Hunting in the Netherlands is in turmoil due to the ruling of the Gelderland District Court: according to the reports of Faunabeheer Gelderland, it is no longer possible to kill the animal species that are on the national exemption list in Gelderland.

Is this court ruling correct? Isn’t it a contradiction to have a national exemption tested again at the provincial level?

The verdict and the consequences

The court ruled on the decision of the Provincial Executive of Gelderland to approve the ‘Fauna Management Plan for Hunting and Implementation of the Exemption 2017-2023’ (hereinafter: ‘the Fauna Management Plan’). The court considered, among other things, as follows:

(…) 4.4 This means that the defendant (read: the province) must assess whether the exemption conditions of the Wnb have been met when approving the fauna management plan. One of the conditions for exempting the species referred to in Article 3:1(1) and Article 3:10(1) from the prohibition on intentional killing on the basis of Article 3.15 of the Wnb is that these species cause damage. In addition, the conditions must be met, inter alia, that there is no other satisfactory solution, that the derogation is justified on the basis of one of the interests referred to in the provisions in question and that there is no deterioration in the conservation status.

On the basis of these conditions, the defendant must assess whether the national and provincial exemption can be implemented in the working area of the Fauna Management Unit, which, with the exception of Crown Estate Het Loo, includes the entire province of Gelderland.

4.5. The court finds that the contested decision does not assess that the species referred to in 3.2 of this judgment cause damage throughout the country, or specifically in the province of Gelderland, what the extent of this damage is and that this damage cannot be prevented in any other way by killing the species. The Environmental Ordinance, the fauna management plan or the statement of defence do not contain such substantiation either. (…)”

Read the full article here