Et brev til EU Kommissionen fra EAWC i anledning af beslutningen om at dræbe ulve helt ned til et bestandstal på 170 i Sverige.
EU Commissioner for Environment, Oceans and Fisheries
Dear Mr. Sinkevicius,
Brussels, 21/05/2022
First of all, let me thank you for your kind letter of 29th march and for your reassurance about the Commission’s commitment to “make use of all tools at its disposal to ensure full compliance with the requirements of EU legislation” regarding the management of wolves in the Scandinavian countries.
Now we must unfortunately refer to the alarming events taking place in Sweden, where the Parliament decided on the 18th of May that the Favourable Conservation Status (FCS) of the wolf in that country, previously established at an arbitrary number of 300 individuals, should now be reduced to 170.
This is a serious challenge to the Habitats Directive and, in fact, to the rule of law in the EU. Needless to say, the FCS is a concept that depends on biological and ecological data and cannot be set arbitrarily by politicians without any scientific grounds, as the Swedish Parliament insists on doing. Just as worrying, this Swedish decision sets a dangerous precedent, because other EU countries with wolf populations, constantly pressed by the anti-wolf lobbies, will be tempted to imitate Sweden and breach the EU regulations, especially in the absence of a tangible reaction from the Commission.
The scientific facts about the Swedish wolf are very clear, and have been recently stated by leading experts in population genetics, who have shown that even 300 wolves are too few for such an isolated population. Swedish wolves are inbred to the level of siblings, and signs of inbreeding depression are blatant. If the population were further reduced to 170 wolves, it will simply not be viable in the long term.
According to a large gallup survey done by the Agricultural University (SLU) in 2021, only 12% of Swedish citizens are against wolves or want to reduce their numbers. So, the recent decision by the Parliament does not reflect the opinion of the vast majoritiy of the country’s population. Instead, it is the result of a massive campaign by the influential Swedish hunting lobby.
It is the view of the EAWC that a proportional action by the EC would be opportune in order to cut short the attacks of the hunting lobbies, who have already been too succesful at undermining the EU directives.
Yours respectfully,
Enrique Pérez
EAWC Steering Committee