Three animal protection associations, the Ligue pour la protection des oiseaux (League for
the Protection of Birds), the Association pour la protection des animaux sauvages (Association
for the Protection of Wild Animals) and the Rassemblement des opposants B la
chasse (Anti-Hunting Union), have asked the Conseil d'État to annul the French decree
relating to the dates for the hunting of waterfowl and migratory birds. That
decree lays down the procedures and conditions under which the French authorities, at
various levels, may authorise such hunting. According to the League, the rules of
the Wild Birds Directive on the conservation of birds1 cannot be interpreted as
allowing hunting during the period of particular protection (nesting, breeding, rearing, etc.). In
its view, such hunting cannot in any circumstances amount to a "judicious use"
as permitted under the Directive.
According to the Union des chasseurs (Hunting Union), an intervener in the main
proceedings, the Directive to a large extent permits derogations from the general system
of protection established by it. Since the hunting of wild birds and waterfowl
is subject to stricter control than that of other birds, those species can
be hunted only under a derogation.
That difference of opinion led the Conseil d'État to refer two questions on
the interpretation of the Directive to the Court of Justice in order to
determine whether the Directive permits derogations from the opening and closing dates for
hunting which are set in the light of the objectives for the protection
of birds laid down in the Directive and, if so, what criteria determine
whether that derogation can be used.
In reply to the first question, the Court declares that the hunting of
wild birds for recreational purposes during periods of particular protection may constitute a
"judicious use" permitted under the Directive.
As regards the second question, the Court points out that such hunting may
be authorised only if certain conditions are met, in particular that there is
no other satisfactory solution, that the hunting is carried out under strictly supervised
conditions and on a selective basis and that it applies only to certain
birds in small numbers.
The condition that there is no other satisfactory solution cannot have been satisfied
if the sole purpose of the derogation authorising hunting is to extend the
hunting periods for certain species of birds in territories which they already frequent
during the hunting periods authorised under the Community directive.
Moreover, hunting authorised under a derogation must ensure the maintenance of the population
of the species concerned at a satisfactory level.
Available languages: DE, EN, FR. The full text of the judgment can be found on the internet (www.curia.eu.int ). In principle it will be available from midday CET on the day of delivery. For additional information please contact Christopher Fretwell Phone: (00 352) 4303 3355; Fax: (00 352) 4303 2731. |