Wolf protection downgrade gets green light in EU
Members of the Bern Convention, tasked with the protection of wildlife in Europe as well as some African countries, agreed in December to lower the wolf's status from "strictly protected" to "protected".
The downgrade came into force in March, and the European Commission moved immediately to revise related EU laws to reflect the change.
EU lawmakers approved the move by a majority of 371 to 162, with support from conservative, centrist and hard-right groups.
The law requires a formal rubber-stamp by EU member states -- which have already endorsed the text -- before entering into force, after which states will have 18 months to comply.
Green and left-wing parties voted against a change they denounce as politically motivated and lacking scientific basis, while the parliament's socialist grouping was split on the matter.
The European Union -- as a party to the Bern Convention -- was the driving force behind the push to lower protections, arguing that the increase in wolf numbers has led to more frequent contact with humans and livestock.
But activists fear the measure would upset the recovery made by the species over the past 10 years after it faced near extinction a century ago.
A trio of campaign groups -- Humane World for Animals Europe, Eurogroup for Animals and the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW) -- denounced the vote as "a worrying precedent for European nature conservation."
"There is no data justifying a lower level of protection, but the EU institutions decided to ignore science," IFAW's Europe policy director Ilaria Di Silvestre said in a joint statement.
Echoing those concerns, Sebastian Everding of the Left group in parliament said the move "ignores effective coexistence tools".
"Downgrading wolf protection... panders to fear, not facts," he charged.
Grey wolves were virtually exterminated in Europe 100 years ago, but their numbers have surged to a current population of 20,300, mostly in the Balkans, Nordic countries, Italy and Spain.
- No 'licence to kill' -
Commission president Ursula von der Leyen welcomed the results of the vote on Thursday.
"With growing wolf concentrations in some areas, we should give authorities more flexibility to find balanced solutions between the aim to protect biodiversity and the livestock of local farmers," she wrote.
In late 2022, von der Leyen lost her beloved pony Dolly to a wolf that crept into its enclosure on her family's rural property in northern Germany -- leading some to suggest the matter had become personal.
In practice, the EU rule change makes it easier to hunt wolves in rural and mountainous regions where their proximity to livestock and sheepdogs is deemed too threatening.
Von der Leyen's European People's Party (EPP), which spearheaded the change, has stressed that member states will remain in charge of wolf management on their soil -- but with more flexibility than before.
To date, there have been no human casualties linked to rising wolf populations -- but some lawmakers backing the change warn that it may only be a question of time.
Spain's Esther Herranz Garcia, a member of the conservative EPP, cited figures showing that wolves attacked more than 60,000 farm animals in the bloc every year.
"The people who feed our country cannot be expected to work with this fear hanging over them," said France's Valerie Deloge, a livestock farmer and lawmaker with the hard-right Patriots group, where the rule change found support.
Socialist and centrist lawmakers -- while agreeing to back the changes under a fast-track procedure -- struck a more measured tone.
"This is not a licence to kill," Pascal Canfin, a French lawmaker with the centrist Renew group, told AFP. "We are providing more leeway for local exemptions -- wolves remain a protected species."
By Matthieu Demeestere
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
TimesLIVE
2 hours ago
- TimesLIVE
Zelensky, moving to defuse crisis, restores power of anti-graft agencies
President Volodymyr Zelensky restored the independence of Ukraine's two main anti-corruption agencies on Thursday, moving to defuse a political crisis that has shaken faith in his wartime leadership and worried Western partners. Thousands of protesters rallied in Kyiv and other cities in recent days in a rare show of discontent after MPs led by Zelensky's ruling party rushed through amendments last week defanging the respected agencies. Zelensky reversed course after the outcry, under pressure from top European officials who warned that Ukraine was jeopardising its bid for EU membership by curbing the powers of its anti-graft authorities. He signed a new bill on Thursday shortly after MPs approved it 331 to 0, saying the legislation 'guarantees the absence of any kind of outside influence [or] interference'. 'Ukraine is a democracy — there are definitely no doubts,' Zelensky said on the Telegram messaging app. Thursday's law reverses amendments that had given his hand-picked general prosecutor the power to transfer cases away from the agencies and reassign prosecutors, a step critics alleged had been designed to protect his allies from prosecution.
eNCA
4 hours ago
- eNCA
Zelensky signs bill ensuring anti-graft agencies' 'independence'
President Volodymyr Zelensky signed new legislation on Thursday restoring the "independence" of Ukraine's anti-corruption agencies, reversing changes that had sparked large-scale protests and criticism from the European Union. He inked the bill shortly after lawmakers gave their backing for the changes, which was also approved in advance by the anti-corruption bodies. Kyiv's European allies supported the new legislation after worrying the previous change to the law would undermine anti-corruption reforms key to Ukraine's bid to join the EU. "The law guarantees the absence of any external influence or interference," the Ukrainian leader wrote on social media, announcing he had approved the bill. "It is very important that the state listens to public opinion. It hears its citizens. Ukraine is a democracy," he added, in an apparent message to Ukrainians who had demanded the changes. Prime Minister Yulia Svyrydenko said after the vote in parliament that the result was "a clear response to the expectations of society and our European partners." Dozens of demonstrators -- holding signs that read "restore independence" or European Union flags -- gathered ahead of the vote to urge lawmakers to back the new bill. One of the demonstrators, Anastasiia, told AFP it was important that anti-corruption agencies were not in the "pocket" of government officials. "While the military is defending our country from the damned Russians, we here in the rear are communicating with our authorities so that the country they are fighting for is worthy," she said, identifying herself with her first name only. European Commission spokesman Guillaume Mercier said the bill "restored key safeguards" for anti-graft agencies but cautioned "this is not the end of the process." "Ukraine accession will require continuous efforts to guarantee a strong capacity to combat corruption and to respect rule of law, we expect Ukraine to deliver on those commitments swiftly," he said. The earlier law had put the National Anti-Corruption Bureau of Ukraine (NABU) and Specialised Anti-Corruption Prosecutor's Office (SAPO) under the direct authority of the prosecutor general, who is appointed by the president. Critics took to the streets in protracted protests fearing the the move could facilitate presidential interference in corruption probes. By Vadym Tomashevsky
Daily Maverick
4 hours ago
- Daily Maverick
Policing crisis is symptom of SA's transition into a violent democracy
South Africa has undergone a second transition, away from the ideals of a constitutional democracy, first into a gatekeeper state, and then increasingly into what academics call a 'violent democracy'. President Cyril Ramaphosa recently established a judicial commission of inquiry, chaired by Acting Deputy Chief Justice Mbuyiseli Madlanga, to investigate Lieutenant General Nhlanhla Mkhwanazi's allegations that 'sophisticated criminal syndicates have infiltrated law enforcement and intelligence structures in South Africa'. Naturally, much of the attention has been on the toxic relationship between ANC politicians, corrupt businesspeople and the country's top police structures. However, while it is tempting to believe that this is just another example of the rot infecting the South African state, this would be a mistake, because these activities are not an aberration of South Africa's weak state but rather an outcome of the dysfunctional democratisation process that has unfolded in the country over the last few decades. Gatekeeper state In common with many other post-independent African states, South Africa transitioned from the horrors of colonialism and racism into being a gatekeeper state. In these fragile states, the control of access to wealth and power, rather than governance, is the ultimate political prize. Over time, state wealth and power are increasingly centralised and contested among the elites, while service delivery and governance for most of the population languish at the periphery. Political authority is therefore less about guiding national development and more about managing the intersection between internal resources and external recognition. At its core, a gatekeeper state revolves around who controls the 'gate'. In South Africa, this gate was historically guarded by the ANC so long as there was uncontested electoral recognition. Governance, in this framework, becomes a zero-sum game where controlling the gate is paramount because losing power means losing access to wealth. This has irredeemably reshaped the internal dynamics of the ANC, fuelling factionalism as different groups within the party compete for control of shrinking state resources. Consequently, the government is increasingly unable to meet its service delivery obligations because public office is not about public service but is instead a means of ensuring financial rewards, and because service delivery is not about optimal provision within the budgetary limits but is instead a means to garner political loyalty. Over time, as the ANC's factional battles worsened, the ANC's response has been to centralise control, consolidating authority in the Presidency, marginalising Parliament, and actively eroding independent institutions. However, as the ANC's electoral support has declined, gatekeeping, instead of weakening, has decentralised and now infects both formal and informal political-economic structures. The consequence of this system is neo-patrimonialism — ruling by patronage rather than by policy — that replaces governance as hollowed-out formal institutions are replaced with informal networks based on political allegiance and reciprocal favours. Loyalty is rewarded not through public service delivery or national development, but instead by access to tenders, jobs, and contracts. As the electorate loses faith in political leadership, political support is 'purchased' via patronage networks rather than earned through effective governance. Violent democracy The implications for South Africa's democratisation have been grim. In the years of the Zuma-Ramaphosa presidencies, South Africa has undergone a second transition, away from the ideals of a constitutional democracy, first into a gatekeeper state, and increasingly into what academics call a ' violent democracy '. This is not merely a democracy with violence. In this aberrant form of democracy, violence is an implicit part of the political system. Assassinations, intimidation and State Capture are features of how power is contested, contained, and controlled. In a violent democracy the state does not have the sole legitimate right to use violence — instead elite coalitions, criminal networks, and even taxi associations can use violence to capture and replace democratic governance. Naturally, as violent democracy deepens, constitutional democracy weakens. South Africa's democratic institutions, once the pride of our post-apartheid dispensation, are now infected with corruption, inefficiency and decay. The ANC cannot be reformed, but whether the Government of National Unity can resurrect the democratic institutions of accountability and reverse the country from its dark path remains to be seen. If not, then the dream of a free, fair, and equal South Africa will likely become just another casualty of rapacious greed. DM
