Sweden has been reprimanded by the EU for its report on the favourable conservation status of wolves, with the EU questioning whether the decision has a scientific basis.
In a letter dated 7 November to Åsa Johansson, Director of EU and International Affairs at the Ministry of Climate and Food, Sweden is urged to submit a new, revised report on the conservation status of wolves in accordance with Article 17 of the Habitats Directive. The matter has now been referred to the Ministry of Rural Affairs and Infrastructure, which has been asked to submit a new report as soon as possible.
In August, the Swedish government reported via the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency that a favourable conservation status for wolves in Sweden is 170 individuals. This has been strongly questioned as it is a political decision that lacks scientific basis. The EU has now requested a written revision of the report, partly because it questions whether the decision has a scientific basis.
Scientific evidence in line with the Habitats Directive is lacking
Among other things, the European Commission states that “the reported FRP value of 170 wolves is not supported by scientific evidence in line with the Habitats Directive and associated guidelines. In particular, the reported FRP value of 170 appears to be an estimate of the minimum viable population (MVP), whereas a scientifically sound FRP should, by definition, be higher than an MVP.9” The EU also believes that the report does not clearly explain why it excludes a large part of Sweden’s boreal region from the favourable reference area for wolves. The letter concludes by stating that ‘These serious concerns indicate that Sweden’s Article 17 report, as regards wolves, does not comply with the requirements of the Habitats Directive.’
Sweden is now requested to submit a new, revised report as soon as possible, reviewing, to the extent appropriate, the Swedish Article 17 report on wolves. If a new and correct submission is not made in time, the report on the state of nature for 2026 may need to be accompanied by reservations highlighting problems with the Swedish assessment of the conservation status of the species.
‘We are so happy that our work is finally beginning to bear fruit. The Swedish Predator Association has been in dialogue with the EU on this issue for a long time. Now it feels like we, together with other environmental organisations that are also fighting for these issues, have finally gained momentum,’ says Jenny Olsson, press spokesperson for the Swedish Predator Association.
We have contacted Minister for Rural Affairs Peter Kullgren for a comment but have not yet received a response.
Susann Engqvist