COMUNICAT - Platforma Carnivorelor Mari

AGVPS din România
Mesaje: 235
Membru din: 24 Noi 2015 10:59
Membru al: Nespecificat
Confirmat ca persoana reala de: SuportTehnic

COMUNICAT - Platforma Carnivorelor Mari

Mesajde AGVPS din România » 25 Noi 2016 13:54

Ieri, 24 noiembrie 2016, la Parlamentul European – în cadrul Platformei UE pentru coexistenţa dintre Carnivorele mari şi oameni – a fost organizată o dezbatere importantă referitoare la protecţia şi conservarea carnivorelor mari, printr-un management adecvat, în contextul recentei decizii a MMAP de a nu aproba cote de recoltă pentru urs, lup, pisică sălbatică și râs.
Au participat specialişti ai ţărilor membre ale UE şi ELO, FACE şi CIC. Prin intermediul FACE a putut participa, din partea AGVPS, d-l acad. dr. Atilla Kelemen, care a prezentat evoluţia situației urşilor din România, din anul 1950 până în prezent, şi rata de creştere a populației locale de la noi, subliniind atingerea unui nivel ce reliefează deja suprapopularea, cu implicații socio-economice conflictuale cu crescătorii de animale, agricultori şi apicultori.
Participanţii au concluzionat că este necesară aprofundarea tematicii, eventual în cadrul unui Simpozion internaţional la care AGVPS s-a angajat să fie gazdă, cel mai târziu în primăvara anului 2017.
S-a mai concluzionat că în ţările unde populaţiile de urşi produc prejudicii şi accidente, precum în România, se impune ca acestea să fie ţinute sub control şi chiar să fie reluate negocierile de aderare ale acestor ţări la UE.
Urmează ca, în curând, FACE, ELO şi CIC să transmită un comunicat privind această întâlnire.
Folosim prilejul pentru a vă aduce la cunoştinţă că pe TVR şi TVR HD , începând din data de 25.11.2016, vor avea loc dezbateri săptămânale, vinerea de la ora 2100, referitoare la situația ariilor naturale protejate, în contextul acutizării conflictelor dintre dezvoltarea economică și conservarea naturii. Fiind implicat în alte activități organizatorice, la această primă dezbatere va participa, din partea AGVPS, d-nul director Vladimir Talpeș.


Neculai Şelaru

AGVPS din România
Mesaje: 235
Membru din: 24 Noi 2015 10:59
Membru al: Nespecificat
Confirmat ca persoana reala de: SuportTehnic

Re: COMUNICAT - Platforma Carnivorelor Mari

Mesajde AGVPS din România » 25 Noi 2016 14:02

David Scallan <david.Scallan@face.eu>
To sg@elo.org Tamas Heli siitari Johan SVALBY
CC agvpsrom@yahoo.com Filippo Segato Monia Anane Alice Budniok Delphine Dupeux Today at 1:03 PM
Hi all,

Here’s a quick update on yesterday’s discussions about Romania.

We had a meeting between ELO, FACE, CIC and WWF prior to the Platform meeting. It is clear that WWF simply does not understand some issues (e.g. the risk of illegal killing when poor management decision are taken, despite the evidence) and are overly concerned about what their ‘urban’ members think. When we explained our concerns, we all agreed in the end that we share many of the same principles. In this regard, WWF agreed with our suggestion that a position of the Platform on Romania would be helpful. They will obviously not agree with us that the decision should be reversed or logically re-evaluated (after appropriate consultation), however, I think, in such a statement, that we can stress the need for decisions to be taken after inclusive stakeholder consultation, stressing the importance of good monitoring, the need for coexistence to be prioritised, etc. WWF also stated that it would be useful to have a regional workshop of the Platform next spring in Romania to discuss large carnivore management and monitoring in Romania. This idea was supported.

At the Platform meeting, the Commission provided their (expected) legal position on what they can and cannot do with respect to Romania. However, importantly, they referred to their interest in large carnivore conservation and their efforts to improve coexistence. They welcomed the idea of finding common ground and a Platform statement as well as a Platform workshop in Romania next spring. They also said that they previously received complains about the use of derogations for large carnivores Romania (good to see NGOs doing their job!), but when questioned, these were never serious enough for an infringement procedure to be opened. They also stated that derogations should work to deal with problem animals (serious damage) in specific situations and questioned us about how problem animals are dealt with in the context of hunting. We countered this by explaining the procedures, which are in place in Romania and stated that it is not in the interest of the hunting community to have, for example, a ‘problem’ bear in an area and how the hunting community acts a key intermediary group between the state and the farmers, therefore, key players in improving coexistence. We all respected the success thus far of Romania with regard to large carnivore conservation, coexistence, etc. The Commission also said that management should include more methods than lethal removal. Here, Dr. Kelemen responded with examples of how problem bears, which were translocated from conflict situations to areas far away, returned in a short space of time.

Please feel free to add anything.

Kind regards,

David

Dr. David Scallan
Conservation Manager
FACE - Federation of Associations for Hunting and Conservation of the EU
Rue F. Pelletier 82, B-1030 BRUSSELS
T: +32 (0) 2 732 6900
F: +32 (0) 2 732 7072


http://www.face.eu

AGVPS din România
Mesaje: 235
Membru din: 24 Noi 2015 10:59
Membru al: Nespecificat
Confirmat ca persoana reala de: SuportTehnic

Re: COMUNICAT - Platforma Carnivorelor Mari

Mesajde AGVPS din România » 25 Noi 2016 14:55

Evolution and management of large carnivores from the point of view of the hunters in Romania

Dr. Atilla Kelemen
Dr. ing. Neculai Şelaru
1.PNG
1.PNG (448 KiB) Vizualizat de 1506 ori

1. INTRODUCTION
In Romania, the bear, the wolf, the lynx, the three species of large carnivores that are the object of the strict protection of the Berne convention and of the „Habitat” Directive, live in mighty populations, extended on areas of 70.000 – 100.000 km2, where the largest densities of individuals can be found in Europe. We also point out the special lustiness of the individuals of the three species, with arguments such as the current world records on bear skull, bear fur and wolf fur, owned by our country, and even the national records on wolf and lynx skull, close to the world records. We only add the wild character of the individuals from the inland populations of the three species, preserved in time through hunting.
The exceptional situation of the bear, wolf and lynx population in Romania is due both to the hard accessible and little anthropized life style of these species in our country, and to the politics of the hunters in Romania, who had the wisdom to allow to live, in populations controlled for over 60 years, their main competitors to the surplus of herbivores and omnivores as a prey for large carnivores.
Romania is today in the situation of being recognized as the country with the most representative populations of bear, wolf and lynx in Europe, excepting the western part of the Russian Federation.
This recognition, which Romania enjoys, is due to a protective and efficient management of the preserving of the hunting species, applied with consistency and result also on the case of the large carnivores, and is about to regress because of the constraint of some exaggerated protection laws, even damaging the preservation of these species.
Also, because of the exaggerated costs, direct and indirect, exclusively supported by our country, in order to preserve the three large carnivores in „situ”. We are referring to the cover of the prejudices produced by the individuals of the three species, to the farmers and animal breeders, to the public budget and to the exaggerated reduction of the harvest shares approved for herbivores and omnivores (prey).
We are also referring to the slightly degeneration of the large carnivores’ populations in our country, all due to the imposition of some inappropriate European restrictions in the management of these species, in the situation of exaggerated densities encountered in patches in our country.

2. DISTRIBUTION,POPULATION AND DENSITY OF LARGE CARNIVORES
About the distribution and the population numbers of the hunting species in Romania we have systematic information since 1950. For some of this species, we have even older information. It is certain that both the presence and the number of individuals of each species have been the object of inherent approximate estimations, made every spring, after overcoming the burdens of the winter, when it was considered that the animals which survived the critical period would live and reproduce.
For large predators, this approximate estimation was made through direct observations, during organized hunts, on luring places or randomly on the set, and also, following the marks on the ground or on the casualty places. In time, the gathered data, often suspected of overvaluation due to the vast range of activity of large carnivores and their mobility, became closer to the reality, emphasizing an explicable and believable evolution.
In the interest of a real perception in the distribution and the evolution of the population of the three species of large carnivores, we are restoring graphically, in picture nr. 1, the distribution at a given time (1996) and the evolution of the population of these species, in a relevant period, that outruns a half of a century.




































We are indebted to specify that the distribution of large carnivores remained relatively constant overtime, although the tendency of the prospecting behavior, outside the specific area, is increased for all of them, being influenced by the high density in the stable area and by the vagrancy tendency, in search for females of the young excluded males. During some periods of the year, especially in summer and autumn for the bear, and in winter for the wolf and lynx, isolated individuals appear in far places from the known area, places richer in food, where they settle in temporarily and leave marks feeding from local harvests, domestic animals and even wild herbivores with emaciated senses, due to long absence of these predators in the area.
Therefore, the areas presented graphically are relatively stable specific areas, which are temporarily extended to lower altitude sites, where conflicts with humans, including hunters, are more frequent and more important.
In this context, we can affirm that in Romania, there are currently:
• Evaluated approx. 7000 bears, which occupy an area of approximated 80.000 km2, in a overdone medium density, of approx. 9 bears/10.000 ha;
• Evaluated approx. 2500 wolves, which occupy an area of approximated 100.000 km2, in a medium density of approx. 2,5 wolves/10.000 ha;
• Evaluated approx. 1950 lynx, which occupy an area of approximated 60.000 km2, in a medium density of approx. 3,25 lynx/10.000 ha.

3. EVOLUTION OF POPULATION, COORDINATED HARVESTS AND NATURAL GROWTH
Until 1950, we have only random information about large carnivores’ population. Since 1950, this information were listed in multiannual official statistics, kept by the central public authority that coordinates the hunting, based on every spring evaluations of all the population of each non migrant species.
The methods for spring evaluation, for large carnivores, were: the method of direct observations, made by hired personnel and hunters, during hunting actions or other activities all around the year, and the method of reading tracks, left by the hunting species on the ground through feeding, territory marks. Notice that the data gathered during evaluating actions of the hunting species’ populations became more accurate, since 1956 until recently, due to the analisys, the interpretation and correlation of this data, structured on years, on adjoining hunting background, on counties and nation wide.
Based on this annual statistics data, coordinated harvests were approved and the annual and multiannual natural growth was calculated.
From the analysis of the evolutions presented graphically, it results the state politics for the hunting sector, differenced from one species to another, based on the interest in raising the numbers of herbivores, in order to develop a more efficient hunting exploit, but, indirectly, in favor of the large carnivores, which are preserved in controlled populations, beneficiaries of a larger feeding base.

BEAR IN ROMANIA



























In case of the bear, the protection of which it was beneficiary since 1953, since the harvest quotas were introduced for this species and since it was forbidden to shot the females with cubs, determined a continuous growth of the population, from approx. 860 bears in 1950 to 7.780 individuals in 1998, then a little drop and then it was stabilized at approx. 6.300 max. 7.000 individuals in Romania.
This evolution was possible due to a multiannual medium share of 2,2% from the population, to a multiannual medium growth of approx. 4,2% until 1990.
It was wrong, in our opinion, in the management of the bears, to shot mostly the dominant males, and that led to a obvious destructuration of the bears’ population in our country, in favor of the females, the cubs and the small sized bears. The destructuration of the population to which we are referring reverberated, indirectly, in the bears’ behavior, that got closer to the cities and became less fearful to humans. As a result, the damages were larger and the attacks on humans were more frequent.
In conclusion, the destructuration of the population and of the behavior of the bears in Romania is due mainly to an imperfect management, in the last 25 years, objectified through wrong extractions of the population’s surplus. We must not neglect the repercussions of the constraints of the same restrictions, through the Berne Convention and „Habitat” Directive both in the countries overpopulated with large carnivores and in the countries with populations in danger.

WOLF IN ROMANIA


























In case of the wolf, the state policy was to diminish and to maintain a real control of the population, at a level of approx. 2.500 individuals, during 1960–1990, through consistent „control” with the gun, with traps, with poison and by catching cubs at the lair. Notice that the wolf population could be controlled in a period when the hunt shares were realized to the level of the natural growth, at approx. 76%, growth calculated as a multiannual average of the natural growth reported to the multiannual average of the population, evaluated every spring.
It is known that the rewards, not at all neglected, for every wolf extracted, through any method contributed to this evolution. After the accession to the Bern convention and the assuming of the „Habitat” Directives in the national legislation, therefore after the introduction of the wolf under strict protection, it was registered a sudden fall of the hunt shares and an obvious raise of the population of the species, up to 4000 individuals, continued by a recurrence to a level of approx. 2500 individuals, less in the present. The causes of the recurrence of the wolf population to an acceptable level were, certainly, the decrease of his feeding base and the repercussions of the overcrowding (decrease of the natural growth as a result of the expansion of the female areas, the growth of the cubs ‘death, the more frequent diseases). Other effects of the overcrowding were the little decrease of the individuals’ vigour and their proximity to cities, to platform wastes.
In conclusion, because of the exaggerated protection of the wolf, it was affected both the direct and indirect interests of the hunters (through smaller hunting shares for wolf and herbivores) and also, the interests of the wolf, noticed in the qualitative degradation of the individuals (smaller natural growth, more reduced size, the raise of the garbage wolves, the reduced fear towards humans).

LYNX IN ROMANIA



















In case of the lynx, the full protection from 1950 to 1962 and after that, the hunting share more reduced than the natural grow, lead to the increase of the population of the species from approx. 500 individuals in 1950 to over 2500 individuals in 1979. But after 1980, the lynx population easily regressed correlated with the roebuck population and the black goat population, given that the numbers of roebuck and wild boars continued to rise in the lynx area. Therefore, the evolution of lynx population seems to be widely influenced by the evolution of the roebuck population.
4. CURRENT RISCS FOR LARGE CARNIVORES
The highest risk for the populations of large carnivores in Romania, and also in the other European countries with viable populations is the degradation of natural habitats, which mostly overlap the three species of large carnivores (bear, wolf and lynx). Another risk is definitely the decrease of the feeding base. Finally, a last potential risk, which must not be neglected, can be the unfriendly attitude of the prejudiced man, the hunter that endure the competition for the same hunting resources and the affected human, directly or indirectly, by the more and more fearless behavior of these carnivores, and also the accidents produced by bears.
The current causes of the degradation of natural habitats, without exhausting them, can be structured, as follows:
• The more accentuated fragmentation of the natural habitats, from building highways and the modernization of current national roads, where the frequency of the circulation highly increased, becoming almost continuous;
• The intense exploitation, seldom chaotic, of the forest products, including protected forests, with unfavorable effects, direct and indirect, on the quality and quantity of the food for large carnivores, as well as the affecting their wild character, because they became more accustomed with human presence in their natural area.
• The more accentuated insight of men in other untouched areas - by opening of new forest roads, by building holiday residences, auto tourism in difficult places, tourism outside the touristic paths –leads to a greater habituation of the large carnivores to human presence;
• Competition for food with the domestic animals (herding dogs and feral dogs) and the trouble produced by humans and their dogs in the forest compel the hunting species, including large carnivores to look for other feeding and refuge places, many times in proximity of the farming fields and even cities, causing negative effects on damages produced and their wild character.
• The more abundant offer of alternative food outside the forest and immediately near the cities – in orchards, farming cultures, waste platforms. –which brings large carnivores closer to humans.
The decrease of food base for large carnivores is due to overexploit of the herbivore hunting stock (prey), the competition for food produced by domestic animals (herding dogs and feral dogs) and to the exaggerated growth of large carnivores density – can affect in time their numbers, directly and indirectly. The evolution of wolf and lynx populations in Romania, first ascendant and then descendent, following the evolution of numbers of prey species is eloquent. If we follow the evolution of large carnivores’ populations, comparing the numbers evolution of roebuck, deer, wild boar and black goat –presented in Annex 2, we shall observe a similitude which sustains the affirmation above.




















The unfriendly attitude of the man prejudiced by the large carnivores and of other categories of people affected by the fearless behavior of some large carnivore individuals (bear and wolf), and the unexplained coverage of the accidents produced by bears, may represent another important risk factor. With the increase of large carnivores’ density, the risk of their proximity towards sheepfolds, waste platforms, cities, orchards, fields. The abundant offer of unguarded food outside the forest remains a permanent attraction for bears and wolves. The risk of a hostile public opinion to the conservation of exaggerated numbers of predators, fearless to humans, becomes reality, as real as the hidden actions of catches and kills with different types of traps and toxic substances by prejudiced humans.
Finally, the hunter is indirectly affected by the exaggerated growth and the competition of large carnivores for the same stock surplus. The fact that in Romania the natural growth noticed in herbivore stock and very reduced hunting shares, comparative to other European countries without large carnivores, is due mainly to the existence of some exaggerated population of large predators. As an example, we have the situations of:
• Deer - whose medium share crop is of only 4 -5 % of population in Romania, comparative to approx. 30-40% in Hungary, France etc.;
• Roebuck – whose medium hunting share is of only 10-12 % in Romania, comparative to 35 – 40% in Germany, France etc.;
• Wild boar – whose medium share crop is of only 25 – 40% of population in Romania, comparative to approx., 100 – 150 % in Hungary, Germany etc.;
• Black goat – whose medium share crop is of only 3 – 4 % of population in Romania, comparative to over 10-15% in Austria

In conclusion, an exaggerated protection and an irrational growth in numbers for the large carnivores’ population, especially for bear and wolf, may lead to a general effect opposite to the one aimed, of species conservation and even to a visible involution, especially for the wolf, but very real for the bear and the lynx.


5. THE CONDITIONS OF THE PEACEFUL COEXISTENCE OF THE LARGE CARNIVORES WITH HUMANS

The peaceful coexistence of large predators with humans was and still is possible, but in our opinion, only in case of a rational management that does not favor any of the parts. Nor the humans and nor the large carnivores.
Following the idea of an exaggerated protection of the large predators and totally disregarding the interests of the humans (farmer, animal breeder or hunter), it is as wrong as the ancient idea of the extinction of these predators, quite fashionable not long ago in many European countries or as the reduction of the numbers of these species, to the limit of their survival.
In our opinion, of reason and balance in the strategy adopted by the decision markers concerning the protection and conservation of large carnivores’ populations, it is required a differentially analysis of these populations in different countries and implicitly the adoption of different measures and policies, according to the concrete situations.
Therefore applying the provisions of the Bern Convention and the „Habitat” Directive equally in all the states members- the one that are overcrowded with large carnivore or the ones where they are barely found or they have just reappeared- would be wrong and inequitable from all points of view. A such ad-litteram application of the European regulations, equally to all countries, could reverberate to a real and efficient protection of the viable population of these species, that would not favor in any case the conservation in „situ” of the bear, the wolf and the lynx.
First of all, because by applying equally, disregarding the situation, the provisions of the Bern Convention and the „Habitat” Directive, it would punish indirectly, by overspending and material losses, the same countries that had the interest and the wisdom of an efficient protection and conservation of these species.
That happens because, according to these Europeans regulations, but not only through these, the countries are forced to support alone the direct and indirect losses, not at all neglected, due to the existence and the overcrowding of the large carnivores’ populations.
These countries, among which Romania, understand very well the idea of the protection and the conservation of large carnivores where they live in viable numbers, in „situ”, but can not agree that all the financial losses due to their quality as „ the genofond reserves of Europe’s large carnivores” must be supported only by the members of their society.
Seeing the common interest for Europe and humanity, the citizens and the hunters of the countries with important large predators’ populations should feel the solidarity of all the persons interested in this matter and the effective financial contribution of Europe and the world. Just as the countries which protect elephants, rhinos and Siberian tigers enjoy the large international support, for this purpose.

6. THE MANAGEMENT OF LARGE CARNIVORES IN ROMANIA
We note, from the beginning, that in Romania, for over 50 years, is practiced a sustainable management of population of large carnivores, based on annual evaluations of the bear, wolf and lynx populations and on annual crop shares for the three species, approved by the difference between real numbers in field and the numbers considered normal for these lands. The sustainability of the applied management is strongly presented by the evolution of the large carnivores populations in Romania.
Due to the Romania’s ascension to the Bern Convention and to the implementation of the “Habitats”, the sustainable management, applied since 1950 until after 1990, was troubled. The exaggerated protection of large carnivores and the increase of their numbers over normal began to have opposite effects to those intended, for long-term conservation of viable and vigorous actual large carnivores, primarily because the damage of the food base.
In this situation, it is quite clear that the application at - literally of the provisions of the Berne Convention and Directive "Habitats" is counterproductive and it has the opposite effect in countries and areas with overpopulation of large carnivores.
For the reason stated and for the mobility of the species in question, their management, only on the lands where viable and vigorous populations of bears, wolves and lynx live, should be based on:
• Knowledge of the exact traditional areas, propitious for living for every species of analyzed large carnivores

• Delimitation of special conservation areas of the three species of large carnivores in areas of favorable habitat, far away from their localities as to not create premises for public resentment towards them;
• Delimitation of circulation corridors, including under the highway to ensure the exchange of individuals between populations’ nuclei, located on either side of the obstacle to their free movement.
• Establishment of normal numbers and densities, on hunting groups and fund managers, so that the damage caused by large carnivores to human population and the pressure exerted by them on hunting are acceptable;
• The conservation of large carnivores food base through proper management of prey fauna, especially ungulates;
• Additional feeding of large carnivores with natural hygienic products to help their survival during the winter-spring and decrease the pressure exercised by them on the prey wildlife;
• The hunt without delay and throughout the year of any problem individuals within any population of bears, wolves and lynx;
• The hunting limited, in addition, of large carnivore, where there are temporary concentrations or the densities exceed normal preset limits, in order to avoid payment of damages unbearable and incentives offered to hunters for the conservation of large carnivores normal effective;
• Establishing clear periods of extraction of the surplus population, that should not be extended to the spring, during pregnancy and offspring growth;
• Extraction of the surplus population, therefore of the specimens which do not constitute a problem by the "dashed" that does not favor the negative selection (removal of animals with the most valuable trophies);
• Extension of the started research for eco-ethology knowledge of large carnivores in Romania;
• Special training for the hunting staff involved in the conservation of large carnivores in Romania;
• The attraction of financial funds from NGOs protecting wildlife and habitats, in Romania and the EU, to finance sustainable management of population of large carnivores in Romania, and for payment of the damages caused by these other users of the environment so that the effort for the conservation of large carnivores in the "site" to be divided among all the beneficiaries of this concern.
In the countries and areas where the populations of bear, wolf and lynx are considered threatened or risky for population viability, the provisions of the Berne Convention and Directive "Habitats" should be strictly respected and respectively implemented.
7. CONCLUZII:
The interest for the conservation of large carnivores in „ situ”, in viable and healthy numbers, is acknowledged and of major interest, nationally and internationally. For this reason, large carnivores need to be protected and groomed essentially where they live in viable populations, even with the hunting weapon, by extracting the troubled individuals and the surplus of the population.
The financial effort for the conservation of large carnivores in „situ” must be supported by all the beneficiaries of this action from the country and from abroad. Because it is not normal that this effort to be supported only by the societies that protected and conserved large carnivores and especially by the hunters of this country. Because the hunters of this country have had, until now, the undeniable merit in the management of large carnivore’ populations, there where they remained viable and vigorous.
At the same time a rational, balanced and equitable management of large carnivores is required, differentiated from one country to another and from one area to another, depending on the situation and the quality of these large carnivores populations.
So the Berne Convention and Directive "Habitats" would be required to be revised to be applied differently, depending on the actual situation of populations of large carnivores in each country, so as not to become counterproductive of the major interest and generally followed, „ conservation of some vital predators populations, in equilibrium with the population of prey species , normally structured by gender and age groups, consisting of vigorous and healthy individuals. "
In these conditions, the peaceful coexistence of man with large carnivores is possible in Romania, in Europe and worldwide.




BIBLIOGRAFICAL REFERENCES
1. A. M. Comşia – Biologia şi principiile culturii vânatului, Edit. Academiei, Bucureşti, 1961;
2. V. Cotta şi M. Bodea – Vânatul României, Edit. Agrosilvică, Bucureşti, 1969;
3. C. Promberg şi col – Ursul/Biologie, ecologie şi management, Edit. Hako, 2000;
4. C. Promberg şi col. – Lupul, Edit. Hako, 2000.
5. C. Promberg şi col – Râsul, Edit. Hako, 2000.
6. N. Şelaru şi N. Goicea – Situaţia şi Managementul ursului brun în România, Rev. Vânătorul şi Pescarul Român, nr. 2/2005.
7. N. Şelaru – Lupul în România, Rev. Vânătorul şi Pescarul Român;
8. Consideraţii privind distribuţia râsului eurasiatic şi evoluţia populaţiei speciei în România, Adunarea Generală CIC – Skopje, Macedonia,2013;
9. G. Vasiliu şi P. Decei – Despre Râsul din Carpaţii României, Bucureşti, 1963.
10. **** – Situaţia statistică a efectivelor de vânat şi a cotelor de recoltă din perioada 1950 – 2010.
11. **** – Planul de acţiune pentru conservarea marilor carnivore în Europa.

Avatar utilizator
Daniel Ilie
Mesaje: 368
Membru din: 11 Noi 2015 19:09
Nickname: Biriuck
Membru al: http://www.ajvpsbuzau.ro
Confirmat ca persoana reala de: SuportTehnic

Re: COMUNICAT - Platforma Carnivorelor Mari

Mesajde Daniel Ilie » 25 Noi 2016 15:31

David Scallan <david.Scallan@face.eu>

We had a meeting between ELO, FACE, CIC and WWF prior to the Platform meeting. It is clear that WWF simply does not understand some issues (e.g. the risk of illegal killing when poor management decision are taken, despite the evidence) and are overly concerned about what their ‘urban’ members think. When we explained our concerns, we all agreed in the end that we share many of the same principles.

Aceasta fraza merge tradusa intr-un singur cuvant si suna cam asa: IPOCRIZIE!

David Scallan <david.Scallan@face.eu>At the Platform meeting, the Commission provided their (expected) legal position on what they can and cannot do with respect to Romania. [...] They also said that they previously received complains about the use of derogations for large carnivores Romania (good to see NGOs doing their job!), but when questioned, these were never serious enough for an infringement procedure to be opened.

ONG-isti paraciosi dar prosti! :lol: :D :lol:

Imi place si cum insista ONG-istii lui peste pe extractia doar a animalelor problema dar se fac ca nu pricep ca suprapopularea face de cele mai multe ori ca animalele pasnice sa se transforme in animalel problema. Suprapopularea se rezolva siomplu prin extragerea surplusului de populatie, adica animale "nevinovate" :idea: Manipulare si gargara!
"Corruptissima republica, plurimae leges" -Tacitus
Membru ANDA

Liviu Mircea
Mesaje: 411
Membru din: 10 Noi 2015 05:02
Nickname: tehărău
Membru al: AJVPS Buzau
Confirmat ca persoana reala de: SuportTehnic

Re: COMUNICAT - Platforma Carnivorelor Mari

Mesajde Liviu Mircea » 25 Noi 2016 15:36

Un material complet si bine articulat, imposibil de trecut cu vederea de catre decidentii europeni. Bine facut, tradus, prezentat.
Felicitari domnilor Selaru si Kelemen pentru pregatirea si sustinerea materialuilui si nu in ultimul rand, felicitari domnului Constantinescu pentru efortul de a traduce acest material!
Opriți transformarea nulităților în vedete!
http://www.ajvpsbuzau.ro/ro/descriere/


Înapoi la “Anunturi şi comunicate AGVPS”

Cine este conectat

Utilizatori ce ce navighează pe acest forum: Niciun utilizator înregistrat și 2 vizitatori