WRITTEN QUESTION E-2480/01 by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission. Lynx hunting in Sweden.
Date: 2001-09-13
Institutions: European Parliament, Provisional data
Subjects: Sweden, fraud, hunting, hunting regulations, wildlife

16.5.2002

EN

Official Journal of the European Communities

C 115 E/97

(2002/C 115 E/101)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2480/01

by Jonas Sjöstedt (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(13 September 2001)

Subject: Lynx hunting in Sweden

Sweden could have legal action brought against it in the European Court of Justice because it allows lynx
to be hunted outside reindeer herd grazing areas. The Commission gave the Swedish government until the
end of September 2001 to ban the hunting of lynx outside such areas. Sweden’s Minister for the
Environment argues that the country’s lynx population is the biggest in Europe and is very vigorous. In
spring 2001, the Swedish Parliament adopted a government proposal for a lynx population of 1500. The
environment minister saw no reason to reduce protective hunting, as the lynx population is increasing at a
healthy rate. There was a general consensus in Sweden, amongst everyone from game specialists and
huntsmen to MPs, on the need for the hunting of lynx. The lynx population has increased by 20 % a year,
and the number of animals the Swedish State allows to be hunted is equivalent to less than half of that
increase. Game specialists agree with the Swedish government that, if Sweden is forced to ban all hunting
outside reindeer herd grazing areas, the result would be a disaster for the management of the lynx
population, as there would be a risk of uncontrolled poaching.

But the Commission argues that poaching takes place on a significant scale in Sweden and that it claimed
the lives of 50 lynx in 1999. It also takes the view that the Swedish State has not adopted the measures
that are needed to prevent poaching. Sweden’s Minister for the Environment has pointed out that a
decision has been taken to step up action by the police and other authorities and to double the fine for
serious hunting offences. The Commission also disagrees with Sweden on the need for the prudent hunting
of lynx in order that both huntsmen and the local population in the areas concerned accept and have
confidence in the policy on predatory animals.

Where does the information on which the Commission is basing its views on poaching in Sweden come
from? Why does the Commission not accept the Swedish authorities’ plans regarding the increase in the
lynx population?

Answer given by Mrs Wallström on behalf of the Commission

(26 October 2001)

The information which the Honourable Member refers to originates from a number of complaints which
the Commission has received. Due to confidentiality requirements, the Commission cannot disclose the
identity of these complainants. The information in question has, however, been verified and confirmed by
the Commission.

With regard to the plans for the population increase referred to, this is not in itself the subject of the
infringement case. This case concerns the fact that the derogations for the hunting of lynx were not
justified. Lynx is a species which in accordance with the Habitats Directive (1) is in need of strict protection.
Pursuant to Article 16.1 of the Habitats Directive, Member States may derogate from the general ban on
hunting of lynx only under certain conditions, for example in the interest of public health and safety or for
other imperative reasons of overriding public interest. Furthermore, the authority which is granting
derogations must assess if there is any other satisfactory alternative than to allow the hunting in question.
The Commission has in its assessment taken into account the information which Sweden has so far
submitted concerning the lynx population, however,
it is not aware of which plans the Honourable
Member refers to. In any event, even with a 20 % increase of the lynx population per year, the derogations
for lynx hunting must be justified in accordance with the Habitats Directive.

The failure to take necessary measures to prevent the poaching of lynx, as referred to by the Honourable
Member, constitutes an additional infringement which is part of the same infringement case. Sweden has
undertaken to eliminate this infringement by adopting a number of legislative and administrative measures.
However, this case has to be pursued until the measures in question have been adopted by Sweden.

(1) Council Directive 92/43/EEC of 21 May 1992 on the conservation of natural habitats and of wild fauna and flora,

OJ L 206, 22.7.1992.