Naturalists and activists call on MEPs to vote against weakening wolf protection in the EU

Naturalists and activists from the Workshop for All Beings are calling on MEPs to vote against weakening wolf protection in the European Union during a session of the European Parliament. The vote is to take place on Thursday.

The authors of the appeal argue that the wolf population has not yet recovered and that work to weaken the protection of this species in the EU is being carried out without taking into account the results of scientific research and despite the appeal against their validity and procedure to the European Court of Justice (CJEU).

As Katarzyna Wiekiera from the Workshop for All Beings told PAP, the vote to change the protection status of the wolf will be a signal to the rest of the world that Europe not only fails to protect nature, but also ignores the voice of science and disregards the voice of society by choosing an urgent rather than a full decision-making procedure.

On Thursday, May 8, the EP will hold an emergency vote on changes to the EU Habitats Directive. This was decided by MEPs sitting in the EP on Tuesday. This vote may finally seal the weakening of the wolf's protection status - from a strictly protected species, this predator will become a protected species. The wolf would then no longer be subject to strict prohibitions on deliberate capture, killing, disturbance, deterioration or destruction of breeding and resting areas of the wolf. It will also be possible to conduct controlled culling (population regulation) of these predators, in accordance with the regulations of individual countries.

"In letters sent by email, we appealed to MEPs from the parties forming the "15 October Coalition", mainly PO MEPs, but also Poland 2050 and the Left, who promised before the 2023 elections that they would protect nature, to stand on the wolf's side on Thursday," Wiekiera said.

She added that it is impossible to protect the wolf in Poland without maintaining its strict protection in Europe. "This is especially true for the Central European wolf population - one of three living in Poland. Its numbers are still insufficient, and wolves migrate over long distances, so even if we maintain strict protection in our country, it will not be enough. We must continue to strictly protect the wolf in the EU," she explained.

In letters sent to MEPs, representatives of the Workshop and its supporters pointed out that there are no grounds for applying the urgent procedure and that a substantive, evidence-based discussion is needed "within the framework of the democratic decision-making procedure of the European Parliament".

As they assessed, the vote is not urgent, and the matter de facto requires a stay until the CJEU decides on the complaint filed by a coalition of 22 international NGOs (non-governmental organizations) against the actions of the European Commission and the EU Council in lowering the protection status of the wolf.

Among the allegations in the complaint is the disregard of "a number of scientific reports of international importance" indicating that the wolf population in Europe is not free from significant threats. For example, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN), as many as six of nine transboundary wolf populations are considered vulnerable or nearly threatened.

"The reduction in wolf protection in the Habitats Directive proposed by the EC is unprecedented - for the first time in history, the EC would deprive legal protection of a species more than half of whose population in the EU is classified as 'vulnerable', 'near threatened' and 'threatened with extinction'," wrote naturalists and activists in letters sent to MEPs.

As they added, more than 700 scientists have no doubt that wolves should remain in Annex IV of the Habitats Directive, which guarantees the preservation and restoration of the proper conservation status of these animals. The complaining organizations also draw attention to the lack of consistency of the EC and the EU Council, because the downgrading of the wolf's status in the Bern Convention was based on the same scientific data that in 2022 prompted the EU to vote against a similar proposal presented by Switzerland at the time.

Naturalists and activists also point to the violation of the principles of the EU Habitats Directive and the violation of the guidelines of Recommendation No. 56 (1997) of the Standing Committee of the Bern Convention, which state that changes in Annexes I and II to the Convention must be made based on the best available scientific knowledge. Meanwhile, according to the assessment of scientists, the documentation presented by the EC as a basis for justifying the lowering of the wolf's protection status in the EU does not provide a substantive basis.

In their analysis, Dr. Mark Fisher (University of Leeds, UK) and Dr. Ettore Randi (University of Aalborg, Denmark) state that "uncertain and outdated data should not be used to advocate lowering the level of protection of the European wolf population." They also point out that the document referred to by the EC does not recommend any revision or change of the wolf's protection status.

"The wolf is an essential element of the ecosystem, a guardian of biodiversity. It guarantees that there will be order in ecosystems and that is why we should protect it. Polish politicians have the opportunity to stand on the side of nature during the vote on Thursday and show Poland as a country that is guided by scientific premises in nature protection, and not prejudices and false information," Katarzyna Wiekiera told PAP.

She recalled that wolves regulate the numbers and behavior of their prey – mainly ungulates, and thus enable the reconstruction of forest ecosystems with all their biodiversity. According to activists, wolves are also allies of farmers and the entire agricultural economy – by hunting ungulates, such as roe deer or wild boars, they reduce losses in agricultural crops, and by eating wild boars infected with African swine fever (ASF), they contribute to eliminating the outbreaks of this disease, which is dangerous for pig farmers.

In convincing MEPs to vote against weakening wolf protection, naturalists and activists also point out that wolves in Poland do not pose a threat to humans. "Cases of wolf aggression towards humans are extremely rare and result from irresponsible human behavior, e.g. deliberate feeding and taming of these animals," they wrote. Meanwhile, wandering dogs are responsible for 450,000 bites in humans.

What's more, wolves are not a significant economic problem either. Of the 60 million sheep registered in the EU, only 0.065 percent are killed annually as a result of attacks by these predators. And if the need arises, the regulations currently allow for issuing permits for the killing of individual individuals.

Scientific analyses show that wolf culling leads to a weakening of wolf families and even to an increase, not a decrease, in the number of attacks on farm animals.

"We have a number of effective ways to harmoniously coexist with wolves, such as developing a system of prevention and compensation. (...) These solutions should be promoted by the EU and the European Parliament, and not waste the effort to rebuild the European population of this valuable species, which wolves undoubtedly are," we can read in letters to MEPs.

"The dispute over the wolf is also a dispute over the +Trumpization+ of politics, which is becoming increasingly populist. An urgent vote on changing the protection status of the wolf is controversial. The CJEU and the European Ombudsman are involved in the case, and they also sued the EC," Wiekiera pointed out.

In her opinion, the results of Thursday's vote will show not only whether the EU is guarding nature, but also whether it is able to defend the democratic decision-making process. "After what has happened so far, also after Tuesday's decision by the European Parliament that Thursday's vote will be held in an urgent procedure, we already have a signal and a warning that democratic standards are being violated. A law devoid of substantive, scientific premises for its implementation is being processed quickly, in an urgent procedure, without a broad discussion. In reality, Thursday's vote is a red alert that will show whether Europe is turning towards populist, anti-scientific policies, or whether it understands the reality of the biodiversity crisis and will stand guard over nature protection," Wiekiera concluded.

Joanna Morga (PAP)

jjj/ bar/ ktl/