{"id":1153666,"date":"2026-08-17T12:49:22","date_gmt":"2026-08-17T12:49:22","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/1153666\/"},"modified":"2026-08-17T12:49:22","modified_gmt":"2026-08-17T12:49:22","slug":"first-wolves-now-bears-eastern-europe-wants-the-eu-to-roll-back-wildlife-protections","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/1153666\/","title":{"rendered":"First wolves, now bears: Eastern Europe wants the EU to roll back wildlife protections"},"content":{"rendered":"

Bears: the new wolves?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The proposal calls for brown bears to be managed in the same way as wolves. So how comparable are the animals? There are similarities between the two species, \u201cbut also significant ecological and management differences\u201d, says Papp. Both are considered large carnivores, but the bear is omnivorous. In practice, therefore, it \u201cgrazes like a cow and eats more fruit than meat\u201d, in the words of L\u00e1szl\u00f3 G\u00e1l in\u00a0a study on waste management<\/a> in the town of B\u0103ile Tu\u0219nad, in Transylvania.<\/p>\n

In his research, G\u00e1l found that only 1 per cent of the bear\u2019s diet in that area came from hunting prey. A little over 40 per cent was grass; 17 per cent apples and plums; and 14 per cent wheat. Plastic made up nearly 5 per cent.<\/p>\n

So, although both wolves and bears can attack livestock, points out Papp, wolves cause greater predation while bears may also cause damage to property and crops. Their different behaviours must also be taken into account. For example, wolves are strict carnivores with organised pack dynamics and more predictable territorial behaviour. Meanwhile, bears are solitary omnivores (except for mothers with cubs, and orphaned cubs), and so \u201cfar more opportunistic\u201d, says Papp. That\u2019s why conflict with them is more common around unsealed rubbish, crops, and so on.<\/p>\n

For both species, \u201ccoexistence depends largely on preventative measures\u201d, says Papp. When individual bears are removed without addressing the factors that attracted them, the usual result is that they are quickly replaced by other bears.<\/p>\n

WWF Romania suggests a number of ways to ensure coexistence between humans and bears. The most effective single one is to properly manage food waste and other items that attract bears. Other measures include a clear protocol for responding quickly to individual problem bears; the use of GPS collars or AI-powered camera traps; deterrents such as electric fences and guard dogs; and community awareness-raising. One Romanian municipality with a high density of bears, B\u0103ile Tu\u0219nad, has already had success with some of these measures, as\u00a0El Confidencial\u00a0confirmed during a visit<\/a>.<\/p>\n

2016\u20132024: from a hunting ban to a quota<\/strong><\/p>\n

The bear has been regarded as a protector of the forest since ancient times. Romanians celebrate the New Year with a \u201cbear dance\u201d, to the beat of drums. The animal is featured in festivals, legends and even the country\u2019s best-selling beer brand (Ursus).<\/p>\n

So, \u201cHow did brown bears lose the Romanians\u2019 favour?\u201d,\u00a0asked a BBC headline<\/a>\u00a0on a report about the new laws.<\/p>\n

A series of fatal incidents, pressure from hunters and alarmist content on social media all helped put the animal back in the spotlight. Through viral videos of bears loitering on roads and looting rubbish bins, \u201csocial media is being used to demonise them\u201d, sighs L\u00e1szl\u00f3 G\u00e1l.<\/p>\n

Since Romania joined the EU in 2007, the country has adhered to the international agreements that classify the brown bear as a strictly protected species. Romanian law has changed considerably since 2016, when the previous system of annual hunting quotas was abolished. Lethal culling has since been permitted only as \u201can exceptional measure in specific conflict situations\u201d, explains Istv\u00e1n Imecs, the biologist.<\/p>\n

Another major step was taken with Emergency Ordinance 81\/2021, which introduced the \u201cimmediate intervention\u201d mechanism. This enabled quick-response teams to remove bears posing an imminent threat to people or property. Local authorities were empowered to work with land managers to carry out these interventions.<\/p>\n

In Eastern Europe, a dispute over bears is forcing politicians to arbitrate between environmentalists and hunters. Although the forests of Romania and Slovakia account for just 5.5 per cent of Europe\u2019s total woodland, they are home to more than half of Europe\u2019s brown bears. The two countries\u2019 governments are deploying this argument to demand that the protection status of the brown bear be reduced, as has been done for the wolf<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Their proposal<\/a>, supported by Croatia, Czechia and Finland, was presented at the meeting of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council on June 22nd and 23rd in Luxembourg.<\/p>\n

Romania is home to Europe\u2019s largest population of brown bears outside Russia (although\u00a0there is no consensus<\/a>\u00a0on the exact numbers). In April 2025, Romania\u2019s Ministry of the Environment, Water and Forests presented\u00a0a report<\/a> which concluded that, based on a sampling programme launched in 2023 to extract DNA from hair and faeces, there were between 10,419 and 12,770 bears in Romania. Assuming a population of 11,500 bears in Romania and 2,500 in Slovakia (according to its government), these figures are three times the level considered optimal by the authorities, which is 4,000 and 800 animals respectively.<\/p>\n

\u201cThe government constantly repeats this figure of 4,000 bears, but we have not seen any scientific document explaining how it was calculated\u201d, biologist Istv\u00e1n Imecs, vice-president of the Project Bag Association, complains to\u00a0El Confidencial. \u201cFor a policy of this magnitude, there should be greater transparency.\u201d<\/p>\n

The brown bear is currently listed as a strictly protected species in\u00a0Appendix II<\/a>\u00a0of the Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats. If the brown bear were reclassified from \u201cstrictly protected\u201d to \u201cprotected\u201d, this would have implications \u201cfor both ecology and governance\u201d, says Cristian-Remus Papp, director of wildlife and landscape at the Romania branch of the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF).<\/p>\n

From a conservation perspective, argues Papp, such a decision \u201ccould weaken the precautionary framework that has enabled populations of large carnivores in Europe to recover and stabilise over recent decades\u201d.<\/p>\n

Changing the legal status would not address the causes of the conflict between humans and bears, adds Papp. At its root the conflict is due not so much to the bears\u2019 protected status as to contingent factors, such as \u201caccess to food sources of human origin; ineffective waste management; and the lack of preventive measures and effective response\u201d.<\/p>\n

Rather than being framed as \u201cprotection versus security\u201d, the debate should focus on \u201cthe effectiveness and proportionality of the measures\u201d, believes Cristian-Remus Papp.<\/p>\n

\n

Bears: the new wolves?<\/strong><\/p>\n

The proposal calls for brown bears to be managed in the same way as wolves. So how comparable are the animals? There are similarities between the two species, \u201cbut also significant ecological and management differences\u201d, says Papp. Both are considered large carnivores, but the bear is omnivorous. In practice, therefore, it \u201cgrazes like a cow and eats more fruit than meat\u201d, in the words of L\u00e1szl\u00f3 G\u00e1l in\u00a0a study on waste management<\/a>\u00a0in the town of Baile Tusnad, in Transylvania.<\/p>\n

In his research, G\u00e1l found that only 1 percent of the bear\u2019s diet in that area came from hunting prey. A little over 40 per cent was grass; 17 per cent apples and plums; and 14 percent wheat. Plastic made up nearly 5 per cent.<\/p>\n

So, although both wolves and bears can attack livestock, points out Papp, wolves cause greater predation while bears may also cause damage to property and crops. Their different behaviours must also be taken into account. For example, wolves are strict carnivores with organised pack dynamics and more predictable territorial behaviour. Meanwhile, bears are solitary omnivores (except for mothers with cubs, and orphaned cubs), and so \u201cfar more opportunistic\u201d, says Papp. That\u2019s why conflict with them is more common around unsealed rubbish, crops, and so on.<\/p>\n

For both species, \u201ccoexistence depends largely on preventative measures\u201d, says Papp. When individual bears are removed without addressing the factors that attracted them, the usual result is that they are quickly replaced by other bears.<\/p>\n

WWF Romania suggests a number of ways to ensure coexistence between humans and bears. The most effective single one is to properly manage food waste and other items that attract bears. Other measures include a clear protocol for responding quickly to individual problem bears; the use of GPS collars or AI-powered camera traps; deterrents such as electric fences and guard dogs; and community awareness-raising. One Romanian municipality with a high density of bears, B\u0103ile Tu\u0219nad, has already had success with some of these measures, as\u00a0El Confidencial\u00a0confirmed during a visit<\/a>.<\/p>\n

2016\u20132024: from a hunting ban to a quota<\/strong><\/p>\n

The bear has been regarded as a protector of the forest since ancient times. Romanians celebrate the New Year with a \u201cbear dance\u201d, to the beat of drums. The animal is featured in festivals, legends and even the country\u2019s best-selling beer brand (Ursus).<\/p>\n

So, \u201cHow did brown bears lose the Romanians\u2019 favour?\u201d,\u00a0asked a BBC headline<\/a>\u00a0on a report about the new laws.<\/p>\n

A series of fatal incidents, pressure from hunters and alarmist content on social media all helped put the animal back in the spotlight. Through viral videos of bears loitering on roads and looting rubbish bins, \u201csocial media is being used to demonise them\u201d, sighs L\u00e1szl\u00f3 G\u00e1l.<\/p>\n

Since Romania joined the EU in 2007, the country has adhered to the international agreements that classify the brown bear as a strictly protected species. Romanian law has changed considerably since 2016, when the previous system of annual hunting quotas was abolished. Lethal culling has since been permitted only as \u201can exceptional measure in specific conflict situations\u201d, explains Istv\u00e1n Imecs, the biologist.<\/p>\n

Another major step was taken with Emergency Ordinance 81\/2021, which introduced the \u201cimmediate intervention\u201d mechanism. This enabled quick-response teams to remove bears posing an imminent threat to people or property. Local authorities were empowered to work with land managers to carry out these interventions.<\/p>\n

A young hiker mauled<\/strong><\/p>\n

In 2024, there was widespread shock when\u00a0a 19-year-old hiker tragically died after being mauled<\/a>\u00a0by a bear in the Carpathians. Romania\u2019s parliament backtracked and adopted legislation to control the bear population. It set an annual culling quota of 426 brown bears and an emergency quota of 55 bears. \u201cThese quotas are distributed among the counties and hunting areas and are enforced by the managers of those areas\u201d, explains Istv\u00e1n Imecs.<\/p>\n

Over the past five years, there have been 14 deaths from bear attacks in Romania and more than 150 injuries. In neighbouring Slovakia, the toll was four deaths and 64 injuries, according to the document presented in Luxembourg. Imecs acknowledges the need to protect people: \u201cThe tragic loss of 14 lives must not be downplayed.\u201d\u00a0 However, he argues that what matters most is the measures being put in place to prevent such incidents from occurring. Public attention and political debate have focused on increasing bear-culling quotas. There has been little talk about preventative measures.<\/p>\n

In 2026 the parliament passed a new law increasing the culling quota to 859 bears nationally in 2026-27, plus a further 110 bears under the rubric of emergency intervention. Formally, these are described as preventative and responsive measures, rather than trophy hunting quotas. \u201cIn practice, the distinction is not always so clear\u201d, says Imecs. On 24 June 2026, the constitutional court rejected a challenge brought by the president and ruled that the law\u00a0does not contravene the constitution<\/a>. The legislation is awaiting final procedural steps before it comes into force.<\/p>\n

Imecs believes that transparency is now essential. If culls are genuinely management measures, he argues, then \u201cthere must be clear scientific criteria for the selection of animals, comprehensive reports, genetic verification and public accountability\u201d. Without such openness, it will be \u201chard to distinguish wildlife management from a system which simply re-legalizes trophy hunting under different laws\u201d. In practice, believes Imecs, it may prove difficult to draw a clear line between the two.<\/p>\n

Original article <\/a>in Spanish by El Confidencial<\/p>\n

This article was produced as part of the PULSE collaborative project. Marco Mobili. (Il Sole 24 Ore, Italy) and a journalist from Hotnews (Romania) have contributed to it. It was translated by Harry Bowden.<\/p>\n

Lola Garc\u00eda-Ajofr\u00edn<\/strong>\u00a0is a Spanish journalist based in Madrid. She currently works for\u00a0El Confidencial<\/a>\u00a0and the Polish multimedia project\u00a0Outriders<\/a>. In the past, she has worked with a wide range of media, including\u00a0El Pa\u00eds<\/a>,\u00a0El Mundo<\/a>,\u00a0La Informaci\u00f3n\u00a0and\u00a0Telecinco<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a><\/p>\n

New Eastern Europe is reader-supported. If you value independent coverage of Central and Eastern Europe, please consider supporting our work.

\n\ud83d\udc49 Click here to donate<\/a><\/strong>.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"Bears: the new wolves? The proposal calls for brown bears to be managed in the same way as…\n","protected":false},"author":2,"featured_media":1153667,"comment_status":"","ping_status":"","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":"","_share_on_mastodon":"0"},"categories":[5174],"tags":[313874,728,2000,299,5187,1438,2558,1717],"class_list":["post-1153666","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","category-eu","tag-carpathian-mountains","tag-environment","tag-eu","tag-europe","tag-european","tag-romania","tag-slovakia","tag-wildlife"],"share_on_mastodon":{"url":"https:\/\/pubeurope.com\/@uk\/117110937409100640","error":""},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1153666","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/2"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1153666"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1153666\/revisions"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/1153667"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1153666"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1153666"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.europesays.com\/uk\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1153666"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}