Statement on lowering the protection status of wolves

December 4, 2024

As European youth, we hold all relevant decision-makers accountable for this grave backsliding in European conservation law. We call for the return of scientific reason and intergenerational fairness on the decision-making table. We wish to see this decision not to be applied in EU law, and to be reversed as soon as possible.

Green light to wolf hunting in Europe: youth, science and civil society go unheard.

As young people, we are beyond baffled to see that European countries support lowering the protection status of wolves in Europe, paving the way for increased wolf hunting in the 21st century. After almost a year since the Commission’s proposal to downgrade the wolf status in Europe, the final vote has been cast, flushing decades of conservation work, money and science down the drain. And, once again, it is us, young people, who will face the consequences of this unscientific and irresponsible decision.

On December 3rd, at the 44th Standing Committee Meeting of the Bern Convention in Strasbourg, the proposal to downlist the wolf was welcomed with a staggering 38 countries voting in favour. We must also acknowledge the following countries for opposing this proposal, voicing their concern regarding the evidence presented (or lack thereof), and noting the troubling precedent this decision sets: The United Kingdom, Bosnia & Herzegovina, Monaco, Albania and Montenegro. We urgently call upon these same countries to again voice their opposition before this decision comes into force in 3 months and for others to join them.

Fearmongering, hate and the spread of misinformation in Europe seem to have become common in narratives around conservation. Coexistence measures and modern technology, in which many young Europeans are now involved, are effective means of reducing human-wildlife conflict across the continent, and this is what European institutions should promote.

It is disconcerting how easily the European Union has ignored repeated calls to reason by citizens and scientists alike, in favour of political interests. Even today in Strasbourg, interventions made by multiple NGOs present as observers in the 44th Standing Committee Meeting went ignored (Pro Natura, Birdlife International, Born Free Foundation).

Ashton Melfor (YEE's delegate present at the meeting)

“As a young person from a country where most of my generation did not grow up with these amazing animals, this is not the right step toward coexistence with large carnivores, and nature as a whole. This clearly politically motivated decision undermines the European commitment to the biodiversity crisis and the ability of the Bern Convention to provide adequate protection for the other species listed on its appendices.”

Click for Ashton's full statement

Full statement

The fact that wolves are now present in nearly all EU member states is in no small part thanks to conservation efforts and the legal protection provided by instruments like the Bern Convention. This proposal to lower the protection status of wolf populations can’t be justified based on current scientific evidence relating to the threats wolves still face. In addition, for wolves to effectively fulfil their ecological function, they must persist in ecologically sufficient numbers. Current data also indicates no notable increase in livestock damages or public safety risks caused by wolves since 2022. When a proposal to lower the protective status was brought to this committee.

The Swiss proposal in 2022 to downlist wolves I am referring to, was rejected by the Standing Committee, based on a report by the Large Carnivore Initiative for Europe (LCIE) highlighting the conservation status of European wolf populations at the time. The LCIE again released a statement on November 13th expressing their concern and highlighting what seems to be a cherry-picking of scientific evidence in the current proposal.

In justifying their decision to vote against the Swiss proposal the EU said the following, and I quote.

“Based on current data, lowering the protection status of all wolf populations is not justified from a scientific and conservation point of view. The conservation status of the species remains divergent across the continent, with a favourable conservation status assessment in only 18 out of 39 national parts of biogeographical regions in the Union. Continuing threats to the species, including emerging ones such as border fences and wolfdog hybridisation, also call for maintaining the strict protection status.”

This begs the question, what has changed 2 years since? The answer is virtually nothing. At least as far as the wolves are concerned. What has changed however is the political climate.

So, the European Union’s current decision to propose downlisting wolves appears inconsistent with its earlier stance. The same arguments that prompted the EU to oppose the Swiss proposal two years ago remain relevant today, raising concerns about the rationale behind the EU’s shift in position.

In light of ecological reasoning and prior political commitments, the proposed downlisting of wolves threatens to undermine the progress made in their conservation and sets a troubling precedent for future proposals for downgrading the protected status of other species in Appendix II. Given the fact that the convention does not set out specific science-based guidelines for such an action.

Downgrading the protective status of the wolf will make it easier to implement lethal control measures which are already being implemented with questionable reasoning. The science is clear on this, the decision to kill, legally or not, individuals of a protected species, such as wolves, risks diminishing their perceived value and undermining conservation efforts. As a young person from a country where most of my generation did not grow up with these amazing animals, this is not the right step toward coexistence with large carnivores, and nature as a whole, I want to see.

This move, which makes the wolves scapegoats and will not fix the struggles of rural areas finding it difficult to coexist with these animals, not only jeopardises the ecological functioning of European ecosystems but also sets a very dangerous precedent on how fragile European laws and democracy are in front of lobbying by few.

Read the first youth position here.