Wolf protection downgrade set for 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, which allows hunting to resume under strict criteria.
Barring a last-minute upset, EU lawmakers will give their approval on Thursday to the rule change, backed by the conservative, centrist and socialist groups in the European Parliament.
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.
Echoing their concerns, green and left-wing parties were expected to vote against a change they denounce as politically motivated and lacking scientific basis.
"Downgrading wolf protection... panders to fear, not facts," warned Sebastian Everding of the Left group in parliament, saying the move "ignores effective coexistence tools".
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 has made the case that "wolf packs have become a real danger especially for livestock" in some parts of Europe.
Lowering protections "will help local authorities to actively manage wolf populations while protecting both biodiversity and our rural livelihoods", she said when the convention change took effect.
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 would make 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 has 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 has also found support.
Socialist and centrist lawmakers -- while agreeing to back the changes under a fast-track procedure -- have 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."
mad/ec/raz/bc/jhb
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
7 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cross-Channel migrants to be detained as France treaty comes into force
Sir Keir Starmer's 'one in, one out' deal to return Channel migrants to France will come into force on Tuesday, with detentions set to begin by the end of the week. The deal, which has now been approved by the European Commission, means the UK will be able to send people crossing the Channel in small boats back to France in exchange for asylum seekers with ties to Britain. It also means that anyone arriving in a small boat can be detained immediately, and space has been set aside at immigration removal centres in the expectation that detentions will begin within days. The Prime Minister said the ratification of the treaty will 'send a clear message – if you come here illegally on a small boat you will face being sent back to France'. But opposition parties have criticised the deal amid reports that the pilot scheme will see only 50 people a week returned to France while this year has seen a weekly average of more than 800 people make the crossing. The deal has also been criticised by refugee charities, which have urged the Government to provide more safe, legal routes for asylum seekers instead. Ministers have so far declined to say how many people could be returned under the deal, and insist that if the pilot is successful the figure will increase. Under the terms of the agreement, announced during French President Emmanuel Macron's state visit last month, adults arriving on small boats will face being returned to France if their asylum claim is inadmissible. In exchange, the same number of people will be able to come to the UK on a new legal route, provided they have not attempted a crossing before and subject to documentation and security checks. The Home Office said it had also learned from the 'lengthy legal challenges' over the previous government's Rwanda scheme and would 'robustly defend' any attempts to block removal through the courts. It is the first such deal with France, with the pilot scheme set to run until June 2026, pending a longer-term agreement. Sir Keir said the deal was 'The product of months of grown-up diplomacy delivering real results for British people'. He added: 'The days of gimmicks and broken promises are over – we will restore order to our borders with the seriousness and competence the British people deserve.' Home Secretary Yvette Cooper said it was 'an important step towards undermining the business model of the organised crime gangs that are behind these crossings – undermining their claims that those who travel to the UK illegally can't be returned to France'. Ratification of the deal comes as both Britain and France battle to bring the small boats problem under control, with 2025 on course to be a record year for crossings. Some 25,436 people have already made the journey this year, according to PA news agency analysis of Home Office figures – 49% higher than at the same point in 2024. The issue has also sparked concern that a series of protests outside hotels housing asylum seekers could lead to public disorder similar to last year's riots. On Monday, the Home Office announced it was providing another £100 million to tackle people smuggling and would introduce new powers to seize devices from people suspected of facilitating crossings. Ministers have also launched a crackdown on illegal working in an effort to reduce the 'pull factors' said to be encouraging people to make the journey, while French authorities have changed their guidance to allow police officers to intercept boats while they are in shallow waters. Shadow home secretary Chris Philp attacked the plans, saying they would return 'just 6% of illegal arrivals' and 'make no difference whatsoever'. He added: 'The Rwanda removals deterrent, under which 100% of illegal arrivals would be removed, was ready to go last summer but Labour cancelled it just days before it was due to start with no proper replacement plan. As a result, this year so far has been the worst ever for illegal immigrants crossing the Channel. 'Only removing all illegal immigrants upon arrival will provide the necessary deterrent to stop the crossings. This is the Conservative plan, but Labour is too weak to implement it and as a result they have lost control of our borders.' While the Conservatives' Rwanda plan was in theory uncapped, it was expected to take only around 1,000 asylum seekers in its first five years of operation thanks to limited capacity in the East African nation. The plan, which Sir Keir had previously dismissed as a 'gimmick', was scrapped as one of the first acts of the incoming Labour Government last year.
Boston Globe
8 minutes ago
- Boston Globe
Trump's demand to trading partners: Pledge money or get higher tariffs
Advertisement The tactic was on display last week as Trump and his team rolled out a blitz of new trade agreements before a self-imposed Aug. 1 deadline. 'South Korea is right now at a 25% Tariff, but they have an offer to buy down those Tariffs,' Trump wrote on social media Wednesday. 'I will be interested in hearing what that offer is.' The next day, Trump agreed to impose a tariff of 15 percent on imports from South Korea. The lower rate came after South Korea agreed to make $350 billion in investments in the United States and purchase $100 billion of liquefied natural gas. South Korea is not the only country to make such pledges. Japan said it would establish a $550 billion fund for investments in the United States. The European Union indicated that its companies were poised to invest at least $600 billion. Advertisement To trade experts, the commitments raise the question of whether Trump is negotiating with trading partners or trade hostages. 'This is no doubt a global shakedown of sorts,' said Scott Lincicome, vice president of general economics at the right-leaning Cato Institute. 'The fact is that Trump is using US tariff policy to effectively force these terms upon less-than-willing participants.' But the vague nature of these informal commitments suggests that other nations might also be looking for creative ways to escape Trump's tariffs. Although tariffs are relatively straightforward to enforce, investment and purchase commitments are not as easily policed. The EU, for instance, does not have the authority to dictate the type of investments that it has promised, and much of Japan's pledged investments are coming in the form of loans. The investment announcements have also spurred confusion and lacked the usual detail that would accompany such pacts to avoid future disputes. A large majority of the $350 billion South Korean investment would take the form of loans and loan guarantees. South Korean officials expressed confusion over what US officials meant when they said 90 percent of the profits from the investments would go to the American people. A fact sheet announcing the EU's plans allowed for some wiggle room when it said that 'E.U. companies have expressed interest in investing at least $600 billion' in 'various sectors in the U.S.' 'I think there remain a lot of questions, including by the countries who have announced commitments, as to what those commitments actually really mean,' said Michael Froman, president of the Council on Foreign Relations, who served as the top trade negotiator in the Obama administration. 'Is it enforceable? If they don't deliver a certain amount of investment over a particular period of time, do tariffs go back into place?' Advertisement During Trump's first term, the trade deal he struck with China included extensive commitments for Chinese purchases of American farm products that were never met. The agreement did have an enforcement mechanism, but it proved toothless. Some of the initial investment pledges appear to be too big to be true. New data from the Bureau of Economic Analysis showed that in 2024, foreign spending to acquire, start or expand US businesses totaled $151 billion — a small fraction of the new commitments being announced. The $600 billion EU investment commitment matches the total value of the goods that the United States imported from Europe last year. Although the United States has long been a magnet for foreign investment, the longer-term effects of making countries invest under duress are not clear. 'This is the kind of deal you'd more expect to see from an emerging market that can't attract capital on its merits,' said Aaron Bartnick, who worked in the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy during the Biden administration. 'And we may find over time that if the United States insists on acting like an emerging market, our trade partners may start treating us accordingly, with more onerous terms and less favorable rates that American companies and consumers are not accustomed to dealing with.' Regardless of the economic implications, Trump's tactics show no signs of abating, as he regularly claims more than $10 trillion — and climbing — in investments from foreign companies and countries. Advertisement Daniel Ames, a professor at Columbia Business School who teaches negotiation strategy, said that Trump's approach to trade deals appears to be drawn directly from his days as a developer and businessperson. Trump became notorious for destabilizing his negotiating counterparts with severely low bids, dazzling sales pitches and an ability to capitalize on weakness to gain leverage. Ames noted, however, that the EU and countries like Japan and South Korea might also be playing into Trump's sense of vanity when they unveil whopping investment promises that might ultimately be hollow. 'Donald Trump is a gifted storyteller, and I think when his counterparts recognize this, they can play to it,' Ames said. 'If you're negotiating with a narcissist, you look for ways to make them feel like they've won.' This article originally appeared in .
New York Times
39 minutes ago
- New York Times
Tuesday Briefing: Trump's Tariff Leverage
Trump's trade deals aren't just about tariffs As dozens of countries race to reach trade deals with the U.S. ahead of a Thursday deadline, President Trump has embraced a strategy that goes beyond the usual focus on markets and deficits: He's demanding multibillion-dollar investments in the U.S. The president's tactics echo his 'Art of the Deal' approach. He is using economic leverage to essentially force trading partners to show him the money or face astronomical tariffs, my colleague Alan Rappeport writes from Washington. To trade experts, the commitments raise the question of whether Trump is negotiating with trading partners or trade hostages. Here are a few examples. To secure a lower tariff rate in its deal, South Korea agreed to make $350 billion in investments in the U.S. and buy $100 billion of liquefied natural gas. The E.U indicated that it would buy $750 billion of American energy and that its companies were poised to invest at least $600 billion. Japan said it would establish a $550 billion fund for investments in the U.S. Trade experts cautioned that focusing on the eye-popping investment figures might be premature. Tariffs are easier to enforce than investment and purchase commitments, and their vague nature suggests that countries might be looking for creative ways to escape Trump's tariffs. Some of the pledges appear too big to be true, and many of them lack specifics. More tariff news: India: The foreign ministry said Trump's threat of additional tariffs was 'unjustified and unreasonable' and vowed to 'take all necessary measures' to safeguard India's interests. Malaysia: The country's solar panel industry, which was decimated by tariffs under the Biden administration, provides a warning for the region. A huge pay package for Musk Tesla said yesterday that it had granted Elon Musk roughly $29 billion worth of stock to help retain the billionaire chief executive after a judge struck down his previous multibillion-dollar pay package. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.
