Wind turbines are a cleaner alternative to non-renewable energy, such as fossil fuels, and therefore help to decrease deleterious climate change.[1] Species protection is needed to preserve biodiversity, which is important to all species.[2] It is claimed, how­ever, that between these interests there is a contradiction. Climate change kills birds, but so do wind turbines. According to some, the expansion of wind power is at risk, being hindered by the rules on protected birds, incorrectly interpreted in art­skyddsförordningen[3], the Swedish counterpart to international species conventions and the EU Birds directive[4].[5] The Birds directive and artskyddsförordningen prohibits activi­ties that deliberately kill, capture or disturb migratory birds in the EU (art. 5 Birds directive and 4 § artskyddsförordningen). Mark- och miljööverdomstolen has for some years made the assessment that the establishment and operation of wind turbines may be prohibited by reason of the protection of species, even though the purpose of wind power is to produce electricity and not to kill birds.[6] Due to the legal uncertainty, this essay seeks to find out whether wind energy can fall within art­skyddsförordningens prohibitions and if so, when. This is done through a legal dog­matic method, complemented with a comparative section. The legal situation is not clear, but after a thorough examination of the origin of the Birds directive, previous case law, new disputed ruling by Mark- och miljööver­domstolen, Danish and German case law, ECJ rulings and guidance documents from the European Commission, in total it seems that an inappropriate placement of wind farms or plants can and sometimes should be seen as a deliberate act in respect of the Birds directive and consequently artskyddsförordningen. That is, unless it is possible to under­take precautionary measures, which neutralizes the act. It also appears that art­skyddsförordningen still is to be applied within chapter 2 miljöbalken[7], in the case of species protection. [1] SOU 1999:75, s. 29 f. [2] SOU 2004:37, s. 189. [3] Artskyddsförordningen (2007:845). [4] Directive 2009/147/EC of the European parliament and of the council of 30 November 2009 on the conservation of wild birds. [5] Mark- och miljööverdomstolen har klargjort att vindkraft inte innebär ett avsiktligt dödande eller störande enligt artskyddsförordningen – kommentar av Magnus Fröberg och Hedvig Ekdahl, 2015-01-23, JP Infonet. [6] Se exempelvis MÖD 2013:13. [7] Miljöbalken (1998:808).

Legal regulation of protection of wild bird species Abstract This thesis deals with legal regulation of protection of wild bird species at the international, European and Czech level. The aim of the thesis was to provide an overview of legal regulation of protection of wild bird species, and to evaluate whether this legal regulation is an effective means of achieving objectives which led to its adoption. The thesis consists of an introduction, three main parts and a conclusion. The first part of the thesis describes protection of birds in international law. In this part of the thesis there are first introduced international organizations important for protection of birds, in particular International Union for Conservation of Nature and BirdLife International, and then in the author's opinion the most relevant international conventions to protection of birds, namely the Ramsar Convention, the Bonn Convention, the Bern Convention and the Convention on Biological Diversity. The following second part of the thesis focuses on protection of birds in European law. In this part of the thesis legal regulation of protection of wild bird species in Directive 2009/147/EC (the Birds Directive) is described in detail including the related case law of Court of Justice of the European Union. The author pays attention...

Biodiversity is a concurrent part of the nature inheritance. The human’s activity (development of cities, industry, agriculture, transport infrastructure, pollution, etc) is influencing the nature’s disbalance. Natural areas of habitats are on the way to disappear or their status is getting worse. There is a need for special means to ensure the protection of many species of fauna and flora and their natural habitats, because they are in danger of disappearing. The network “Natura 2000” has few goals: to cover the fragile and valuable natural habitats and species of particular importance for the conservation of biological diversity within the territory of EU and to guarantee sustained efforts to protect the most important areas properly. The main objective of the “Natura 2000” network is to ensure the survival of species that are threatened or rare throughout Europe. These legal EU documents ensure the creation of the above-mentioned European network of protected territories in public territories as well as in private lands. Economic and farming activities are restricted in these areas as a way to protect natural habitats types, rare animals as well as are plants habitats. That way the interests of land owners become quite different from the nature protectionists and the prohibitions of land or forest property rights. It is quite difficult to evaluate the economical loss while establishing some new protected areas in public and private lands. The evaluation is specific for... [to full text]