Europe weakens wolf protection in "major blow to science and biodiversity after vote by EU member states", environmental advocacy says - eviltoast

A majority of EU Member States agreed to adopt the European Commission’s proposal to downgrade the protection status of the wolf under the Bern Convention. This shift opens the door to wolf culling as a false solution to livestock depredation, which runs counter to Europe’s commitment to safeguard and restore biodiversity. The decision which cannot be scientifically justified went through after Germany changed its position from abstention to support.

With this decision, Member States have chosen to ignore the call of over 300 civil society organisations, among others EuroNatur, and more than 300,000 people urging them to follow scientific recommendations and step up efforts to foster coexistence with large carnivores through preventive measures.

[…]

Wolves are strictly protected under both the Bern Convention and the EU Habitats Directive, serving as a keystone species vital for healthy ecosystems and biodiversity across Europe. Weakening their protection will hinder the ongoing recovery of wolf populations.

‘The EU’s decision will not only destabilise the still fragile wolf populations in large parts of Europe, but also undermine the significant progress made towards a coexistence of humans and wolves,’ says Antje Henkelmann, project manager and wolf expert at EuroNatur. ‘Only efficient herd protection can prevent livestock kills. Instead, the EU is focussing on symbolic but inefficient culls. With her turnaround, the Federal Environment Minister is not only weakening wolf protection, but also giving in to populist demands that are of little use to livestock farmers,’’ says the biologist.

[…]

  • Eheran@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    That’s in the context you replied to, see the comment of FTM99. If you want to say something in this branch of conversations but without the things implied by the previous messages, you need to specify that.

    • Visstix@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      7
      ·
      2 months ago

      Your hyperbolic comment about banning dogs didn’t make any sense in context to the previous comment.

      • Eheran@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        At this point I am not sure what to answer. The context is that there was an attack so that kind of makes killing them okay. I asked if we then apply the same logic to dogs, which kill lots(!) of people every year compared to a single case in >20 years for wolves.

        • Visstix@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          And nobody is talking about banning all wolves, so that dog comment was just nonsense, it’s about the protected status of wolves. They also aren’t shooting wolves if they bite people cause they are protected. They are killing dogs if they attack people. So your whole banning dogs comment was just nonsense for no reason.