The European Parliament has approved the downgrading of the wolf’s protection status in the EU from “strictly protected” to “protected”. With 371 votes in favor, 162 against and 37 abstentions, the Parliament supported the Commission’s proposal to amend the Fauna-Flora-Habitat Directive. For the law to come into force, it still needs formal approval from the Council, which had already approved the text on April 16th.
Member states will now have more room for maneuver in managing wolf populations. Member states remain committed to ensuring the favorable conservation status of the wolf. They also have the option of continuing to classify the wolf as a “strictly protected species” in national legislation and maintaining stricter protection measures.
Federal Agriculture Minister Alois Rainer (CSU) welcomed the amendment. “Today’s vote by the European Parliament paves the way for a practical approach to dealing with the wolf. We will now ensure at the national level clear and practical rules that advance herd protection and allow for secure removals for federal states” he said.
The Nature and Environment Protection Association (Nabu) criticized the downgrading severely. “The reclassification of the wolf in the FFH Directive remains, even after the approval of the EU Parliament, a politically motivated decision – without scientific basis and contrary to the recommendations of many experts” said Frederik Eggers, team leader for nature and environmental protection at Nabu Niedersachsen. “It is a pseudo-solution that neither resolves the challenges of grazing livestock nor promotes coexistence.”
A conflict-free coexistence between humans and wolves is possible, but it requires primarily better economic prospects for grazing livestock. “Non-selective shootings will not reduce the number of livestock losses. Only widespread, location-specific herd protection offers effective protection” said Eggers. “At the same time, there needs to be clear regulation for the legal removal of conspicuous animals – such possibilities are already anchored in the FFH Directive and the Federal Nature Conservation Act.” The decision marks a dangerous departure from the principle of forward-looking, science-based nature conservation.