Two judgements handed down by the EU Court of Justice on Thursday 23 April condemn Finland and Austria for illegally allowing the springtime hunting of certain wild birds - the male common eider (water bird) in the Åland autonomous region and the woodcock in the Land of Lower Austria.
In both cases, the Court finds that the very strict conditions for derogation from the Birds Directive (2009/147) were not met. In doing so, the Court ruled in favour of the European Commission, which had initiated infringement proceedings against these two countries for practices incompatible with the Directive.
The Birds Directive prohibits springtime hunting unless there are very strict conditions for derogation, such as the absence of a satisfactory alternative, the judicious use of the species and the requirement that only a small numbers of birds are hunted.
Finland. The Court’s judgment (Case C-217/19) concerns the resumption of the authorisation to hunt male common eiders as from 2011 (after an interruption from 2006 to 2010 following a first Court judgment in 2005). The Court finds that there is no evidence that, at the time when the authorisations at issue were granted, the Finnish authority had well-established scientific knowledge indicating that the population of the species concerned was maintained at a “satisfactory level”, so that the exploitation could be regarded as “judicious use”.
The Court further points out that, in so far as migratory species are stationary during their period of reproduction, they should, during that period and for the purpose of interpreting the exception set out in the Directive, be treated in the same way as sedentary species.
Austria. Austrian rules provide that the woodcock (Scolopax rusticola) may be hunted from 1st March to 15 April, during the courtship period, and that 759 birds may be killed during that period, an authorisation which that Member State justifies in the absence of any other satisfactory solution.
In this case (C-161/19), the Court held that Austria had failed to prove that springtime hunting of woodcocks would be less stressful than autumn hunting for the population of the species concerned in Lower Austria and that there was therefore no other satisfactory solution.
In addition, the Court points out that, on the reference date, Austria was not in a position to comply with the small quantity requirement.
Link to both judgments: - Finland: https://bit.ly/3eMRQXc; - Austria: https://bit.ly/2VUnbyz (Original version in French by Aminata Niang)