A majority of EU Member States agreed to adopt the European Commission’s proposal to downgrade the protection status of the wolf under the Bern Convention. This shift opens the door to wolf culling as a false solution to livestock depredation, which runs counter to Europe’s commitment to safeguard and restore biodiversity. The decision which cannot be scientifically justified went through after Germany changed its position from abstention to support.

With this decision, Member States have chosen to ignore the call of over 300 civil society organisations, among others EuroNatur, and more than 300,000 people urging them to follow scientific recommendations and step up efforts to foster coexistence with large carnivores through preventive measures.

[…]

Wolves are strictly protected under both the Bern Convention and the EU Habitats Directive, serving as a keystone species vital for healthy ecosystems and biodiversity across Europe. Weakening their protection will hinder the ongoing recovery of wolf populations.

‘The EU’s decision will not only destabilise the still fragile wolf populations in large parts of Europe, but also undermine the significant progress made towards a coexistence of humans and wolves,’ says Antje Henkelmann, project manager and wolf expert at EuroNatur. ‘Only efficient herd protection can prevent livestock kills. Instead, the EU is focussing on symbolic but inefficient culls. With her turnaround, the Federal Environment Minister is not only weakening wolf protection, but also giving in to populist demands that are of little use to livestock farmers,’’ says the biologist.

[…]

  • PonyOfWar@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    I don’t think a single unprovoked attack this decade and no deaths from wolf attacks in Europe in the 21st century make this a “complicated situation”.

    • pumpkinseedoil@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      This isn’t about humans but about farmers. Someone I know just recently told me that they lost a few sheep to a wolf attack. Of course they wanted to be refunded, but the officials who checked if he’s eligible for a refund found one short area where his fence was 2 cm too low, therefore he didn’t get anything. He sold his remaining animals and stopped, just like a few of his colleagues who’d stopped before already.

      This decision isn’t because of wolves but because the system didn’t work.

      • AwesomeLowlander@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        Isn’t that kind of on him? If he didn’t meet the minimum requirements, what’s the controversy? Yes the govt could have made an exception, but then the next person who’s 3 cm short points to him as an example, and there we go.

      • jmcs@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        I mean, the current level of cattle breeding is not compatible with long term survival of human beings, so the system is not working regardless of wolves.

        • pumpkinseedoil@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          2 months ago

          I assume you’re hinting mass producing farms, those aren’t affected by wolves anyway (and cattle isn’t, it’s more about smaller animals like sheep). The ones who are affected are the ones who don’t have as many animals but let them be outside.

          To prevent being affected by wolves they could of course keep their sheep indoors, but then they aren’t getting organic meat certificates anymore leading to less money, requiring them to keep much more sheep. Which is not what should be encouraged.