N° 184 Pantone 390 CMYK 24 / 0 / 98 / 8 NOVEMBER-DECEMBER 2019 - BIMONTHLY - EN European Landowners’ Organization Pantone 364 CMYK 73 / 9 / 94 / 39 Wolves in Europe © Shutterstock CountrySide 184 Editorial Thierry de l’ESCAILLE, Secretary General The courage to act This end of year remains unprecedently insightful – while Ur- Contents sula von der LEYEN revealed the “European Green Deal”, it is still unclear after COP25 how we will achieve a net-zero emis- sions target by 2050 on a global level. 3 Wolves in Europe Keeping in mind that we have a long road ahead, the ELO has advocated for many years that one of the key tools to fulfill all 6 Climate Mitigation Policies for Europe: these old & new commitments, including the SDGs, is to pro- The Net Zero Target and the Agriculture, mote an active forest management. In this regard, we will be Forestry and Land Use Sector - ELO very attentive to the actions that the EU undertakes regard- Policy Proposals for UNFCCC COP25 at ing the recently adopted conclusions of the Council providing Madrid. political guidance on protecting and restoring the world’s for- ests. As underlined in the statement : “(Member States) agree that enhanced EU action is needed, and encourage the Com- 8 Pro Planet Apples from Lake Constance mission to urgently prioritize and implement the actions set and AI technology Apisfero winning pro- out in its communication, together with the member states, jects of the 2019 European Bee Award industry, organizations and institutions, civil society and part- ner countries as part of the European Green Deal”. 10 ELO General Assembly in Croatia - “A strong Europe in a world of chal- Let’s be clear: it is urgent that politicians and officials consider lenges” the experience from the field of the forest managers and real- ize that the last 20 years’ policy of inviting forest owners “to 12 Owners and livestock breeders: Guard- grow indigenous trees” has been affected by a massive forest ians of biodiversity dieback linked with climate change. Much of those indigenous trees are dying as they most probably should be grown in cur- Famigro Award rently more temperate or Nordic regions. Our trees cannot mi- “2020 CIC Hunting in Art” Prize grate north as such from one day to the next, and as growers we have the feeling to be a lost generation. Decision makers 13 SYSTEMIC: towards a circular economy have to be more open-minded and accept that some spe- cies, even not local ones, can fare much better against global 2 14 Smart information, governance and warming than others. business innovations for sustainable Last but not least, I wish us all to remain optimistic during supply and payment mechanisms for this forthcoming special time of family gatherings; but for the forest ecosystem services Year to come - to speed up our commitments for change, as I BIOPLAT-EU: to promote the market up- firmly believe that we have all an active role to play. take of sustainable bioenergy in Europe 15 REWARD - 3rd Transnational Meeting FARMID 4th meeting 16 agenda Shutterstock © CountrySide 184 © Shutterstock Wolves in Europe In September 2019 the European Commission published the report “Assessment of current knowledge on wolves in Europe with a view to their effective conservation and management, a partial review of the scientific literature on the wolf in Europe”. The study was commissioned to the European Landowners’ Organization within a strict framework described by the tender specifications. Here is an overview of the most important results. Jurgen TACK, ELO Scientific Director 3 Actual population numbers (excluding Russia and Belarus) was home persal potential and colonizes new areas to approximately 17,000 wolves of which relatively easily. Recently, wolves have In addition to the assessment and re- 13,000 to 14,000 were present in the EU. naturally re-established breeding popula- porting carried out under Article 17 of tions in Finland, Sweden, Norway, France One of the wolf populations became ex- the Habitats Directive, in 2012 the con- and Germany. The wolf is also present in tinct (Spain, Sierra Morena) while the oth- servation status of European large car- Luxemburg, Denmark and Belgium cover- er nine are generally stable or increasing. In nivores was assessed, for each popula- ing all EU Member States with the excep- terms of their extinction threat, three pop- tion, by a group of experts from each tion of the island states. We can expect a ulations are assessed as “least concern”, country where large carnivores were pre- further expansion of the existing popula- three are “vulnerable” and three are “near sent. This information has been updat- tions. threatened” (according to IUCN criteria). ed for 2012-16 (https://www.lcie.org/ In Europe the wolf population is, in gener- Largecarnivores/Wolf.aspx; retrieved on Member States will provide new updated al, expanding westwards following areas 10 March 2019). Although the available data (up to 2018) by October 2019 in the of high ungulate concentrations. data and the methodology used varied framework of their reporting under Arti- greatly from country to country, this in- cle 17 of the Habitats Directive. formation represents the latest available Monitoring assessment of the status of large carni- vore (http://ec.europa.eu/environment/ Distribution Data gathered in EU Member States make nature/conservation/species/carnivores/ use of many different monitoring sys- conservation_status.htm; retrieved on 10 The wolf is a habitat generalist with a tems. Several authors have stressed the March 2019). In 2016, continental Europe preference for woodland. It has a high dis- importance of improving the quality and CountrySide 184 harmonization of the different monitor- mitigation measures, compensations, methods to improve coexistence are fa- ing systems. technical assistance, information and voured. communication, dialogue and involve- Relevant data on range, population (num- ment of relevant stakeholders). Where bers and trends), habitat, threats and the wolf is listed as a strictly protected Hybrids pressures are collected according to a species, Member States may grant ad- common methodology for all species cov- hoc derogations from the strict protec- Hybridization can affect wildlife in a num- ered by the Habitats Directive. tion provisions in certain situations and ber of ways. Negative impacts include Monitoring programs are either based on under specific conditions, as described by loss of reproductive potential, lowered a systematic study design, or on passive the Directive. fitness of individuals that hybridize, in- monitoring where the public and volun- Derogations may not be the only or the teers were asked to report signs of grey troduction of maladaptive alleles into main tool to address conflicts. This issue wild populations, loss of genetic integ- wolf presence. In the latter case, distrust will be dealt with by the forthcoming up- rity, potential for disease transfer, and between groups may limit the availability date of the Commission guidance docu- legal consequences that may affect the and the reliability of data. Involving hunt- ment on species protection. ers and other stakeholders in data gath- individual or population’s conservation ering makes them aware of underlying status. problems, such as the number of livestock Social conflict kills and their impact on deer. Negative attitudes towards predators Wolf management plans have been found with livestock keep- Favorable Conservation Status ers, hunters, and residents in areas with Most of the current wolf management predators. Some people see predators plans focus on recovery and actions re- The wolf is well protected in the Euro- as a threat to their way of life, including lated to it. Wolf management plans pro- pean Union. Two international legislation economic interests, personal safety, the pose compensation methods for live- systems contribute to this protection: safety of pets and hunting dogs, as well stock (incl. sheep, goats, cattle, and hors- as competitors for game. the Convention on the Conservation of es), verified to have been killed by a wolf, European Wildlife and Natural Habi- As the wolf populations are recovering and the opportunity to acquire subsidized tats (the Bern Convention), and and expanding to new areas the likeli- fences built specifically to keep wolves . Council Directive 92/43/EEC on the hood of humans encountering wolves out. Conservation of Natural Habitats and also increases rapidly and more social of Wild Fauna and Flora better known conflicts can be expected. Management plans are “dynamic”, mean- as the Habitats Directive ing they can be adjusted in response to The Habitats Directive requires meas- increased experience, e.g. from specific ures to maintain or restore the concerned Economic conflict conflicts. habitat types and species (including the France and Norway lose over 30 sheep per Many management plans do not specify wolf) at favourable conservation status wolf present. For the other EU Member a range, maximum number, or density (FCS) in their natural range. FCS for a spe- States this varies between 1 and 14. The cies is defined by the Directive in relation of wolves as an aim for the plan. They total sheep population in Europe is 86 to population dynamics, range, habitat do, however, state that individual wolves million. The high loss of livestock we see and future perspectives of the species. causing problems may be subject to dero- 4 in France, Norway (and Switzerland) are Every six years, Member States assess gation from protection. linked to their husbandry systems. Sheep and report to the Commission on the con- graze freely in mountain habitats and for- Most of the wolf management plans are servation status of all habitats and spe- ests without the use of fences, shepherds in reality wolf recovery plans. With in- cies covered by the Directive. In the lat- or dogs. est reporting (for the period 2007-2012) creasing wolf populations throughout the wolf was already reported as being in The most common protection against the Europe, management actions become a FCS for some Member States and biogeo- wolf includes electrified fences and/or more important aspect of the plan.