Nedenstående klage, over den svenske licensjagt på ulve, er sendt til Naturvårdsverket i Sverige (svarende til Miljøstyrelsen i Danmark) D. 4. oktober 2020. Klagen er sendt efter anmodning fra vores svenske venner, Svenska Rovdjursföreningen, som vi samarbejder med gennem vores arbejde i EAWC
Efter en del skriveri frem og tilbage ente sagen i første omgang med at Naturvårdsverket henholder sig til den Svenske jagtlov. Der er ingen tvivl om at Licensjagten er lovlig i forhold til svensk lovgivning. Problemet ligger i at Ulvetid og mange andre, mener den svenske jagtlov ikke er i overensstemmelse med Habitatdirektivet.
Ulvetid har derfor officielt klaget til EU-kommissionen og har modtaget en kvittering for modtagelse af klagen. Desværre har det nok lange udsigter før der sker noget i sagen, men nu kan vi kun vente.
Although the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency leaves the opportunity to make a decision for licensed wolf hunting to all counties in the central predator management area, the responsibility for their decisions still lay with Naturvårdsverket.
As a result of Naturvårdsverkets decision to decentralize the responsibility for the license hunting of wolves, 3 Swedish counties have decided for culling of 24 wolves.
6 wolves in the county of Värmland
6 wolves together in the counties of Västmanland and Örebro
12 wolves in the county of Gävleborg
These permits for license hunting contradicts the provisions in the Habitats directive Article 12.
Text of Article 12
- Member States shall take the requisite measures to establish a system of strict protection for the animal species listed in Annex IV (a) in their natural range, prohibiting:
(a) all forms of deliberate capture or killing of specimens of these species in the wild;
Consequently, as an overall rule, culling of wolves, is not legal in countries, or parts of countries, where the wolf is protected by the Habitats directive as an Annex 4 spices.
In case a derogation is considered, it must be consistent with Article 16 of the Habitats Directive.
Text of Article 16
- Provided that there is no satisfactory alternative and the derogation is not detrimental to the maintenance of the populations of the species concerned at a favourable conservation status in their natural range, Member States may derogate from the provisions of Articles 12, 13, 14 and 15 (a) and (b):
(a) in the interest of protecting wild fauna and flora and conserving natural habitats;
(b) to prevent serious damage, in particular to crops, livestock, forests, fisheries and water and other types of property;
(c) in the interests of public health and public safety, or for other imperative reasons of overriding public interest, including those of a social or economic nature and beneficial consequences of primary importance for the environment;
(d) for the purpose of research and education, of repopulating and re-introducing these species and for the breeding operations necessary for these purposes, including the artificial propagation of plants;
- e) to allow, under strictly supervised conditions, on a selective basis and to a limited extent, the taking or keeping of certain specimens of the species listed in Annex IV in limited numbers specified by the competent national authorities.
Apparently Naturvårdsverket has not evaluated if there is no satisfactory alternative, since the license hunting is a general permit to cull wolves.
The same goes for the wolf’s conservation status. Due to the relatively low number of wolves in Sweden and the serious problem with inbreeding, the wolf’s conservation status I Sweden is at the best, not satisfactory.
Please note in order to permit culling of a wolf, both above conditions have to be fulfilled. Even if that was the case, which it is not, culling of a wolf has to be evaluated for every single individual.
A general permit to cull wolves, contradicts the provisions in the Habitats directive
We must urge Naturvårdsverket to overrule the permissions regarding wolf culling this winter
The association Ulvetid
Chairman Ole Pedersen
4070 Kr. Hyllinge