The sentence
The Regional Administrative Court of Justice of Bolzano, with ruling no. 75 of 30 March 2026, rejected the appeal presented by LNDC Animal Protection, LAV and ENPA against the decree of the President of the Autonomous Province of Bolzano which authorised the killing of two wolves in the municipality of MallesThe associations contested the legitimacy of the measure and the provincial regulatory system for protected grazing areas, arguing that it violated the Habitats Directive 92/43/EEC on the strict protection of wolves.
The legal framework: when can a wolf be killed?
The wolf (Canis lupus) is a priority species protected by European legislation. Article 16 of the Habitats Directive allows exemptions from the killing ban only if three cumulative conditions are met:
Specific need – for example preventing serious damage to livestock
Absence of valid alternatives – non-lethal measures must be ineffective or impracticable
No harm to the conservation status – the collection must not compromise the population of the species
The South Tyrolean provincial law (LP 10/2023 and LP 11/2018) implements this scheme, establishing so-called protected pasture areas: areas where geomorphological characteristics make it unreasonable to install fences, guard dogs, or continuous surveillance.
The reasons for the rejection
ISPRA recognized the existence of serious short-term damage, based on the temporal concentration of predation episodes in the affected mountain pasture.
The Court highlighted that the farmers had adopted several protective measures:
Electric fences
Presence of shepherds
Use of herding dogs
These measures, while deemed adequate, have proven ineffective in the specific context of traditional mountain grazing. ISPRA has recommended a gradual adaptation of livestock farming practices, recognizing, however, that such changes are not immediately feasible.
The authorised removal (1-2 specimens) fell within the prudential threshold of 3-5% of the estimated population, considered compatible with maintaining a favourable conservation status.
The issue of protected pasture areas
The appellant associations argued that the system of protected pasture areas created an unlawful automatic process, circumventing the case-by-case assessment requirement set forth by the Habitats Directive. The Regional Administrative Court rejected this approach, clarifying that: "The identification of protected pasture areas does not imply the self-binding obligation to subsequent administrative action advocated by the appellants."
Constitutional Questions: Why They Were Rejected
The appellants had raised doubts about the constitutionality of the provincial legislation, also invoking the recent reform of Article 9 of the Constitution on animal protection.
The Court stated the issues:
Irrelevant – because the provision was supported by an independent justification
Manifestly unfounded – recalling the Constitutional Court ruling no. 215/2019, which had already recognized the competence of the autonomous Provinces in this matter
Conclusions
The ruling confirms that the culling of wolves in derogation of the Habitats Directive is legitimate when based on rigorous investigations, qualified technical opinions, and compliance with prudential conservation thresholds.
For Alpine farmers, the ruling reiterates the importance of documenting the preventive measures adopted and their ineffectiveness.
You May Also Like ..
