Salzburg: Bird Shooting Plan as an Attack on Nature Conservation

Regulation Riddled with Legal Violations

With a consultation period of just one week, the Salzburg state government seeks to rush through the regulation on the large-scale killing of Eurasian jays, magpies, grey herons, cormorants, and carrion crows.

The draft regulation is riddled with legal violations. The citizens’ initiative for a federal hunting law draws a damning conclusion and demands that the regulation not be enacted. The rule-of-law principle enshrined in the Austrian Federal Constitution stipulates that public authorities may only act on the basis of laws. Yet this fundamental pillar of our republic is all too often trampled upon in the areas of nature conservation and hobby hunting. The most recent example is the bird shooting plan regulation planned by the Salzburg state government, which is rife with legal violations:

Five Serious Legal Violations

1. Central to the matter is the disregard for the Aarhus Convention, ratified by Austria. Under this convention, civil society must have the opportunity to have an administrative act reviewed by a court. However, the Salzburg Hunting Act provides for this only in respect of individual administrative decisions, not regulations. The European Commission has already initiated the second stage of infringement proceedings against Austria for failure to implement the Aarhus Convention.

2. Jays and magpies are protected under EU law and may not be hunted in Austria. Exceptions to the prohibition on killing are only possible under certain conditions, which are not met in the case of these species. Nevertheless, the bird shooting quota regulation is intended to permit the killing of 1’185 jays and 560 magpies per year. No substantive justification is provided for this.

3. Birds may not be hunted during the breeding season or while migrating to their breeding grounds. Nevertheless, the cormorant's closed season does not begin until May. In addition, 10% of the killing quota for carrion crows may fall within the closed season. Why exactly 10%? No explanation is given.

4. Effective alternatives to damage caused by crows are dismissed without justification — for example, the immediate baling of silage. Without an assessment of alternatives worthy of the name, however, the shooting of protected species is not permissible.

5. With regard to the grey heron, no coherent explanation is provided as to what hunting is actually supposed to achieve, other than allowing fishermen to vent their frustration towards a perceived enemy.

Citizens' Initiative for a Federal Hunting Act

«It is frankly incredible that the state government dares to submit such a draft for public consultation,» says Rudolf Winkelmayer, representative of the citizens' initiative for a Federal Hunting Act (bundesjagdgesetz.at). «Once again it is clear that no progress towards the ecologisation of hobby hunting is to be expected at the state level — unfortunately quite the opposite. We need a Federal Hunting Act that takes ecology and animal welfare into account and does not violate the rule of law.»

The complete submission by Tierschutz Austria on the draft bird shooting quota regulation can be found here.