The article is written by Patryk Strzałkowski, a journalist specializing in environmental issues and foreign affairs, and the author of the series Fridays for Climate. He is a recipient of the Journalist for the Planet award, part of Radio ZET's Andrzej Woyciechowski Award in 2023.
Shock, anger, disappointment, embarrassment - these are the emotions expressed by conservationists and environmentalists after the recent decision by Donald Tusk's government. This isn't the first time. And with diminishing surprise, even though the new government's promises regarding environmental protection were entirely different.
This anger was sparked by the government's decision for Poland to support a vote to relax the protection of wolves, a proposal from the European Commission. Not long ago, Warsaw was among the countries abstaining from voting, and there wasn't a majority. However, now several countries, including Poland, have changed their position and supported the initiative to downgrade the wolf's status from strictly protected to simply protected. This formal change could open the door to increased hunting of these animals in EU countries and threaten broader nature conservation efforts.
Tusk's "No" to Nature
Journalist Adam Wajrak reported that the Prime Minister's office had pressured the Ministry of Climate and Environment on this issue. A similar situation occurred a few months ago when Poland did not support the landmark EU Nature Restoration Law. Back then, Paulina Hennig-Kloska's ministry had recommended voting in favor of the law, but the prime minister decided that Poland should vote against it. Ultimately, the law passed by a slim margin, thanks to Austria's minister voting against her coalition's wishes. However, Polish environmental organizations were deeply disappointed by the government's stance.
The decision to support relaxing wolf protection came at the same time Donald Tusk spoke about beavers contributing to flood risks. During a crisis management meeting, the Prime Minister mentioned the need for "quick changes regarding the presence of beavers on embankments." Experts, however, explained that beavers could help regulate water systems and that if their burrows in embankments are indeed a problem, solutions could be found without declaring war on beavers.
During Wednesday’s parliamentary debate on the flood, Tusk briefly mentioned that worsening weather patterns are a result of climate change. However, it was Climate Minister Paulina Hennig-Kloska who spoke more clearly and decisively, stating that "the climate crisis is visible to the naked eye." It's worth noting that various actions by the Ministry of Climate, from creating a transition strategy to specific laws (like those concerning wind farms), have been delayed. While this political responsibility rests with the minister from Poland 2050, Tusk himself doesn't seem to be prioritizing these issues either.
What Has the Prime Minister Understood?
This stance from Tusk is particularly disappointing, given his pre-election and post-election statements, which promised a different approach.
In 2022, Civic Platform organized an entire policy congress dedicated to climate and energy. In his speech, Tusk responded to an open letter from climate activists:
"We were wrong not to fully appreciate the importance of climate protection, of environmental protection. It took us some time to realize that the fight against climate catastrophe is not some romantic fantasy; it is a matter of security".
Later, in his post-election speech, Tusk didn’t say much about climate but passionately talked about forest protection: "Forests are not about timber management. Forests are sacred resources." Almost a year after the election victory, it's time to ask: Has the Prime Minister really understood how crucial nature conservation is - both for our well-being and safety? Or has he merely grasped what potential voters want to hear?
Tusk May Not Lose, But Poland Will
Tusk may not have learned much about the importance of environmental protection, but he is widely regarded as an exceptionally skilled politician. From a purely political standpoint, treating environmental issues as a low priority may not cost him much.
On the one hand, the majority of Poles declare that they want better protection for forests and animal species like wolves and are concerned about climate change. On the other hand, climate and environmental issues are rarely among the main reasons people vote for one party or another. Moreover, there’s little choice, as the current right-wing opposition has nothing better to offer on nature conservation or climate issues.
Thus, neglecting environmental protection may be politically cost-free for Tusk - viewed cynically. But in reality, it will cost all of us. Climate change is driving increasingly severe natural disasters, such as the September floods, and failing to address this threat seriously puts every one of us at real risk.
The same goes for environmental protection. A significant portion of the political class holds an outdated belief that nature is a concern for "dreamers" who "block progress" because they care more about European hamsters or fire-bellied toads. This mindset was evident in Tusk’s comments about beavers: "Sometimes, you have to choose between a love for animals and the safety of cities, villages, and the stability of embankments." This is a way of thinking from decades ago. Today we know—backed by evidence - that biodiversity and wild nature are allies in the fight against climate change and extreme weather, and preserving them isn't just about being a "dreamer" but about our well-being and security. Beavers create natural water retention in landscapes, which can help mitigate both droughts and floods.
Of course, this doesn't mean there is never a conflict between humans and animals like beavers. And yes, sometimes these conflicts are resolved to the detriment of animals, though not necessarily by killing them (for example, embankments can be protected from beavers with nets). The key is that such decisions should be based on expert knowledge, not what a politician happens to believe.
It’s Not Too Late
All of this paints a grim picture: after years of PiS rule, which largely ignored scientists and experts on environmental protection, instead of the long-awaited change, we are facing a series of disappointments.
The silver lining is that it's not too late for change. Poland faces numerous environmental challenges, and Tusk's government still has a chance to show that, first, they take these issues seriously, and second, they can base their policies on expert knowledge.
We have decisions ahead regarding the reform of State Forests, the creation of social forests and new national parks, and hunting reform (Deputy Minister Mikołaj Dorożała has announced the removal of certain birds from the list of game species), and energy transition. The wind turbine law has finally gone to consultation, as has the energy transition plan for 2030. The EU Nature Restoration Law adopted earlier awaits implementation into Polish law, as does the building directive. After the floods, better adaptation to climate change and nature-based solutions (and facts), rather than just building bigger reservoirs, will be necessary. Many of these issues won’t be easy - negotiations with various stakeholders, and the risks of passing too much of the cost of the transition onto citizens (ETS2), require careful preparation and efficient implementation.
Even if climate and environmental issues are not voters' top concerns, public awareness is steadily growing - and often outpaces politicians. If Tusk and his government do not begin to take these issues seriously and base their actions on scientific foundations, it could hurt not only nature and citizens but also the politicians themselves, who may find themselves out of touch with the changing times.
