Hunting and animal rights extremists

Strangely enough, Kenneth Cassar of Animal Rights (June 14) now asks "who are the extremists?" and requires proof. Anyone subscribing to so-called "animal rights" is an extremist, for the simple reason that the animal rights movement sets itself apart from all the animal welfare organisations and goes way beyond animal welfare. Practical examples of extremism are (i) Mr Cassar's view that Malta should close down its abattoir, and (ii) his assertion that hunters are murderers.

As to violence in Malta, the first stirrings were visible last Christmas. I refer to the unprovoked harassment that people, including children, were subjected to when visiting the circus that came over from Italy. Indeed, the Maltese government should enact legislation, as others have done, to curb the provocative behaviour of the animal rights activists. People and societies engaged in animal welfare deserve support, but animal rights with its consequential extremism and potential for violence does not!

Mr Cassar butts in on the issue of birds and hunting while both Andre Raine and Tolga Temuge of BirdLife Malta keep silent. To go by Mr Cassar's yardstick, birds are "non-human animals". In that case, I have already given him (letter of June 8) two examples, complete with quotes, of verbal violence in Malta in the cause of "animal rights".

Mr Cassar is a little perplexed about the definition of "verbal violence". Some other examples might help: (i) "Malta is one of the principal bottlenecks for birds migrating between Europe and Africa" as falsely stated in the resolution moved on March 13 2007 in the European Parliament; (ii) "Swallows are caught in nets" as falsely stated in the Tryanowski report used against Malta by the Petitions Committee of the EU, although discredited by several MEPs; (iii) "The massacre of blackcaps" as falsely depicted in the RSPB petition to the Maltese Prime Minister earlier this year. I could go on and on.

Mr Cassar at least is decent enough to admit that it is only "a minority" that is prepared to go to extremes for the hunting cause. I consider such people not to be hunters, but just persons who carry guns which they should never have been allowed to acquire in the first place.

There is no place for such extremists, and it is incumbent on the authorities to curb their excesses without fear or favour. Likewise, however, I contend that the verbal violence concocted in the media and elsewhere by some anti-hunting extremists should be exposed for what it is. It is unacceptable that this type of violence is tolerated and even tacitly assented to. The final insult is to enact legislation based on the statements of the bird fundamentalists that are unquestioningly accepted as gospel truth. This is what has been happening recently, and I understand that the Federation for Hunting and Conservation (FKNK) is instituting legal proceedings in this regard.