Menu Menu

EU Commission reintroduces wolf hunting following farmer pressure

A proposal to lower the conservation status of wolves in the EU has ignited questions on the equilibrium between environmental preservation and economic considerations. 

In mid-December, the European Union proposed to demote the wolf’s status from ‘strictly protected’ to ‘protected’ under the Berne Convention. Many criticized this decision for its reversal of Europe’s environmental conservation efforts.

The Berne Convention, known in full as the Berne Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats, was adopted in 1979.

The assembly plays a crucial role in promoting cooperation among European countries to take necessary actions to preserve their environments – chiefly, promoting sustainable use of natural resources and protecting endangered species and habitats.

More specifically, it mitigates the impact of human activities on wildlife and fosters a sustainable balance between our agendas and the conservation of natural habitats. Most importantly, the convention underscores the shared responsibility of nations to preserve the health and resilience of Europe’s rich natural heritage.

Though there are many statuses within the convention, the ‘strictly protected’ status typically implies a higher level of legal protection, often prohibiting any form of harm, disturbance, or exploitation of the species or habitat.

This designation is reserved for species facing severe threats or of critical ecological importance.

On the other hand, ‘protected’ status generally implies a set of regulations that aim to ensure sustainable management and use of the species or habitat, which can permit the hunting of the species if deemed necessary.

The decision to assign a ‘strictly protected’ or ‘protected’ status depends on various factors, including an animal’s conservation category, ecological importance, vulnerability to human activity, and cultural significance.

In the context of the EU, new analysis carried out by the organization on wolf populations showed that they have rebounded in recent years, with an estimated value of 20,300 wolves throughout the region – except for Ireland, Cyprus, and Malta.

This has reportedly led to an increase in attacks on livestock, causing economic hardship and emotional distress for farmers who are now lobbying for reduced wolf protection to prevent livestock predation losses.

Many have criticized this move as a ploy for the European Union’s President von der Leyen to gain the support of farmers as it may bolster her re-election campaign. Moreover, she herself was a victim of a wolf attack in which her pony was killed in Germany.

Arguments have been made that von der Leyen’s appearance to prioritize the economic well-being of rural communities could be seen as a means of balancing environmental concerns with economic practicality, potentially attracting voters who might perceive stricter wolf protection as harmful to rural livelihoods.

Pack of wolves | Another wolf pic, I've made at Bad Mergenth… | Cloudtail the Snow Leopard | Flickr
Flickr

While the proposed downgrade of wolf protection in the EU may offer seemingly quick relief to concerns about livestock predation, it ultimately represents a short-term solution fraught with long-term risks.

Prioritizing immediate economic gains over ecological considerations poses a threat to the health of the ecosystem, ignores potential hidden costs, and sets a concerning precedent for future conservation efforts.

The potential disruption of the ecological balance that wolves maintain may entail hidden expenses and unforeseen consequences. The damage to the EU’s image as an environmental leader arguably outweighs fleeting economic benefits, rendering this proposal untenable for the sustainable management of both wolf populations and humans.

A survey conducted in late November in 10 member states showed that 68% of rural populations agreed that the ‘strictly protected’ status of wolves should remain. The survey cited the fact that 78% of the population agreed that the species had a right to co-exist alongside humans.

With reduced protection, wolves have now become markedly more vulnerable to hunting, trapping, and other forms of human-induced mortality.

The European Environmental Bureau has spoken out against the proposal stating that the downgrade of the species’ protection status would go against the region’s environmental efforts. Environmental campaigners also wrote to the European Commission to register their concerns on the matter.

The letter called out the EU’s decision for not being scientifically based, alleging that discussions were driven by hunting enthusiasts and the farming industry who are speaking on behalf of rural communities.

It referred to the survey and stated: ‘The reality is that there is actually a high degree of support among rural communities for the strict protection of wolves in the EU’.

While there have been arguments emphasizing the economic impact of wolf attacks on livestock and the potential political gains for leaders like von der Leyen, the long-term risks associated with such a move cannot be ignored.

The European Union must prioritize the long-term health of ecosystems and maintain its commitment to environmental leadership.

Striking a balance between economic concerns and ecological sustainability is challenging and decisions will not receive backing from everyone, but the well-being of both wolves and humans must be catered for.

Accessibility