When is it acceptable to kill a strictly protected carnivore? Exploring the legal constraints on wildlife management within Europe’s Bern Convention

Arie Trouwborst,Floor M Fleurke,John D C Linnell

doi:10.3897/natureconservation.21.12836

Abstract

As wolf populations expand across Europe, many countries face challenges in finding ways to address the concerns of some elements among the rural stakeholders who are being asked to share their landscapes with wolves for the first time in several generations. In these recovery landscapes, wolves are associated with a wide range of conflicts that include economic, psychological, perceptional, social, cultural and political dimensions. A recurring demand concerns the desire to introduce the use of carefully regulated lethal control of wolves, through either culling by state employees or hunting conducted by rural hunters. Introducing such measures can be very controversial, and many critics challenge their legality under the international wildlife conservation instruments that have nurtured wolf recovery. We evaluate this issue for the case of wolves in Norway, which are strictly protected under the Bern Convention. Drawing on the latest results of social science research, we present the multiple lines of argumentation that are often used to justify killing wolves and relate these to the criteria for exceptions that exist under the Bern Convention. We conclude that while the Convention provides apparent scope for allowing the killing of wolves as a means to address conflicts, this must be clearly justified and proportional to the conservation status of wolves so as to not endanger their recovery.

Highlights

IntroductionThe first half of the 20th century saw the recovery of Europe’s forests and large herbivores (Linnell and Zachos 2011) with large carnivores recovering in the latter half of the century (Chapron et al 2014)
The last century has seen a dramatic recovery of large mammals in Europe
We aim to provide background into the circumstances where lethal control has been claimed to offer potential utility and explore the extent to which this can be permitted within the scope of the Bern Convention

Summary

Introduction

The first half of the 20th century saw the recovery of Europe’s forests and large herbivores (Linnell and Zachos 2011) with large carnivores recovering in the latter half of the century (Chapron et al 2014). This recovery was brought about by both active (reintroduction) and passive (fostering natural expansion) means; but builds on a fortunate coincidence of social, cultural, economic and ecological circumstances, and has been aided by wildlife conservation legislation at national and international levels (Linnell et al 2009). The growth of many conflicts (Redpath et al 2013) associated with wildlife populations forces the consideration of the need to potentially limit recovery at levels below the biological potential (Boitani and Linnell 2015; Trouwborst et al 2017a)

Objectives

Conclusion