Enabling management hunting of large carnivores

Key points of the debate

The debate centred on the reinstatement of population management hunting of large carnivores and its effects on biodiversity and human safety. The government parties and part of the opposition considered the legislative amendment necessary to safeguard safety in rural areas, livelihoods and hunting culture. Part of the opposition, on the other hand, opposed the proposal as contrary to the EU Habitats Directive and species protection, or criticised it as legally inadequate.

• –Will the derogation practice under the act hold up in court and against the requirements of the EU directive?
• –Should the reference values for conservation status be defined directly in the act rather than by decree?
• –Does opening up population management hunting threaten the conservation status of endangered large carnivores?

• National Coalition PartyIn favour

  The group considers the legislative amendment a necessary and long-awaited way to resolve safety and livelihood problems caused by grown predator populations.

  ”Tämä metsästyslain 41 §:n muutos on kauan odotettu esitys, ja sitä on valmisteltu ministeriön ja ministerin johdolla huolellisesti.”

• Finns PartyIn favour

  The group strongly supports the proposal to improve safety, prevent damage to domestic animals and revive hunting culture.

  ”Me kaikki tiedetään, että tilanne on päässyt aivan liian pitkälle. Meillä on koulukyytejä sen vuoksi, että sudet liikkuvat lasten koulutiellä. Meillä on elinkeinoja uhattuna.”

• Swedish People's PartyIn favour

  The group supports the act as a step in the right direction to ease the situation of rural residents, entrepreneurs and hunters.

  ”Arvoisa puhemies! Hallituksen esitys tässä muodossa on askel oikeaan suuntaan.”

• Christian DemocratsIn favour

  The group supports the proposal because large carnivore policy must take social carrying capacity into account and enable population management hunting.

  ”Esitettävät metsästyslain muutokset ovat osa toimia kohti tasapainoisempaa suurpetopolitiikkaa, jossa kannanhoidollinen metsästys on mahdollista.”

• Social DemocratsIn favour

  The group advocates enabling population management hunting for the sake of human safety and resolving local problems.

  ”Kannatan hallituksen esitystä metsästyslain muuttamiseksi.”

• Centre PartyIn favour with reservations

  The group supports population management hunting but considers the government proposal inadequate and fears it will fall in court without reference values laid down by law.

  ”Kiitoksia hallitukselle oikeansuuntaisista esityksistä, mutta tosiasiahan on, että ne ovat aivan riittämättömät.”

• GreensAgainst

  The group opposes the proposal because it considers facilitating large carnivore hunting to be contrary to nature conservation and the EU Habitats Directive.

  ”Tämä esitys on luonnonsuojelun kannalta ongelmallinen ja EU:n luontodirektiivin vastainen.”

• Left AllianceAgainst

  The group opposes the bill because it ignores the protection of biodiversity and is unsustainable under EU law.

  ”Vasemmistoliitto ei voi kannattaa esitystä metsästyslain 41 §:n muuttamisesta.”

• Timo Vornanen's groupIn favour

  The group supports the proposal and considers restoring population management hunting necessary to safeguard the countryside and livelihoods.

  ”Sudet ja suurpedot eivät kuulu kotipihoihin, eivätkä ne kuulu lammasaitauksiin, se on aivan selvä asia.”

This digest was generated by AI from 124 speeches 13 Sep 2026. Group positions are read from the speeches, not from votes; quotations were checked verbatim against the record. The longest speeches were shortened in the digest's source material.