Predator policy is a controversial area that includes problems with hunting and handling of wild animals. This is the reason why the government decentralized some of the work to the regions in 1998. During 2008, the Swedish government produced a proposal regarding the conduct of wildlife management delegations. The purpose of this essay is to study the relationship between politicians and officials in the wildlife management delegation with a specific focus on a polarized issue, the wolf question. We do this by studying roles and politicization. Based on the purpose, the following questions have been formulated: What is the role of officials and politicians in wildlife management delegations? How are these roles affected by how politicized the wolf issue is in the region? These delegations include politicians and officials. Based on the theory of the dichotomy between politicians and officials, politicians have a stance and biased role, while officials have a role that is about being impartial and working on the basis of the regulations. This essay consists of a comparative case essay with a content analysis and thematic analysis as a method. The material used has been collected through semi-structured interviews and printed material. This essay shows that the politicization of the wolf question to some extent affects the representatives in the wildlife management delegation.