Skip to content
parteiprogramm

AfD on the environment and animal welfare

From the program “State Election Program of the Lower Saxony State Chapter of the Alternative for Germany”

2022 Lower Saxony state election, October 9, 2022Original PDF, 84 pagesAnalyzed on October 2, 2026

AIThe summaries and placements on this page were written by AI. No person reviews each one. How they are made

Placement on Environment and animal welfare

Average of the points on this page. The placement is made by AI.

Each axis measures one topic. There is no single "left" or "right" for everything here: economy, society, migration and security are kept apart. Only what the program says is placed. How to read the placement

  • Economyleaning more market (+1), from 1 point

    Points per step: 0 clearly more state, 0 leaning more state, 0 balanced, 1 leaning more market, 0 clearly more market

  • Societyleaning conservative (+1), from 1 point

    Points per step: 0 clearly progressive, 0 leaning progressive, 0 balanced, 1 leaning conservative, 0 clearly conservative

The small columns under the bars show how many points sit on each of the five steps.

Set a cap on the number of wolves

The AfD wants Germany to set a maximum number of wolves, as France and Sweden have done. It justifies this with attacks on grazing animals that it says threaten farmers' livelihoods.

The AfD wants only a fixed number of wolves in Germany. Wolves kill sheep and other animals in the fields. The AfD says many animal farmers lose their income because of this.

The platform points to France, with a limit of 500 wolves, and Sweden, with 350. It says hundreds of livestock farmers in Lower Saxony are at risk and that the first large sheep farms have already closed. According to the AfD, compensation payments fall far short of covering the damage.

Show the original quote (page 36)
„Frankreich und Schweden haben dem Rechnung getragen und eine Höchstzahl für Wölfe festgelegt. (Frankreich 500, Schweden 350). Es wird Zeit, dass Deutschland diesem Beispiel folgt“

Translation: France and Sweden have taken this into account and set a maximum number of wolves. (France 500, Sweden 350). It is time for Germany to follow this example

Page 36 in the original

Placement

This point touches none of the axes.

Shorten animal transports, ban slaughter without stunning

The AfD wants to rebuild smaller, regional slaughterhouses so that animals travel shorter distances. Slaughter without stunning should not be allowed, even for religious reasons. Permits for modern barns should be easier to get.

The AfD wants more small slaughterhouses close to farms. Then animals do not have to travel so far. Animals should always be stunned before slaughter. This should also apply to religious slaughter. Farmers should be able to build new barns more easily.

The platform rejects long transports as well as large industrial slaughterhouses that require animals to be brought in over great distances. Animal protection should apply from birth to slaughter, and the AfD says it can only be achieved with modern barns. Permits for conversions and new buildings should be streamlined. New barns should be allowed to operate for their full service life without retrofitting, even if the rules change. Actions by organizations and associations against livestock farmers, which the AfD calls criminal, should be investigated by prosecutors at once.

Show the original quote (page 37)
„Wir fordern den Wiederaufbau dezentraler, mittelständischer Schlachthöfe, weil dies dabei hilft, Tiertransporte kurz zu halten.“

Translation: We call for rebuilding decentralized, mid-sized slaughterhouses, because this helps keep animal transports short.

Page 37 in the original

Placement

  • Societyleaning conservative

    The exception that today allows religious slaughter without stunning would end, which restricts religious practices of minorities.

No new protected areas

The AfD wants to keep protecting existing natural areas and landscapes but not designate new protected areas or enlarge national parks. It sees these as a creeping expropriation of owners.

The AfD wants to keep protecting nature in Lower Saxony. But there should be no new protected areas. National parks should not get bigger either. The AfD says owners would otherwise slowly lose control of their land.

The rejection covers further areas under European nature protection law as well as larger national parks. The AfD also rejects marine protected zones if they threaten mid-sized fishing businesses; environmental rules should not be read more strictly in Germany than elsewhere in Europe. In forestry, forest owners and foresters alone should decide which tree species to plant, and the party rejects one-sided support for planting beech. It does not want hunting law tightened further.

Show the original quote (page 37)
„Die Ausweisung weiterer Schutzgebiete, FF91H-Gebiete, NATURA 2000Gebiete sowie Nationalparkausweitungen lehnen wir ab“

Translation: We reject the designation of further protected areas, FF91H areas, NATURA 2000 areas and the expansion of national parks

Page 37 in the original

Placement

  • Economyleaning more market

    New protection rules for land are rejected with reference to property rights, which means less regulation.

What do the other parties say on the environment and animal welfare?

All programs in Lower Saxony compared