EU to make hunting wolves easier in Europe
BRUSSELS, May 8 (Reuters) - The European Parliament approved plans on Thursday to make it easier to hunt wolves in the EU, citing their growing numbers and the threat they pose to livestock as reasons for downgrading the animals' protection status.
The changes - which European Union member states already approved last month - will lower wolves' status in EU law to "protected" from "strictly protected", reflecting a change under the Bern Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats.
In practice, it will mean EU countries can allow wolf hunting, but they must still take steps to stop the animals becoming endangered, such as by limiting hunting seasons.
Since 1979, the Bern Convention had protected wolves from being deliberately hunted or captured unless they posed a serious threat to livestock or health.
"Farmers can now breathe a sigh of relief," said lawmaker Herbert Dorfmann of the centre-right European People's Party.
"It's time to adapt to today's reality. This means balancing our conservation efforts with protecting farmers," he said.
Campaigners and some EU lawmakers have accused European Commission chief Ursula von der Leyen, whose own pony was killed by a wolf in 2022, of having a personal motivation for targeting wolves.
"This does not help livestock farmers and harms forestry and nature," said Green EU lawmaker Jutta Paulus. Wolves can support forest ecosystems, for example, by keeping game populations under control.
The Commission, which made the proposal to change the wolf's status under EU law, said it was based on an in-depth analysis and reasoning including the fact that wolf populations are increasing across the EU, with around 20,300 animals present in 2023 - which has led to increased damage to livestock.
The EU had opposed a previous proposal by non-member Switzerland in 2022 to downgrade wolves' protected status under the Bern Convention.
The European Parliament approved the proposal on Thursday with 371 votes in favour, 162 against, and 37 abstentions.
EU countries must give their final approval to the changes, a vote that is a formality and expected to pass.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Reuters
20 minutes ago
- Reuters
Swiss government approves package of measures for closer EU ties
ZURICH, June 13 (Reuters) - The Swiss cabinet on Friday said it has approved the agreements struck with the European Union last year to regulate their relationship and has now launched a domestic consultation process. The uncertain global geopolitical situation made it a "strategic necessity" for Switzerland to maintain stable and predictable relations with the European Union, its biggest trading partner, the government said. "After Switzerland brought the negotiations with the EU to a successful close in December 2024, the Federal Council finalised the implementing legislation and accompanying measures," the cabinet said. Issues such as wage protections, immigration and electricity as well as the type of referendum to be held on accepting the proposals have all been agreed over the last five months. The consultation process will last until October 31, 2025, the Swiss cabinet said. Parliament will debate the package before a referendum is held, likely in 2028. "With this package, the cabinet is aiming for customised sectoral participation in the EU single market as well as cooperation in selected areas," the cabinet said in a statement. "Given the current global unrest, maintaining good relations with neighbouring countries is key," it added.
Daily Mail
32 minutes ago
- Daily Mail
Tories demand OBR steps in to scrutinise Rachel Reeves' spending plans amid alarm that her sums don't add up without tax hikes
The Tories have demanded the Office for Budget Responsibility steps in to scrutinise Labour's spending plans amid claims the 'fantasy sums' don't add up. Conservative MP Gareth Davies, the shadow financial secretary to the Treasury, called for the watchdog to assess Chancellor Rachel Reeves ' proposals. Ms Reeves used her Spending Review on Wednesday to set out plans to 'invest' a staggering £4trillion to fund 'the renewal of Britain' over the coming years. The Chancellor outlined day-to-day spending across Government for the next three years, as well as plans for capital investment over the next four years. She repeatedly said the cost of her Spending Review was covered by the tax rises she brought in last year, telling Whitehall departments to now 'live within their means'. But Ms Reeves also failed to rule out hammering households with further tax hikes at her autumn budget amid deepening economic gloom. Experts have warned a weakening economy and extra spending pledges - such Labour's U-turn on winter fuel payments - mean taxes are likely to go up again. The Institute for Fiscal Studies delivered a withering assessment of the Chancellor's spending plans and warned that tax rises look 'almost inevitable'. Rachel Reeves just became the first Chancellor in history to deny OBR scrutiny of a Spending Review. If the Chancellor doesn't have confidence in her numbers, why should we have confidence in her? 👇 — Gareth Davies MP (@GarethDavies_MP) June 13, 2025 The think-tank's director Paul Johnson said he would be 'very surprised indeed' if heath and defence funding did not need topping up before the next election. Despite Labour's splurge, he also cautioned that schools spending looked extremely 'tight' as special needs provision demand grows. The IFS's post-mortem also ridiculed the Government's claim to have identified billions of pounds in 'efficiencies' during a 'zero-based' overhaul of costs. Mr Johnson pointed out that all departments had been pencilled in for exactly the same percentages of back-office cuts, suggesting it was not a 'serious' exercise. In his call for the OBR to carry out an assessment of Ms Reeves' plans, Mr Davies noted how the Chancellor had previously vowed never to sideline the watchdog. In July last year, Ms Reeves announced new laws giving the OBR the power to make an independent assessment of any single major tax and spending announcement. The Tory shadow minister said: 'This is the first time in the OBR's history that it has not provided a report alongside a Spending Review. 'This means Labour's Spending Review is founded on billions of pounds worth of speculative savings which have not been subject to independent OBR scrutiny. 'The supposed savings dwarf the Chancellor's headroom, so taxpayers are on the hook if they fail to materialise - as they always do with Labour. 'Given that Rachel Reeves promised to never make a significant fiscal announcement without an OBR report, this is yet another U-turn from a Government which has lost its grip. 'Labour has lost control of the economy, and families are tightening their belts as a result. 'Rachel Reeves' fantasy sums will be paid for in billions more borrowing and even more tax rises. 'The OBR must assess Labour's sums to prevent further speculation and uncertainty, and protect the pockets of hardworking British taxpayers.'
The Independent
40 minutes ago
- The Independent
Will Israel's war on Iran force Keir Starmer to raise defence spending even more?
One of the curiosities of Rachel Reeves's spending review was that the defence budget is planned to rise in 2027 and then stay at that level. In two years' time, defence spending is expected to rise from 2.3 to 2.5 per cent of national income, but to rise no further after that. This is despite Keir Starmer committing just days ago to the 'ambition' of raising it to 3 per cent 'in the next parliament when economic and fiscal conditions allow'. The prime minister spoke in sombre tones at the launch of the strategic defence review last week about the need to prepare for war and for the country to move to a state of 'war-fighting readiness'. Yet all his chancellor did on Wednesday to increase defence spending further was to redefine 'defence spending' to include the intelligence budget, which takes the plateau to 2.6 per cent. Given that the increase from 2.6 to 3 per cent is a substantial one, we might have expected Rachel Reeves to set out a rising trend towards it. But no. All the prime minister's talk of a changed world in which we must be prepared to fight wars again is backed up by an increase in spending that will take us back to the level of 2010, which will be paid for by cutting the aid budget, and then … nothing more. So far, Starmer has resisted pressure from Mark Rutte, the former Dutch prime minister who is secretary general of Nato, and from John Healey, his own defence secretary, to put a date on his 'ambition' of 3 per cent. Just before the strategic defence review was published, Healey and Starmer clashed in private when Healey said in an interview that there was 'no doubt' that the 3 per cent would be reached in the next parliament. Leaving aside the constitutional pedantry that no parliament can bind its successor, Starmer was annoyed at this attempt to bounce him into making a firm, expensive commitment. Healey was sent out to do more interviews in which the 3 per cent figure was once again downgraded to an 'ambition'. But there will be a Nato summit in the Hague on 24 June, at which Starmer will come under further pressure. Rutte visited London this week and – after his meeting with the prime minister – made a speech in which he publicly raised the bar. 'I expect allied leaders to agree to spend 5 per cent of GDP on defence,' he said. This is a number designed to impress Donald Trump, who has demanded that other Nato members spend 5 per cent, even though the US itself spends only 3.4 per cent of its national income on defence. The small print of Rutte's demand adds another layer of complication, as his 5 per cent figure is made up of 3.5 per cent as conventionally defined (including intelligence spending in the new British definition) plus 1.5 per cent on cybersecurity and defence-related spending. But his message to the British people was blunt: if we are not prepared to increase defence budgets to 3.5 per cent, he said, 'you had better learn to speak Russian'. Given that Starmer refuses to put a date on the lower target of 3 per cent, this means that there is a yawning gap to be bridged at the Hague in 11 days' time. Because the UK is one of the higher spending Nato members, there is some irritation in Downing Street and the Ministry of Defence at signals from Italy and Canada, which currently spend less than 1.5 per cent on defence, that they will sign up for the 3.5 per cent figure. The Israeli bombing of Iran will add to the sense that conflicts around the world are increasingly dangerous and that the post-Cold War peace dividend has been exhausted. The main pressure on European Nato members to increase defence spending, however, remains the war in Ukraine and the reluctance of the Trump administration to pay for it – as Rutte suggested on Monday. Britain will no doubt continue to help Israel defend itself against Iranian counterattacks, including through proxies such as the Houthis in Yemen, although Starmer's response to the attacks on Iran was more neutral than in the past. But Israel vs Iran is not a war that Nato is likely to join. The real pressure for higher Nato defence spending remains the need to prevent Vladimir Putin from advancing in Ukraine and to deter him from threatening his other European neighbours.
