The government wants to reduce Sweden’s wolf population from the current 375 to just 170 individuals, saying it wants to take greater account of people living in the wolf’s neighbourhood.
The conservation status of species listed in the Habitats Directive is reported to the EU every six years, with the next report due next year. One of the things this report says is how large populations need to be for the species to have a favourable conservation status.
The government now wants to decide that this reference value for wolves should be 170 individuals, and says it wants to take more account of people living closer to wolf populations.
– Predator policy must take into account all people who live and work near wolves. Sweden’s management of the wolf population must be both ecologically and socially sustainable, states climate and environment minister Romina Pourmokhtari, in a press release.
According to the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency (Naturvårdsverket), there are currently around 375 wolves in Sweden, and the first step is to reduce the wolf population to 270 individuals. After that, the population will be reduced to 170 as soon as possible.
The wolf is currently protected in Sweden, but can be hunted under protection and with a licence, and a previous study by the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency concluded that at least 300 wolves are needed for the species to reach a favourable conservation status.
We don’t have a billionaire owner, and our unique reader-funded model keeps us free from political or corporate influence. This means we can fearlessly report the facts and shine a light on the misdeeds of those in power.
Consider a donation to keep our independent journalism running…
A new comprehensive study shows that the genetic diversity of animals and plants is declining worldwide.
The study, which is based on the analysis of over 80 000 scientific articles, indicates that birds and mammals are particularly affected.At the same time, the researchers highlight several conservation measures that can slow down the negative trend.
Genetic diversity plays a key role in enabling animals and plants to adapt to changes in their environment. A wide variety of genes increases the chances that some individuals will develop traits that make them more resistant to drought or high temperatures, for example. These traits can then be passed on to future generations and contribute to the survival of the species.
An international research team, including Uppsala University, Stockholm University and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency, has analyzed genetic changes in 628 species over a period of more than 30 years. The study, published in the journal Nature, shows a global decline in genetic variation.
–The study shows that the loss of genetic variation is widespread, which is alarming, but the tools to counteract further loss exist, which is hopeful, says Sara Kurland, postdoctoral researcher at the Department of Earth Sciences, Uppsala University and one of the researchers behind the study.
Restoring important habitats
The researchers highlight five key actions to preserve genetic diversity. One of them is to add new individuals to populations to counteract genetic depletion. In some cases, it may also be necessary to limit the reproduction of certain individuals to prevent inbreeding.
Protecting and restoring important habitats is another measure that can strengthen the genetic diversity of species. For example, restoring wetlands can help create stable ecosystems where populations can grow and diversify.
Where a species is threatened by disease, competition or predation from other species, controlling these factors can be a solution. The Swedish Arctic fox is an example where recovery is hampered by competition from the red fox.
Restoring wetlands is also considered an important measure. Photo: Abrget47j/CC BY-SA 3.0
Reintroduction of species
The final measure highlighted is the introduction or reintroduction of populations in areas where genetic variation has been lost. This is a controversial approach, but in some cases it can help strengthen genetic diversity and increase the survival of species.
– Overall, the study shows that there are effective conservation methods and data that allow for strategic targeting of actions.But then the genetic component must be considered, says Kurland.
– By incorporating genetic considerations when planning and implementing conservation actions, we can protect biodiversity and strengthen the resilience of ecosystems to current and future challenges, adds Catherine Grueber, a researcher at the University of Sydney and leader of the study.
The moose is one of the species being mapped. Photo: Ryan Hagerty
Hoping for more political support
In Sweden, researchers are already using DNA-based indicators to monitor species such as salmon, trout and moose in a collaboration with the Swedish Agency for Marine and Water Management and the Swedish Environmental Protection Agency.
– The work has identified particularly sensitive stocks of these species, but also those where the situation looks good genetically, says Linda Laikre, professor of population genetics at Stockholm University and one of the co-authors of the study.
The researchers hope that the results will lead to concrete measures and increased political support for conservation work.
During the UN meeting in South Korea last week, there were high hopes for a new global agreement to reduce the world’s plastic pollution.However, this never materialized and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF) considers the outcome as “deplorable” and “a major failure”.
“The world missed a historic opportunity to stop the growing plastic pollution that threatens animals, ecosystems and human health.WWF considers it a major failure that countries at the UN meeting could not agree on a globally binding plastics agreement”, it writes in a press release.
It points out that a large majority of UN member states wanted to see far-reaching measures “that science has shown can stop plastic pollution” – but that a few countries opposed this and stopped the plans.
–It is regrettable that the negotiations did not result in a binding agreement, which is needed to save our planet from drowning in plastic, said Inger Näslund, senior ocean expert at WWF.
The organization points out that it has been over 1000 days since UN countries agreed to establish a legally binding treaty to stop plastic pollution in oceans and on land, and that 800 million tonnes of plastic have been produced since then alone, with over 30 million tonnes leaking into the oceans, harming animals and poisoning ecosystems.
“No intention of finding a solution”
WWF has previously urged countries to vote instead of settling for a watered-down agreement if a consensus could not be reached, but this was not the case, and major oil producer Saudi Arabia was one of several countries that opposed calls to reduce plastic production.
– For too long, a small minority of states have held the negotiation process hostage. It is abundantly clear that these countries have no intention of finding a meaningful solution to this crisis and yet they continue to prevent the large majority of states who do, said Eirik Lindebjerg of WWF International, who followed the negotiations on the ground in Busan.
–In 2025, we want to see countries come to the negotiating table again, but then ready to take the necessary decisions to end plastic pollution, emphasizes Inger Näslund.
Trillions of pieces of plastic debris
Although it is well documented that large parts of the world’s waterways are currently littered with plastic waste, it is still difficult to get a clear picture of the extent of the problem.
According to National Geographic’s estimate, there are around 5.3 trillion pieces of plastic debris floating in the world’s oceans – and in addition to what is on the surface, around four billion plastic microfibers per square kilometer litter the deep sea, threatening a large number of species.
The big problem with plastic waste is not just that it takes a long time to break down. Instead, once it disappears “in plain sight”, it leaves behind tiny microplastic particles that remain in nature and in the oceans for hundreds of years – and are taken up by the species that live there, including fish species that are then consumed by humans.
Human activity has had a devastating impact on Africa’s elephants in recent decades, a new study from the US and South Africa shows.According to the researchers, 77% of the continent’s elephants have disappeared since the 1960s.
Since the 1960s, hundreds of elephant surveys have been conducted in Africa using different methods. These varying methods, along with other factors, have made it difficult to track changes over time, according to the researchers.
In a study published in the scientific journal PNAS, researchers from the University of Washington in the US and Nelson Mandela University in South Africa, among others, used these surveys to create a computer model that estimates the extent of elephant population declines in many parts of Africa.
There are two species of elephant living in Africa, the African savanna elephant which is the largest, and the African forest elephant which is slightly smaller in size. Savanna elephants are mainly found in grasslands and savannas, while forest elephants prefer forested areas.
The study shows that the savanna elephant population has declined by 70% since the 1960s, while forest elephants have declined by 90% over the same period.
Human impact
According to the study, human activity is the main threat to both species. Savannah elephants are mainly threatened by the illegal ivory trade, while forest elephants are most affected by deforestation in rainforest areas.
Despite the gloomy figures, researchers highlight some bright spots: in several countries, particularly in southern Africa, elephant populations have increased thanks to effective conservation measures.
The exact number of elephants in Africa today is uncertain, but the WWF estimates there are approximately 415,000 African elephants in total, with about a quarter being forest elephants.
The UN meeting on biodiversity, COP16, was not the success that many participants may have hoped for and when the meeting ended yesterday, decisions had still not been taken on several of the issues on the table.
One agreement that was reached was to establish a permanent body tasked with representing the interests of the world’s Indigenous populations, which will be consulted before the UN makes decisions on nature conservation matters.
The new advisory body is being hailed as a breakthrough in recognizing the role that indigenous peoples play in conserving natural areas around the world – including some of the most biodiverse areas on the planet, such as the Amazon.
The UN body, which will also include representatives from various indigenous peoples, is also said to help incorporate more traditional knowledge into conservation efforts.
Focus on Africans
The assembly also adopted a proposal recognizing the role claimed to be played by people of specifically African descent in caring for nature, which, according to Colombia, the host country of COP16, would give these groups easier access to resources to fund their biodiversity projects and participate in global environmental discussions.
– Our territories, which cover much of the natural wealth of the planet, have also been home to people of African descent and Indigenous peoples whose sustainable practices are needed to face the environmental challenges that we all share today, said Colombia’s Foreign Minister Luis Gilberto Murillo, saying the position was particularly important for Latin America and the Caribbean.
Representatives of some 200 countries gathered in Cali, Colombia, for COP16 – and in 2026, the next major meeting will be hosted by Armenia.
