The preventive measures adopted in the affected areas were found to be weak, scarce, and insufficient: numerous episodes of predation occurred outside the fences, in the absence of guard dogs, highlighting that livestock protection was inadequate and could be significantly improved.
Please note that the conditions imposed by Provincial Laws no. 11/2018 and no. 10/2023, in accordance with the Habitats Directive, for the removal of wolf individuals are clear: the intervention must be carried out to prevent serious damage to production activities; alternative methods must have proven ineffective; and the removal must not negatively impact the favorable conservation status of the population.
We also emphasize that culling should not be seen as a preventive measure and cannot be considered an alternative to livestock protection. Thinking of not implementing adequate defensive measures because "they'll be culled anyway" means abandoning responsible and sustainable management of coexistence.
It is surprising and concerning that ISPRA has expressed a favorable opinion given the shortcomings found in prevention initiatives.
As an Association, we reiterate that wolf culling is not taboo for us: it can be considered in exceptional, justified, and documented situations, only after implementing all effective prevention measures . In this case, however, the quickest and most irreversible path was chosen, without addressing the real causes of the conflict and without ensuring the protection of either the farms or the species.
Coexistence between pastoralism and wildlife is possible: it requires knowledge, commitment, and consistent implementation of preventive measures, which are still sorely lacking in South Tyrol, rather than drastic solutions that risk compromising the balance of Alpine ecosystems.