Response to interpellation 2022/23:61 on the management of wolves
Translated from Swedish by AI; the translation may contain errors. The Swedish text is the original.
Summary AI, written in advance
KD wants to lower the wolf's protection status by moving it from Annex IV to Annex V in the Habitats Directive and in the Bern Convention 1 2. KD considers that the wolf population needs to be significantly smaller than today to create security for farmers and hunters 1 3. KD argues that previous governments have not done enough over eight years 4. S also wants to move the wolf to Annex V to facilitate long-term management and protection hunting 5. S wants to maintain a favorable conservation status but demands a predictable policy that takes socio-economic conditions into account and enables livestock farming 5. S warns that Sweden could lose control over the wolf population if it continues to increase 6.
Written by AI in advance and may contain errors. The numbers lead to the speech a statement builds on; check against the text below.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! Tomas Kronståhl has asked me how I intend to act so that the ambition of 170 individuals becomes a reality.
The development of the wolf population in Sweden has shown an increasing trend regarding the number of individuals over the last 20 years. At the latest inventory, the wolf population was approximately 460 individuals, which is significantly more than the current reference value of 300 individuals.
Both the current and previous governments have pursued the issue of reducing the wolf population. For example, both the current and previous governments support the line of working to lower the wolf's protection status by proposing that the wolf be moved from Annex IV to Annex V in the Habitats Directive, as well as lowering the wolf's protection status within the Bern Convention. Such a change can increase the possibility of taking measures, for example, protection hunting, in order to reduce conflicts between humans and wolves.
The Riksdag decided in May 2022 on an announcement regarding the reference value for the wolf population—that is, how many wolves are required for the wolf population to be considered to have a favorable conservation status—should be between 170 and 270 wolves. According to the announcement, it should be kept at the lower end of the range of 170 individuals, partly in view of the fact that the wolf population is becoming more dense.
The previous government simultaneously tasked the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency with investigating the reference value for wolf. The Swedish Environmental Protection Agency shall analyze whether, and if so under what conditions, the wolf's reference value in terms of population size for a favorable conservation status according to the Habitats Directive could be within the range of 170-270 specified in the bill A sustainable predator policy (prop. 2012/13:191), which the Riksdag decided on as early as 2013.
I intend to follow the developments closely. The wolf must have the conditions to exist in Sweden in the long term, and we must live up to our EU legal obligations. But it needs to be a significantly smaller population than today.
Tomas Kronståhl (S)
Madam Speaker! Thank you, Minister, for the answer! I can state that I do not believe we are so very much in disagreement on the issue. But it is extremely important from several perspectives for us to be able to move forward, and I truly share the Minister's assessment that it would be desirable with a shift in the Birds and Habitats Directive from Annex IV to Annex V.
It would naturally not mean that the wolf's protected status would thereby cease. But hopefully, it would facilitate a significantly more long-term management as well as simplifications regarding the - as I believe - very important protection hunt, not least for those people who engage in farming and agriculture in the vicinity of wolf territories.
We Social Democrats also want to continue to safeguard the conservation status of all our predators based on the ambition that it should be a good and favorable conservation status, and we naturally want to do that for the wolf as well.
But at the same time, Sweden needs a wolf policy that works for people who live and stay in the vicinity of the wolf. We need a long-term sustainable and predictable wolf policy that, of course, shall be based on science and take into account people's socio-economic conditions. But it must also enable and ensure that it is possible to keep domestic animals and that it is not significantly hindered.
For that reason, Madam Speaker, the former Social Democratic government decided to give three, as I see it, very important assignments to responsible authorities in order to be able to reduce the Swedish wolf population but at the same time maintain a favorable conservation status for the same.
Among other things, the protection hunt should be investigated so that it becomes significantly more effective and also possible for those who farm with grazing animals. It would be reviewed whether there are actual conditions to reach the parliamentary goal of a reference value of between 170 and 270 wolves. And it would also be reviewed how the wolf can achieve a better genetic status, perhaps through the possibility of moving genetically important individuals to other geographical areas.
My question to the Minister is: Does the Minister share the ambition and does the Minister agree on the importance of these three, which I believe are very important prerequisites for being able to continue to manage the wolf population with the conservation status that we all want?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! According to the latest published data regarding the status of wolves in Europe, a generally positive trend is highlighted. At the European level, the wolf is assessed to be viable, according to the International Union for Conservation of Nature's Red List criteria. Our assessment is therefore that it is reasonable for us to lower the protection status at the European level.
As we are completely in agreement, if the wolf is listed in Annex V to the Birds and Habitats Directive, it will have the same protection as, for example, our Swedish seal species and the beaver. The wolf is already listed in Annex V in a number of other member states: Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Slovakia, and Poland. Parts of the wolf populations in Finland, Spain, and Greece are also listed in Annex V. We do not consider it good that we have different levels of protection in different countries in this way – the difference can be questioned and negatively affect the perception of the directive and, in the long run, also negatively affect a long-term sustainable management of the wolf.
I will continue to work towards having the wolf's protection status lowered in the EU rules, that it is moved from Annex IV to Annex V. Such a change can, as mentioned, lead to increased opportunities for protection hunting to reduce conflicts, which the member is also touching upon. The exact form of how we drive this, we will of course have to return to.
The tasks that the previous government has set, together with a number of announcements from the Riksdag, we are now analyzing in the relatively newly appointed government. We have been in office for 7 days. The previous government had 409 weeks more to get this done. I can, however, as in previous interpellation debates, state that at the end of the previous mandate period, some decisions were made which, I must say, went in the right direction.
Tomas Kronståhl (S)
Madam Speaker! One can observe, I believe, that it requires a rather long-term effort to deal with this issue. It is probably not as simple as it sometimes may sound. That is probably the assessment we all make, and perhaps the Minister will also come to experience that.
There are several reasons why I nevertheless, even though we are largely in agreement, bring up this issue again and want to discuss it. We see the sharp increase of the wolf population in several areas and several regions in our country. If the growth in the wolf population that we are now seeing continues without us being given the opportunity for a fairly strongly increased license hunt, which until now unfortunately has been hindered by several different national agencies but also by various EU regulations, there is a great risk that we will soon lose the national initiative and the control over our own management of this very important predator.
It is the case, Madam Speaker, that the EU's rules regarding predator management prohibit a larger hunting quota than 15 percent of a given wildlife population. We have today, I believe, over 460 individuals in our forests. It could mean that in a couple of years' time we could be up to perhaps 600 individuals. Then we will, in the near future, find ourselves in a situation where we ourselves might lose control and the possibility for the long-term management that we all agree on and which we have also made decisions about here in the Swedish Riksdag when it comes to the size of the wolf population.
If this becomes a reality, I believe that with all certainty we will see significantly larger conflicts than we already experience today, and also significantly larger impacts on our domestic animals and not least the huntable wildlife. There we have another very big problem when it comes to the wolf issue in our country, namely that we have a long and, as I think, fine culture when it comes to hunting: We hunt with driving dogs. There we have a gigantic resistance against the wolf because it very often can take these hunting dogs. For us, it is many times about a family member. So perhaps it does not always look like that in the rest of Europe, but for us it is truly a very important, and culturally important, form of hunting.
My final question to the Minister is: How does the Minister intend, and what measures does the Minister plan to take, so that Sweden does not end up in a situation where we no longer have control over the wolf population?
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! This should have started at a completely different level of ambition, yesterday – if the expression is permitted. We are not coming to a fully and completely set table. As mentioned, 7 weeks have passed today while previous governments, in two different forms, had 409 weeks to do something about this.
Many, both farmers, hunting organizations and hunters, express a concern, exactly as the member says, and it is a positive awakening. But that has not been the case during these eight years. For eight years, the wolf population in Sweden has had a rather expansive growth, and we should have tried to do more.
This naturally does not take anything away from what I said before – that several of the assignments that you in the previous government gave to various agencies are positive. But it is late.
I and the government will do what we can. An important part is to move the wolf from Annex IV to Annex V of the Habitats Directive at the EU level. Unfortunately, we did not go all the way regarding the Bern Convention this time, but it is a completely different level of consensus than it has been for a while. We can also note that the European Parliament as recently as a few weeks ago stated that a majority in that body also thinks that the protection status for the wolf should be changed.
I believe it is positive that we broaden the parliamentary support for a different predator policy and that more of us are helping to push forward on this issue nationally in Sweden but also, and primarily, at the European level. Then I believe we can achieve success, and so we must hope that we do not end up in the scenario that the member of Parliament paints here.
Tomas Kronståhl (S)
Madam Speaker! I think the Minister has a good starting point on this issue. But it really matters not to believe that it is so simple to conduct predator politics in a government position as it actually is in opposition. I believe it might be a bit simpler then than in a government position.
I nevertheless extend a hand here, because this issue is very important for our country and for many people, not least those who live in the countryside.
The problem with the issue is somewhat what we have touched upon, plus that there is also often a divided view on the wolf issue, not least when it comes to city and countryside. Here we as politicians, regardless of party affiliation, have a great responsibility to try to solve the problem in such a way that we can continue to have a predator population in this country but still have a clear acceptance from both the people and individuals who live in the countryside and those who live in the city.
I will, as I have said, be helpful in every way I can so that we can resolve this issue.
Landsbygdsministern Peter Kullgren (KD)
Madam Speaker! I took the outstretched hand right here. I believe it is good and necessary for us to achieve success.
The government's policy aims to create safety and freedom for everyone who lives and resides in Sweden. But we live in a time where the wolves are clearly creeping closer to people's safety and freedom. As we have said, over the last 20 years we have seen an increasing trend that society is affected more palpably than before. Farmers do not dare to invest in their food enterprises, and their animals are not allowed to go out to pasture as they wish for fear that cattle herds will be scattered in the forest or sheep herds will be killed. We can repeatedly read in the news, as Tomas Kronståhl pointed out, about dogs that are attacked and people who feel unsafe.
The increasing growth of the wolf population has become a safety issue that we must take seriously. The predator population in Sweden must be managed in such a way that animals and humans can live side by side. This means that the wolf population needs to be smaller than it is today.
Source: The Swedish Parliament. The speeches come from the open data of the Riksdag, translated into English by AI, which may contain errors.