Are we laying all conservation efforts in national parks, which are part of our most valuable protected nature. What is the problem with subsidized grazing of large breeds in national parks. What is the measure of “Pastoralism”… Katerina Rakovska from the environmental organization WWF spoke to FACTS.
- Mrs. Rakovska, the campaign for European elections has passed, but is everything that the EU does in favor of the people? A new WWF report reveals that EU countries are channeling between €34 billion and €48 billion of EU subsidies per year to activities that harm nature. What does the report show?
- The report was commissioned by the WWF office in Brussels in connection with the Global Biodiversity Framework adopted in 2022, part of the implementation processes of the Convention on Biological Diversity. The objectives of the framework are to outline actions to halt biodiversity loss and a more sustainable future. One of the targeted actions to achieve this goal is the reduction of harmful subsidies. The WWF report focuses on what member countries plan as they plan and invest European funds. It includes examples of harmful subsidies from agriculture, transport and water infrastructure.
- These "harmful" subsidies cover all major sectors of the economy, but the bulk of them are in agriculture. Who are…
- It is about unsustainable agricultural practices, changes in the way of sustainable use, fragmentation of rivers, degradation of forests, which lead to loss of natural habitats, loss of species and degradation of ecosystems. Assessments by the European Audit Office on agriculture show that the previous Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) (2014 – 2020) did not meet its climate and environmental targets, emissions from agriculture have not decreased, biodiversity on agricultural land continues to is declining, and CAP subsidies encourage greater water use rather than more efficient use.
- Research shows that up to 60% of EU Common Agricultural Policy (CAP) funding of €32.1 billion per year is spent by EU countries on activities that promote large-scale unsustainable agriculture… What is it about?
- In particular, the report examines direct support in the form of an area payment – it encourages the increase of intensive animal husbandry or the expansion of crop production under conventional agriculture, which can harm the environment by:
- increase in greenhouse gas emissions;
- deterioration of air quality;
- contributing to unsustainable use of natural resources, (e.g. water use, increasing the land area needed to grow crops used as feed for cattle);
- pollution of land and water bodies (e.g. by excessive application of nitrogen and phosphorus and by pesticides);
- adverse impact on biodiversity (through the decline of natural habitats and their fragmentation and pollution)
- How are natural habitats destroyed?
- The examples of damage from other countries in the report show the following - in Italy, where 80% of subsidies go to 20% of farmers and stimulate too intensive animal husbandry; In Romania, in the Danube Delta, which is a UNESCO Biosphere Reserve, large areas of the valuable ecosystem have been converted into agricultural land, area payment schemes only encourage large farmers and intensive agriculture, but not sustainable development, other subsidies encourage the conversion of parts of the wetland to agricultural land. In Bulgaria, with funds from the measure “Pastoralism“ in Bulgaria's three national parks, heavy cattle breeds trample sub-alpine grasslands, trample water sources and pollute glacial lakes.
- The report includes examples of harmful subsidies from agriculture, transport and water infrastructure from a number of countries, including Bulgaria. What is happening in our country?
- The example from Bulgaria is the application of the measure for seasonal grazing, or pastoralism, which was applied in our national parks until now. Improper design of the measure in addition to the lack of control has harmful consequences for our most precious nature. The assessment by the conservation and scientific community, as well as national park experts, of the impacts of subsidized grazing on nature in national parks is as follows: it leads to increased eutrophication (pollution with organic matter) of lakes due to the influx of biogenic elements, erosion and destruction of coasts and reducing the transparency of waters, freely grazing animals enter territories prohibited for grazing - reserves, forest territories, etc., impoverishment of the grass composition, mechanical damage, trampling, systematic pollution of drinking water sources, disturbance of wild animals, etc. Conflict with wild animals - the shepherds themselves, in conversation with tourists, brag about the wolves and bears they shot.
Subsidized grazing creates a perverse incentive to board large numbers of domestic animals in parks.
Lacks capacity to control animal movement. Park rangers are few, have enough duties, but even if the parks were well staffed, their job is not to become shepherds. There are plenty of grazing areas in Bulgaria, the forest cover in the country is growing precisely because of the lack of grazing. The development of agriculture does not need to come at the expense of our most precious nature. Pastoralism originally had ecological motives, but in reality distortions have occurred: grazing cows only in the NP “Rila” have increased from 661 in 2007 to 8338 in 2022. It is important to note that grazing in national parks is permitted by law, the problem is created by subsidized grazing.
- The study pays special attention to subsidized grazing of cattle in national parks under the “pastoralism“ measure. What is this?
- Part of the Strategic Plan for Agriculture, the pastoralism measure initially aims to protect open areas in the high mountains by grazing sheep and traditional cattle breeds. However, the inclusion of heavy livestock, combined with the challenges of control in remote areas, created a bigger problem rather than solving it.
National park directorates and experts have extensively documented the adverse effects of heavy livestock on these delicate ecosystems. Evidence includes lake pollution, erosion, damage to water sources, and decline in plant species. In order to mitigate the harmful effects of the increased number of cattle, under the program “Environment“ activities for 1.5 million euros have been approved.