"The Wolf defended itself instinctively": Shifting responsibility in online discussions on wildlife comeback.

How people interact has a major influence on the intractability of wildlife-related disputes. However, research into the discursive practices employed in wildlife-related debates is limited. Applying discursive psychology, we analyse these practices in interactions on the comeback of wolves and beavers in the Netherlands. We focus on digital interactions that occur on social media. The analysis reveals an overall tendency to ascribe responsibility, not only to humans but also to the animals involved. Participants manage the issue of responsibility through various discursive practices: by means of assertions and counter-assertions, contradictions, personifications, and categorisations. These responsibility attributions implicitly reflect participants' stance on the comeback of wolves and beavers, making visible and potentially reinforcing differences between participants. We assert that awareness of the identified discursive practices can facilitate a more constructive dialogue about wildlife comeback, which is important for wildlife conservation.