Malta does have a case

The Federation for Hunting & Conservation - Malta (FKNK) refers to reports in the media on a bird migration report compiled by BirdLife (Malta) conservation manager Andrè Raine, which allegedly "challenges the government's claim that the number of turtle doves and quails killed over Malta is insignificant on an international level".

The Malta government has commissioned an independent scientific study by a reputable foreign institute to determine the extent of Maltese hunting of these two species. This institute has specialised on bird migration, by census, radar and bio-acoustics for more than 70 years, and has carried out various studies in the south of France and in countries situated within the Mediterranean basin.

BirdLife (Malta) has termed the government's study as "rubbish".

I would like to make the following observations:

The Raine report admits the very significant fact that it is based on "1,188 individuals, representing 120 species". However, since the government derogation on spring hunting concerns only two species, the pages concerning the remaining 118 species are of little or no relevance to the issue.

We are concerned here only with two species, namely the turtle dove (Streptopelia turtur) and the quail (Coturnix coturnix).

The turtle dove has a large range, with an estimated global extent of occurrence of up to 10 million square kilometres. It has a large global population and the calculated European population is estimated by BirdLife's own experts to be about 14 million birds. The same experts state: "The species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List. For these reasons the turtle dove is evaluated as Least Concern".

The quail also has a large range with an estimated global extent of occurrence of 10 million square kilometres. It also has a large global population. BirdLife International experts state that the estimated European population is about 9,400,000 individuals, adding that this species is not believed to approach the thresholds for the population decline criterion of the IUCN Red List. For these reasons, the quail is evaluated as Least Concern.

For the benefit of the readers, the meaning of Least Concern as quoted from the same IUCN Red List is "A Taxon is Least Concern when it has been evaluated against the criteria and does not qualify for critically endangered, endangered, vulnerable or near threatened. Widespread and abundant Taxa are included in this category".

This explanation states the exact opposite of what BirdLife would have us all believe, namely that the turtle dove and the quail are threatened species.

The IUCN is the International Union for Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (sponsored, among others, by the European Commission) whose data has been assessed and accepted by BirdLife International through evaluations by BirdLife International's own Red List authorities. The evaluators for the two species in question were J. Ekstrom and S. Butchart and the above information was downloaded from IUCN's website very recently.

However, considering even the exaggerated figures conjured up by BirdLife (Malta) in conjunction with the IUCN information stated above, there is no doubt that Maltese spring hunting of turtle doves and quails is well within the parameters of the EU Birds Directive.

Young Dr Raine, from Bermuda, is a newcomer to these islands, having arrived just this January, besides being relatively unknown within EU circles. Several ornithologists of repute, including Maltese ones, had made their observations in situ over many years. They all agree that the Maltese islands are not of any great ornithological importance, one of the reasons being that Malta's geographical position is far out and away from the central European-African migration flyway (Tunisia-Sicily. See also flyways map). To speak, as Dr Raine does in his report, of "the international importance of Malta on the European-African migratory flyway" is a gratuitous assertion not only unsupported by the facts but, more importantly, contradicted by the empirical observations of his predecessors (Moreau, Roberts, Kalchreuter, et al).

The Raine report is based on a claimed total of 1,188 recovered ringed birds from a total of 48 countries during the spring and autumn migrations. That means an average cross-section of 24 birds per country. Besides, they cover both spring and autumn migrations, not just spring. If one goes by BirdLife's argument that autumn is as good as spring, we are talking about 12 birds per country in spring. Taking this as an indicator, we thank Dr Raine for showing, albeit unwittingly, that the Maltese government was correct to claim that "the number of turtle doves and quails killed over Malta is insignificant on an international level".

We also thank Dr Raine for concluding that "the five most commonly recorded countries for birds killed in Malta are Finland, Sweden, Tunisia, Italy and Germany. Together, these five countries make up over half of all recoveries".

This is the proof we needed that the British RSPB (Royal Society for the Protection of Birds) petition signed early this year by over 115,000 people, from whom RSPB made £750,000, was based on fabrications. The Maltese Prime Minister was right in refusing to accept the petition.

About bird trapping, the Raine report states that "a total of 112 foreign-ringed finches from 19 countries were recorded from the BirdLife database. The five most common countries recorded from ring recoveries are the Czech Republic, Hungary, Italy, Slovenia, and Croatia". Analysis of this data shows an average cross-section of six birds per country. Again, Britain is excluded, and so is Belgium.

Once more, these findings give the lie this time not only to the RSPB petition but also to the petition by the Belgian Bird Protection Society to the Petitions Committee of the EU. It is also relevant to point out that the birds ringed in the Czech Republic, Hungary, Slovenia, and Croatia probably originated from Russia, and, as such, may not be "European" birds. More grist to the government's mill, as Russia does not have a Birds Directive the Maltese government needs to derogate from!

To say the least, we consider it entirely misleading to state that "The trapping of finches in Malta is effectively causing the local extinction of the Maltese breeding populations and impacting on migrating finch flocks from a range of countries throughout their European breeding range".

The stark truth is that Maltese breeding populations of finches do not exist and never did. Therefore, the trapping of migratory finches cannot cause the extinction of non-existent "breeding populations". If further proof were needed, we wish to point out what is obvious to us, but apparently not so obvious to Dr Raine and BirdLife (Malta), that although the trapping of songbirds was completely banned this spring, no songbirds remained here to breed.

The same happened in the years 1993 to 1996 when trapping of songbirds had been banned. In our view, the "invention" of so-called Maltese breeding populations of finches is enough to condemn the Raine report as totally unreliable.

According to the RSPB website, the killing of 55 million songbirds annually by domestic cats in Britain has little or no effect on the conservation status of these birds. We, therefore, consider it ridiculous for BirdLife (Malta) to argue that the few thousands trapped in Malta have an impact on the European songbird populations.

We have proved that the "data" presented by BirdLife (Malta) can actually be used to show that the Maltese government's arguments in favour of a derogation for spring hunting are hugely valid. Our conclusion is that the government was correct to exercise its right to apply the derogation. Moreover, we contend that, provided it has the political will to do so, it can build a very strong case that should stand the test at the European Court of Justice. In this respect the government has our complete support.

Mr Farrugia is FKNK secretary.