The European Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FACE), in which our Latvian hunter representatives are also actively involved and Linda Dombrovska serves as vice-president, emphasises that the implementation of the Birds and Habitats Directives is the basis of its political work, as these legal acts directly affect the hunting laws of member states, as well as the protection of habitats and territories. The European Commission is currently conducting a “stress test” of these directives, which is part of a broader European Union initiative to simplify regulations with the aim of strengthening European competitiveness. The goal of the test is to evaluate whether the directives are still fit for purpose and to identify ways to reduce unnecessary bureaucratic complexity. Unlike banks, which assess their exposure to climate risks, this stress test rather analyses the economic risks posed by nature conservation laws themselves.
Discussions and key topics
At a recently held conference, the European Commission and stakeholders examined the opinions submitted in the summer in order to separate legislative problems from implementation issues and seek more effective solutions. The discussions focused on three blocks – firstly, the issuing of planning permits in Natura 2000 territories; secondly, policy coherence, public participation, financial support and management; and thirdly, species protection, derogations (exceptions) and the procedure for adapting the annexes of the directives.
The attitude of member states towards modernising institutional procedures to update the annexes of the directives, or species lists, in accordance with scientific and technical progress, is varied. Out of the 24 member states that provided responses, 9 replied in the affirmative (yes), 1 replied in the negative (no), and 3 were unable to provide a concrete answer (don't know). The remaining countries were cautious, emphasising the maintenance of legal certainty, strict scientific criteria and the need for coordinated action in cases of transboundary animal populations. For comparison, in a similar check carried out 10 years ago, as many as 59% of national environmental agencies supported updating the annexes, which indicates that the desire for change has decreased significantly since then.
To expand the discussion, FACE, in cooperation with European Parliament member Juan Ignacio Zoido, will soon be organising an event in the European Parliament on the next steps of the directive stress test regarding the protection and management of wild animals in Europe.
National attitudes – caution, certainty and stability
Compared to the situation ten years ago, European member states have become much more reluctant regarding the idea of changing or opening the annexes of the Nature Directives. Countries value legal certainty and stability more highly than the flexibility that modernising procedures would provide. The stress test marks a clear tension between Brussels' goal of reducing the administrative burden on business and the need to maintain strict environmental, social and cultural protection standards. The discussion largely boils down to the fact that the main obstacles and complications arise not from the text of the directives themselves, but from their uneven or complex practical implementation in different member states, for example, in issuing building permits or applying exceptions.
FACE is attempting to proactively participate in decision-making at the highest level – in the European Parliament – to ensure that the simplification of legal acts does not weaken species management mechanisms, but makes them practically executable for hunters and landowners.
Below is a detailed breakdown of how the EU Birds and Habitats Directives regulate the sector and why the current EU “stress test” is so important for Latvian foresters and hunters.
Birds and Habitats Directives and their impact on hunting?
Both documents are cornerstones of European nature conservation law, the main aim of which is to ensure the survival of rare species and habitats, and they also directly affect the hunting sector,
The Birds Directive was adopted in 1979 and provides general protection for all wild bird species in the European Union. The annexes of the directive list species that may be hunted and specify periods when hunting is prohibited, for example, during spring migration and nesting.
The Habitats Directive was adopted in 1992 and, in turn, protects other animal and plant species, as well as unique habitats. This directive was the basis for the creation of the Natura 2000 protected area network.
If a species is strictly protected, such as wolves, lynx or bears, hunting it is prohibited, except in cases where the state applies strictly controlled derogations. These exceptions may only be used if there is no other alternative and to prevent, for example, serious damage to agriculture or public safety.
Stress test and the impact of the directives' rules here in Latvia?
In Latvia, discussions about the flexibility and application of these directives are very heated; the stress test initiated by the European Commission directly affects two large groups – hunters and foresters. In Latvia, the greatest tension regarding the Habitats Directive concerns the management of wolf and bear populations.
In Latvia, the wolf is historically a game species with a strictly defined annual quota, even though it is strictly protected in Europe as a whole. Latvia uses the exceptions or derogations permitted by the directive. Any discussions at the European level about “opening the annexes” or changing the status of species are important for Latvian hunters in order to maintain the right to control wolf numbers and protect peasant farms that raise livestock.
In recent years, the number of brown bears in Latvia has increased rapidly, causing damage to beekeepers and concern among the public. Since the bear is a specially protected species of European importance, Latvian hunters and environmental agencies cannot simply start hunting them – any action must be strictly coordinated within the framework of the Habitats Directive. If EU procedures were simplified, it would be easier for the state to react operationally to the appearance of problematic animals.
Impact on Latvian foresters and landowners
The forestry sector, which is one of the pillars of the Latvian economy, is most concerned about Natura 2000 territory obligations and planning permits.
In Latvia, many private and state forests are located in Natura 2000 or other micro-reserves, which means partial or total bans on tree felling, for example, during bird nesting or in certain habitats, in order to fulfil the requirements of the directives. Forest owners in Latvia often point out that the compensation set by the state for restrictions on economic activity in forests is not adequate to the actual value of the forest, which is why foresters are looking forward most to improvements in management and funding in the stress test, which were discussed at the conference as topic 2, so that the burden of nature conservation does not rest solely on the shoulders of landowners.
The approval of planning permits for logging or infrastructure construction near protected areas in Latvia tends to be long and complex. If the European Commission succeeds in simplifying the administrative layers as a result of the stress test, it could speed up project approval without reducing the quality of nature conservation.
Latvia's position on this issue is one of balance – on the one hand, the state is proud of its rich nature and biodiversity, which the directives have helped to preserve; on the other hand, the forestry sector and hunters are demanding greater flexibility and consideration of regional characteristics, because the situation regarding predator populations and forests in general in Latvia is drastically different from, for example, Belgium or the Netherlands, where almost no natural forests or large forest animals remain.
Sources: FACE and European Union information websites