The Administrative Court decided the matter by vote. When making the decision, the level of protection of the bear population came up, which according to administrative law is favorable. Finnish hunting traditions also came to the fore.
The exception permit for 18 bears granted by the Finnish Game Agency to Kuhmo was in accordance with the law, states the Administrative Court of Northern Finland in its decision.
The administrative court put the bear permits on hold in August, just before the start of bear hunting, when the Nature Conservation Association Tapiola Pohjois-Savo-Kainuu ry and the Finnish Nature Conservation Association Kainuu piiri ry complained about the permit.
The Administrative Court considered the decision to be in accordance with the Hunting Act even after taking into account the interpretation effect of the Habitats Directive.
The decision states that the bear is one of the strictly protected species under the Habitats Directive. Strict protection can only be deviated from on the grounds set out in the Habitats Directive and the Hunting Act. According to the Game Center’s decision, the purpose of the exception permit was to manage the bear population in accordance with the principle of sustainable use while preserving the Finnish bear hunting culture and taking possession of the catch.
When assessing the legality of the Game Center’s decision, the Administrative Court drew attention, first of all, to the fact that the level of protection of the bear is favorable. The Administrative Court considered that, as the bear population increases, it is justified to pay attention to the prevention of harm caused by bears.
In the justifications, it is said that the bear is a valued and important game animal in Finland, and that bear hunting has a long tradition in Finland. According to the administrative court, it was credibly presented in the exemption application that bear hunting is also of regional economic importance.
According to Metsähallitus, the regional economic effects of bear hunting in Kainuu in 2021 were almost 500,000 euros.
The administrative court’s decision came after a vote (2-1-1). The two members who were in the minority in the administrative court considered, on different grounds, that the game center should have rejected the exception permit application as it violated the hunting law.
Timo Klemetti estimates that the decision will have a positive effect on the permits applied for next year. Klemetti thinks that he is no longer applying for a permit himself.
*What thoughts did the decision evoke? The subject can be discussed until 23:00 on December 2.*