The wolf of upset – Norges Jeger – og Fiskerforbund

the Climate and miljøminister Vidar Helgesen will get its share of difficulties for the decision about the null ulvejakt in ulvesonen. Many people ask where NJFF says in a debate that is characterized by steep fronts. Here is a summary of the NJFFs point of view.

A wide majority in Parliament was in the summer to agree on a national bestandsmål for the wolf. The last public filings of the wolf population shows that we are well above the approved bestandsmålet.

Rovviltnemndene opened therefore up for a cull of wolves to balance the Norwegian wolf population at the level that Parliament has decided that it should be. After that the government in 12. time canceled the planned ulvejakten in the county of Hedmark, it has been the high temperature of the debate.

NJFF is a democratic organization. Stand in the controversial issues are decided frequently by the congress, which is our organization’s highest democratic body. Around the wolf passed the congress in 2015 the following: “NJFF will be working for a management of the wolf that ensures that the hunting, hunter’s, hunting dog and viltinteressene are safeguarded and that contribute to reduced conflict level: the Abolition of the ulvesonen a Maximum of 2-3 family groups of wolves including the Norwegian share of the grenseflokkene. Grenseflokker with more than 50 % share in Norway will count in the Norwegian bestandsmålet. Bestandsregulering of the wolf, as for the other national target: the spread, take place through the licence in whole ulvens range with one’s jakttid. It must be opened for withdrawal of the entire family groups of wolves to reduce the total rovviltbelastningen in areas where this is high, and thus also contribute to a better burden-sharing. Local involvement must be emphasized. Within the framework of the Storting’s decisions concerning the ulvepolitikken and applicable regulations, must rovviltnemndene have the freedom and the real opportunity to emphasize and balance the various interests to contribute to the konfliktdemping. Local participation in bestandsregistreringer must be emphasized. Forbundsstyret shall give priority to work with the management of large predators and highlight the league’s standpoint and involvement. NJFF will continue its work with capacity building, including arrangements to ensure effective licensing and kvotefelling and good framework conditions for the use of the dog. NJFF shall cooperate with the other.”

Accepting the wolf, but fewer

the Parliament has through its decision given the wolf a place in the Norwegian nature. NJFF relate to this and agree that there shall be wolves in Norwegian nature.

NJFF relate also to the bestandsmålet that is passed by Parliament, even if the NJFFs united had initially wanted a lower bestandsmål (see separate rammesak).

Narrow interpretation of the legislative foundation

Some simplifies the problem and ask about NJFF reject Norwegian law when we are critical of the ministry’s decision. It is turning the issue on its head, as the Parliament as a legislative body also adopted ulveforliket.

NJFF relate of course to the Norwegian law, but believes the ministry through a narrow interpretation of the Bernkonvensjonen and the nature diversity act has restricted the basis for conducting a ulveforvaltning in line with what Parliament decided.

Parliament was clear on that in the management of rovvilt should be more than just damage to the grazers. That the ministry have now chosen to narrow in, is therefore in conflict with the earlier decisions of the Parliament.

Introducing reservatpolitikk

the ministry’s decision has created a complex and entrenched situation which NJFF find untenable. It is not acceptable that ulvesonen through legal strokes being converted into a reserve for the wolf, which adopted bestandsmål in practice do not have any real significance.

So the situation is now, emphasized only skadepotensialet in relation to livestock. Hunting and jegerinteressene or consideration for the affected communities, counts not at all.

NJFF ask the Parliament to take action

- It can not be expected that the Climate and miljødepartementet will reverse its decision, or promote a new case for the Parliament. The parliament must take up the matter themselves, in order to ensure that the practical management of the wolf is done in accordance with the Parliament itself has added to the reason. In particular, the assumptions that were applied during the treatment of the nature diversity act as well as the prerequisites that the majority of the Energy and miljøkomiteen allow to reason under ulvemeldingen in the spring of 2016, said the NJFFs note about whether the basis for the licence of the wolf.

the Parliament must as soon as possible to ensure that the government follows up ulvemeldingen so that the practical ulveforvaltningen happens according to it the Parliament itself has added to the reason. In practice, this means that a broader legal review of the case to see if you can find forvaltningsløsninger that better protects the Storting’s intentions. NJFF will be an active prime mover in such a process.