
The Dutch farmers reaching for their guns after EU backed down on wolf crisis
Wolves were driven out of the Netherlands in the late 19th century, but after the feared predators were deemed untouchable under a 'strict protection' order issued by the EU in 2015, they have returned.
Now, wolves are ravaging livestock across the country's farms every day, leaving meadows peppered with mutilated carcasses.
A sharp rise in attacks on livestock and pets – including on Ursula von der Leyen's own beloved pony – convinced the EU to downgrade the protection order in December, placing the onus on member states to devise their own responses to wolves from March onwards.
The decision has left rival groups jostling for the ear of Dutch politicians: farmers, who are in favour of culling, and animal rights groups, who fear an open season on the animals.
Officials have as of yet provided no clear direction on how to handle the nine packs of wolves roaming the Netherlands.
Eduard van Adrichem, a wizened hunter sporting a cowboy hat and an unkempt grey beard, sees culling the increasingly emboldened wolf as a solemn duty to his neighbours.
'It's not the wolf's fault, he is an opportunist. It's nature, I don't blame him for that, but I will shoot him for that,' the 67-year-old said, his gnarled hands gripping a rifle with familiarity.
'I would kill them all. It's my obligation to save Holland from a disaster.'
On the farms of Gelderland, Utrecht and Drenthe, WhatsApp groups deliver news of sightings and savage attacks.
'I will quit breeding sheep'
Boudewijn Kooijman, from Limburg, orchestrates the Green Wolf warning system, sending on a flurry of reports from farmers complete with gory photographic evidence.
'You never get used to it. I take it home. I can't sleep,' the 65-year-old says after arriving at the scene of a grisly overnight attack on a fellow farmer's flock in Emst.
Once the proud owner of 1,500 Maasduinenschaap (a breed of sheep), which his family has farmed since the 1800s, Mr Kooijman has seen his numbers dwindle to around 500.
'It is my life, but I can't do it anymore. For me it is clear that I will quit breeding sheep,' he said in front of a tractor loader bearing five caracasses, a lamb visible amidst the entrails hanging from a mother's torn belly.
The marauding wolf, Mr Kooijman explained, ravages sheep – ripping the throat and bowels – but rarely eating its prey, leaving behind a gruesome and often half-dead surplus.
Tanja Witman, with anguish sketched into her face, said there have been four attacks on her farm in two years, resulting in the deaths of more than 50 sheep.
'The fences don't work, the wolves jump over. We need to start shooting,' her husband Erik said. 'If it continues like this, it will not be possible to keep sheep in this area.'
Further north in Drenthe, Jos Ubels, a 38-year-old cattle farmer, dismissed the anti-wolf fences subsidised by the government as a waste of time and money.
'You do it because otherwise they say you are not trying but we know it does not work,' he said.
Such fences threaten to eradicate an age-old symbiotic relationship whereby farmers lend sheep to their fellow dairy farmers, rotating through fields for three days at a time to improve the quality of next season's grass.
'They are destroying the system, they don't understand,' Mr Ubels added.
He explained that the choice between leaving sheep vulnerable and taking on back-breaking labour to install and maintain fences, for which the government does not offer compensation, renders the tradition untenable.
Farmers have also warned the more fencing is laid down, the harder it is for wildlife such as deer and boar to migrate across the Netherlands.
Mr Ubels, no stranger to activism as vice president of the Farmers Defence Force, said he was amongst the first to sound the alarm over wolf attacks after 14 of his calves went missing.
'We found a carcass. It was shocking. There was only the spine and a severed head,' he said, adding that the authorities initially refused to send a team to collect DNA samples, claiming that a wolf would never attack cattle.
An organisation known as Bij12 must obtain DNA matching a wolf on the government's database for the farmer to be paid compensation – an amount which farmers feel does not go far enough.
Mr Ubels responded by vowing to deliver the mutilated remains of a heifer through the local authorities' window. After alerting local media, who then phoned the province to ask what was happening, investigators confirmed wolves were responsible.
The cattle farmer fears similarities in the response that wolves will never attack humans.
On Friday, two ponies were found dead, dismembered and uneaten in Hierden, Gelderland, posing further concern over wolves' broadening appetite.
'My children are scared,' Mr Ubels said, adding that, given the opportunity, as a licensed hunter he would not think twice before reaching for his gun.
Last summer, the province of Utrecht was rocked by two cases of children being bitten and knocked over by wolves, which prompted the local authorities to issue urgent advice for children to stay out of the forests.
'It is a question of time before a wolf attacks a child. Little Red Riding Hood will no longer be just a fairy tale,' warned Caroline van der Plas, leader of the farmers' party BoerBurgerBeweging (BBB).
It is a fear shared by Mr van Adrichem, who said wolves prey on easy targets.
'He will learn [that] after sheep that there are children and men, he will learn that,' the hunter warned.
Mr van Adrichem, his shoulders resting on the fur pelt of a black bear he shot with a Winchester lever-action rifle in Canada, does not see himself as above nature, but rather as part of it.
'I adore the wolf, I cannot hate him. I would not even hate him if he took one of my dogs. But I would kill him,' the hunter said. 'I worship the wolf, but Holland is too small for him.'
Fed-up farmers have held demonstrations in Emmen, Ede and Arnhem this month, the latter featuring mock wolf hangings.
'Dividing the population'
Vets have also vented their frustrations at being tasked with euthanising swathes of maimed animals.
'This is not why I became a vet. It is a tragedy. [The wolves] simply have to be shot,' Hans Veenstra, a vet from Wolvega, Friesland, told Dutch outlet AD.
The disparity in attitudes towards wolves has fuelled a widening rift between rural and urban areas.
Eric Kemperman, who represents the BBB in both the national parliament as a senator and the Gelderland local government, has long advocated for shooting wolves that attack livestock.
'People in the cities don't know how serious it is, it is dividing the population,' he told The Telegraph. 'It's getting out of hand, every day there are attacks'.
A hunter himself, Mr Kemperman said his party was 'waiting' for the right case in Gelderland to call on the mayor to enact local legislation which would permit the wolf to be shot.
'We will end up in court immediately, that is how it works here, but we want to challenge it,' he said.
In July 2023, the mayor for Westerwald authorised the killing of a wolf which had bitten a farmer near Wapse in Drenthe – an action which could otherwise result in a prison sentence or a fine.
Faunabescherming, an animal protection group, brought a lawsuit soon after the wolf was shot.
Earlier this month, a court sided with Faunabescherming over the provincial authorities of Gelderland, which had issued a permit allowing rangers to deter wolves with paintball guns.
Wolves neared extinction in the mid-20th century in Europe but recovered after being granted strict protection status by the Berne Convention in 1982 and the EU Habitats Directive in 1992.
Dr Joanna Swabe, senior director of public affairs at Humane Society International/Europe (HSI) fears the decision could mark a watershed moment for animals without natural predators.
'The EU decision-making on lowering legal protections for wolves sets a dangerous precedent for other European species, such as bears and lynx,' she said.
Léa Badoz, a wildlife programme officer at Eurogroup for Animals, believes the wolf has been unfairly tainted as a bogeyman.
'The wolf is unfortunately the latest political pawn, a victim of misinformation,' she said.
'[The downgrading] is based on misconceptions and threatens wolves, while failing to provide real support for farmers and local communities, many of whom are in favour of coexistence with the wolf.'
There have been no verified fatal attacks on humans in the last 40 years.
Jakob Leidekker, head of operations at De Hoge Veluwe National Park, believes the anger of animal rights groups is misguided, citing the loss of wildlife at the hands of the wolf.
'For the profit of one species, do we need to lose other species? Our main concern is maintaining biodiversity,' Mr Leidekker said, explaining that the introduction of wolves into the national park in 2021 decimated the grazing mouflon population.
The mouflon are an integral rung of the food chain, keeping the spread of Scots Pine at bay and propping up the poor-quality soil, without which Mr Leidekker predicts all his heathlands would disappear within 20 years.
Mr Leidekker added that wolves were becoming braver with every human interaction. Of the two children attacked last year, he noted: 'This is just the beginning.'

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


The Guardian
8 hours ago
- The Guardian
Fifa facing multibillion-pound compensation claim from players
Fifa is facing a multibillion-pound claim for compensation from a group of current and former players after last year's ruling by the European court of justice (CJEU) that its transfer rules are unlawful. The Justice for Players foundation, a Dutch group that has the former England assistant manager Franco Baldini on its board, has served notice of its intention to file a class action against Fifa and the football associations of France, Germany, the Netherlands, Belgium and Denmark. Justice for Players is seeking compensation on behalf of players who have lost income because of Fifa's transfer rules since 2002. It says the legal case will involve about 100,000 players. The claim will be filed in the district court of Midden Nederland, with the Netherlands chosen as the jurisdiction because Dutch law permits claims from anyone who has worked within the European Union and the United Kingdom. The Football Association is understood to have been sent a copy of the letter before action. Although not named as a defendant, it could be added later. Fifa and the five domestic FAs have been given until September to respond. The compensation claim is the result of the CJEU judgment last October in the case brought by former Chelsea and France midfielder Lassana Diarra, who sued Fifa after the world governing body refused to issue him with an international transfer certificate (ITC) to join the Belgian club Charleroi in 2016 after he was found to have breached his contract with Lokomotiv Moscow two years earlier. Fifa fined Diarra €10.5m and suspended him from football for 15 months for breaching his contract, in a ruling upheld on appeal at the court of arbitration for sport. After blocking his registration at Charleroi, Fifa was then hit with a counterclaim from Diarra, with the CJEU ruling that its transfer regulations were unlawful. Sign up to Football Daily Kick off your evenings with the Guardian's take on the world of football after newsletter promotion The CJEU found that the Fifa regulations on the status and transfer of players infringed EU competition law and the right to free movement of workers. Fifa has amended its transfer regulations, although the new rules have not been accepted by the international players' union, Fifpro. The Justice for Players foundation is understood to have been set up this year with the intention of bringing a mass legal action. Diarra's lawyer, Jean-Louis Dupont, who won the landmark case at the CJEU on behalf of Jean-Marc Bosman that established the principle of free movement for players out of contract, in 1995, is advising Justice for Players. The legal letter sent to Fifa makes reference to the class action being a multibillion claim. This figure is understood to be based on independent analysis from economists at Compass Lexecon, who have estimated that players would have earned about 8% more over their careers since 2002 had Fifa's transfer regulations not been unlawfully restrictive. The CJEU judgment ruled that Fifa's regulations restricted free movement by establishing unlawful criteria for determining compensation to be paid by a player who breaks their contract, allowing the national federation of the former club to withhold a player's ITC, making the player's new club liable for the compensation to be paid to the former club and allowing Fifa to impose disciplinary sanctions on the player and their new club. Fifa has been contacted for comment.


The Sun
8 hours ago
- The Sun
While Trump showed the world how to handle Brussels, Starmer waves the white flag on Brexit
PM's Brexit exit DONALD Trump showed the world how to force a deal with the EU. Terrify them with threats of the loss of billions in lost trade and tens of thousands of jobs … and watch Brussels beg for business. 1 Sadly, Sir Keir Starmer took the opposite approach with his sellout 'reset' deal. Now jubilant European leaders are bent on bullying the UK into accepting their tyranny all over again thanks to its terms. A total reversal of Brexit is closer than ever. The PM has repeatedly promised never to take the UK back into the EU's Customs Union and Single Market. Yet that is effectively what the EU Commission demands as the price of its agreement. Britain must take all EU regulations on food without any say in those rules — and pay penalties for not doing so. We couldn't even import food from outside the EU without its meddling. Technically, there is still time during last-minute negotiations for our dyed-in-the-wool Remainer PM to stop this gross betrayal of Brexit. But on current form he seems vanishingly unlikely to do so. Keir Starmer- hopes for reset with EU do not mean 'reversing Brexit' Boiling over VOTER rage at the immigration explosion is close to boiling point. And even the OBR says public services are seriously stretched because of Britain's over-reliance on migration. Yet tin-eared Labour ministers still lecture protesters outside asylum hotels by telling them 'anger doesn't get you anywhere'. They don't get that Nigel Farage's current success comes from speaking real people's language. Similarly, useless cops appear to have learned nothing from the handling of the identity of the Southport killer. — as Warwickshire police did in the case of an Afghan accused of raping a 12-year-old girl — are an affront to justice. The immigration status and nationality of all offenders should be published for each crime. It's the only way to restore trust. Cell out WHY is the Left's answer to prison overcrowding always to release prisoners or cut sentences? Ex-Chief Inspector of Prisons and human rights activist Dame Anne Owers says a near meltdown in the system means even mandatory life sentences for murder should be scrapped. How about, instead of letting thousands of dangerous criminals back on to the streets, Labour does what the Tories so abjectly failed to do.


The Sun
9 hours ago
- The Sun
Was it Starmer's plan all along to make us so subservient to the EU that we'd be better off back in?
WERE we fooled too easily by Sir Keir Starmer's assurances that he had no intention of taking Britain back into the EU? With the publication of the EU's draft documents for the 'reset' in relations between Britain and the bloc, it is tempting to wonder whether there has been a scheme in the PM's mind all along: to make Britain so subservient to the EU that eventually a return to full membership becomes a less-worse option. 3 3 As announced by Starmer and EU Commission President Ursula von der Leyen at their summit in London in May, a new 'common sanitary and phyto-sanitary' area will be created. That should mean the end of checks on food imports and exports — as well as petty customs officers confiscating sandwiches from lorry drivers. Needless to say, it comes at a price. In order to escape the border checks, Britain will have to agree to full alignment with EU food standards. And it is becoming increasingly clear what this means in practice: Britain simply agreeing to enact EU standards. French farmers In contrast to when we were members of the EU, however, we will have little say in what those standards should be. We may be consulted, but it is the EU which will make the rules and Britain which is forced to accept them. It is obvious from past experience what is going to happen. EU legislators, heavily lobbied by French farmers and the like, will pass laws which are designed to discriminate against UK-made produce, in order to keep it out of EU markets. We will have no power to stop them. To take an example, Britain spent 27 years fighting the EU for the right to sell our chocolate bars across the Continent. Keir Starmer- hopes for reset with EU do not mean 'reversing Brexit' The EU, under pressure from French and Belgian manufacturers, wanted to impose a limit on the milk content and vegetable fat content of chocolate bars — which just happened to permit products made in France and Belgium but exclude those which were popular in Britain. In a typical piece of EU-style bureaucratic invention, officials tried to come up with a compromise: where UK-made bars would be labelled 'vegelate' — presumably to make them sound so unappetising that no one would want to buy them anyway. Britain eventually won that battle — in 2000, after nearly three decades of bruising political and legal battle. But in future? Britain will have no say. The European Commission will be able to pass a law banning British chocolate bars and there will be little we can do about it. British food manufacturers could, perhaps, appeal to the new 'independent arbitrary tribunal' which will be set up to judge trade disputes, but it won't really be worthy of the name 'independent'. As the EU draft documents make clear, the EU's Court of Justice will become 'the ultimate authority for all questions of EU law'. Needless to say, the EU wants Britain to pay for the privilege of joining its common sanitary area. We will also be under obligation to align our carbon levies with the EU, making it more difficult for a future UK government to escape the straitjacket of Net Zero. Both Britain and the EU are in the process of imposing carbon border taxes — levies on imports according to their embedded carbon emissions. Under the reset, Britain will be expected to align its own system with the EU's. It was exactly these kinds of arrangement which Theresa May and Boris Johnson's governments fought so hard to avoid — not very satisfactorily, it has to be said. We actually ended up with an arrangement which created an internal UK border between Britain and Northern Ireland. But the system which will come about as a result of Starmer's reset will be far worse. It will take us close to being the 'vassal state' that Jacob Rees-Mogg warned about — a vassal state being the name given to states in medieval Europe which were notionally independent but in practice were under the control of, and under obligation to pay taxes to, a much larger empire. No UK PM ever really tried to play the EU at its game — even though they ought to have been in the driving seat in negotiations At the moment, the reset will cover food, animal and plant products as well as a number of high-carbon materials such as steel and cement. Second referendum But this will almost certainly mark just a beginning. Under a Starmer government we will be sucked further and further into the EU's orbit until it becomes a mere tidying-up exercise to rejoin the bloc in full. Donald Trump has just shown what you can do if you negotiate hard with the EU — European Commission president Von der Leyen ended up agreeing to 15 per cent tariffs on EU exports to the US, as well as a commitment to buy more US oil and gas — all for very little in return. Yet no UK PM ever really tried to play the EU at its game — even though they ought to have been in the driving seat in negotiations with the EU because they sell more to us than we sell to them. While Conservatives were trying and failing to get a good deal, Starmer, you might remember, was campaigning for a second Brexit referendum in which — he hoped — Britons would vote to reverse the result of the first. He didn't get his way on that, of course. But that doesn't mean he has given up on trying to reinstate Britain in the EU. To judge by his actions, that may very well be his undeclared ambition.