

Wolves give rise to controversy not only in the wild but also in captivity. Due to their genetically inherited fear of humans, wolves in captivity are notorious for persistent escape attempts, self-destructive behaviours, stereotypical behaviour and over-all suffering. Socialization of wolves with humans makes the animals more suitable for living in captive environments by reducing their fear of humans. Although proven effective, it is still a widely unknown and often misunderstood method of improving animal welfare for captive wolves. 

In this paper, a semiotic approach is used to explain the essence and proper methodology of socialization of wolves with humans for animal welfare purposes. Emphasis is put on understanding the changes in the animal’s Umwelt and in the human–animal relationship. The interdisciplinary theoretical contribution will be supported by Laura Kiiroja’s practical experiences with socialization of wolves in USA and Germany, and by Morten Tønnessen’s studies of wolf socialization in two Norwegian zoos (Langedrag mountain farm and wildlife park and Polar Zoo). Additionally, Kiiroja has conducted semi-structured interviews with world-recognized experts.  

The study explains how proper socialization aims to change the human’s significance in the animal’s Umwelt from enemy to social partner. This requires social human-imprinting, and using consistently positive methods of taming and handling. In fact, using aversive techniques, such as dominance theory and punishment, damages socialization and results in dangerous situations. Working “on animal terms” and establishing effective inter-specific communication is crucial for avoiding conflicts and maintaining positive and healthy relationships. The authors suggest that a zoosemiotic approach complements more mainstream ethological knowledge in human–animal interactions and is capable of advancing animal welfare as well as give zoo visitors more realistic experiences of wolves. 

The pros and cons of socializing captive wolves will be analysed. Animal welfare will improve with more opportunities for enrichment, less stressful effect of visitors, and better veterinary routines and husbandry practices. Avoiding suffering caused by constant fear enables the animal to display a quite complete species-specific behavioural repertoire. This is a benefit for behavioural research on captive wolves. Additionally, seeing the wolves in close proximity or interacting with them triggers empathy and interest in visitors, and this may contribute positively to support for wolf conservation. On the downside, zoos and other facilities keeping socialized wolves should be aware of the possibility that visitors might misinterpret wolves as potential pets, and adjust their education program accordingly. The management of these facilities should furthermore invest in educated wolf personnel, to be able to meet the requirements of proper wolf socialization. 

Keywords: Umwelt theory, wolves, captivity, socialization, human–animal relationships, human–animal communication, animal welfare, animal behaviour

Abstract for Gathering in Biosemiotics 16: "A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep"

Today I have submitted the abstract below to the organizers of Gathering in Biosemiotics 16 (Prague July 4-8).

***

A brief history of the cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep

Morten Tønnessen

University of Stavanger, Norway

Wolves and sheep go together – at least in the public mind. In terms of ecological range, they are among the most widespread mammals of wild and domesticated species respectively. While the wolf is in several countries the most controversial large carnivore, it is also, and not coincidentally, the most symbolically laden Western carnivore. The wolf is a symbol of large carnivores, governmental interference in local issues, freedom and authenticity, evil, hunger, sexuality, etc. Sheep, on the other hand, represent among other things innocence and vulnerability (and, of course – food, wool and thus economic value). 

The juxtaposition of the symbolism of wolves and sheep go all the way back to the Bible, if not even further. In the Bible, this archetypical opposition is only resolved in the vision of a new Earth and new Heavens, when, in this new paradise, “[t]he wolf and the lamb will feed together” (Isaiah 65:25). Meanwhile, everybody “knows” that wolves prey on sheep. However, many would be surprised to learn that in Norway, wolves over time only account for 4–5% of depredation on sheep (Rovdata). This demonstrates the way in which people are informed not only by facts, but also by cultural imagery.

Familiarity with the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is arguably a precondition for fully understanding the fierce human emotions that are invoked in social and political conflicts on wolf management and conservation. Although there are local variations, and even though imagery and symbolism can change over time, the “background noise”, as it were, of the historical cultural semiotic of wolves and sheep is significant practically wherever there are, or were, wolves.

In this paper I will present central and illustrative examples of the symbolism of wolves and sheep from a historical point of view. The historical perspective will help making sense of developments in animal imagery. The topic matter is of interest not only because it says something about how we conceive of animals, but also because our representations of wolves and sheep are often used to construct human identities. As a matter of fact, the cultural imagery of wolves and sheep is just as telling about who we are, as humans, and how we think about ourselves, as it is about actual wolves and sheep.

Acknowledgement: This work has been carried out thanks to the support of the research project Animals in Changing Environments: Cultural Mediation and Semiotic Analysis (EEA Norway Grants/Norway Financial Mechanism 2009–2014 under project contract no. EMP151).

Reference

Rovdata. http://www.rovdata.no. 

Czech-Norwegian research application composed and submitted

The last couple of months I have been working with Anton Markoš, Head of department at Department of philosophy and history of science at Charles University, Prague, on an application within the Czech-Norwegian research programme. The deadline was today - a 44 pp application with numerous annexes was uploaded some days back.

The title of our prospective project is "Living beings as sign systems in evolution and development". It involves the group lead by Anton at Charles university (Project Promoter), a group of researchers at Palacký University, Olomouc (Czech Project Partner) lead by Dan Faltýnek, and a group at University of Stavanger's Department of health studies, with me as prospective Project Leader (Norwegian Project Partner). 

The prospective project involves 5 Work packages, one lead by each of the mentioned Project Leaders (with Anton as Principal Investigator for the project as a whole), plus one lead by Karel Kleisner and a further one lead by Paul Thibault. My work package would be named "Umwelt theory for our time".

CFP: Non-human in social sciences (III)

A third conference (November 17-18) is upcoming in the non-humans in anthropology series in Prague, established by Marco Stella and colleagues. The call for papers, with deadline September 10th, is to be found here.

Due to my wife's pregnancy I'll unfortunately not be able to come this time either.

CFP: Non-human in anthropology II (Prague)

The second conference under the label "Non-human in anthropology" (this time with the theme "Limits and boundaries of social science") is scheduled for November 19-20 this autumn. Abstracts are due September 10th.

Contact info: nonhuman@email.cz

Brief report from Gathering in Biosemiotics 9, Prague

The 9th Gathering in biosemiotics took place in Prague, The Czech republic, June 30th-July 4th. 48 presentations were scheduled in the programme (abstract book here), a few of which were cancelled.

Some talks I enjoyed (I did not attend all talks):
Edward BAENZIGER: "Photosemiosis in orchids"
Eliseo FERNÁNDEZ: "Biosemiotics and the relational turn in biology"
Jonathan HOPE: "Umwelträume and multi-sensory integration"
Timo MARAN and Karel KLEISNER: "Semiotic selection, cooption, and good old Darwin: Is there a common basis for the explanation of mimicry, sexual selection, and domestication?"

My talk, "On contrapuntuality: Semiotic niche vs. ontological niche: the case of the Scandinavian wolf population" was given Friday 3rd of July - and went well, with positive response and useful feedback.

I further enjoyed the spirited company of (among others) Myrdene ANDERSON, Luis Emileo BRUNI, Sara CANNIZZARO, Paul COBLEY, Stephen PAIN, Riin MAGNUS, Rex ALEXANDER and Prisca AUGUSTYN.

Augustyn held an interesting workshop on Uexküll translation (she is currently translating Theoretische Biologie (1928), among other texts). The gathering also featured a lively roundtable on the concept of meaning within biology, to which there were 20 suggestions for definitions.

The next gatherings will be arranged the following places (main responsible in parenthesis):
2010: Portugal ... (João Carlos MAJOR)
2011: New York (Victoria ALEXANDER)
2012: Tartu (Kalevi KULL)