The Nîmes Criminal Court examined the high-profile case surrounding the destruction of 520 flamingo eggs during the filming of Nicolas Vanier's movie 'Donne-moi des ailes' on March 7, 2025. The production company, Radar Films, stands accused of severely impacting the conservation of this protected species after microlights used for filming spiraled panic within the nesting colony of flamingos located in the Natura 2000 area of Salins du Midi.
This distressing incident occurred on June 6 and 7, 2018, when two microlights reportedly flew dangerously low over approximately 8,000 flamingos, causing widespread abandonment and destruction of many eggs. France Nature Environnement (FNE), which filed the complaint, stated this represented nearly 11.5% of the species’ annual reproduction rate within France.
The prosecutor, addressing the court, emphasized the gravity of the offense, asserting, "The materiality of the offense is established." Fines ranging from 80,000 to 100,000 euros have been requested against Radar Films, as the court seeks to impose accountability for what many view as gross negligence concerning environmental sensitivities.
Although filming had been authorized, the prosecutor highlighted severe lapses within the production’s organization and planning. The court was informed by various experts about the heightened risks associated with filming during the sensitive breeding season. "You showed negligence. A simple awareness meeting would have sufficed," argued Olivier Gourbinot, the legal representative of FNE, underscoring what many see as avoidable chaos brought on by the production's actions.
Matthieu Warter, the chief of Radar Films, defended his company by placing the blame on one of the microlight pilots, who he argued acted independently and too close to the birds. "The pilot did not question whether he was authorized to do this," he claimed. This defense, unfortunately, did not seem to alleviate many concerns raised by environmental advocates about potential environmental exploitation for cinematic gains.
The civil parties involved, including ASPAS and seven other non-governmental organizations (NGOs), have joined forces to claim over 600,000 euros to cover damages pertaining to both moral and environmental harm, illustrating how serious the consequences of this unfortunate incident have been.
The defining trial revealed tensions between artistic expression and environmental responsibility, especially since this film ostensibly promoted nature conservation. "There is a total gap between the film’s message and production methods," stated Isabelle Vergnoux, representing ASPAS, driving home the point about the apparent hypocrisy of the situation.
The court has postponed its final decision until April 11, 2025. This pending verdict will not only determine the fate of Radar Films but will also have far-reaching repercussions for the film industry, potentially altering how productions engage with environmental regulations and concerns going forward.
The culmination of this case raises significant questions about the appropriateness of filming practices during sensitive ecological periods and serves as a wake-up call for filmmakers to examine the ethical dimensions of their work. The resulting litigation is emblematic of the challenges the intersection of art and environmental stewardship continues to encounter.