Status of turtle doves and hunters

Richard Cachia Zammit (May 9) admits that the global status of the turtle dove is authoritatively placed in the category of Least Concern, denoting a widespread and abundant population.

He also admits that "global" includes North Africa and Central Asia. That is exactly our position. The Maltese Islands are geographically at altitude of 35.54'0" N, and Cape Bon in Tunisia is at a latitude of 36.45'0" N.

This means that Malta is further down south than the coast of North Africa.

Without the slightest doubt this puts Malta, in ornithological terms, and consequently for the purposes of hunting, firmly within the North African orbit. No amount of fact twisting by BirdLife Malta is ever going to change that.

Additionally, Mr Cachia Zammit should note that the turtle dove Management Plan 2007 - 2009 of the European Commission (DG ENV B2) itself asserts that "the turtle-dove is still a widespread and fairly common species in Southern Europe". It is in Northern Europe that the species is in decline.

In Britain where the turtle dove is protected, a 2005 study by the Game Conservancy Trust found the cause to be the destruction of suitable nesting habitat and reduced food availability. By contrast, in France where the turtle-dove is heavily shot and there are 1,350,000 hunters (the largest number in the EU), the turtle-dove population is healthy and increasing.

One other crucial point is that the turtle dove has a vast range, with an estimated Extent of Occurrence in Europe alone of 1,000,000 - 4,500,000 square kilometers, and globally 10,000,000 sq. km. As far as the turtle-dove is concerned, Malta with its 315 sq. km. is just an insignificant speck on the map. One need not be a genius to understand that the decline or abundance of turtle-doves in Europe is entirely unconnected with Maltese hunting.

On the matter of spring-hunting it is, therefore, not a case of Maltese hunters ignoring the facts or interpreting them as suits them best, as Mr Cachia Zammit writes.

It is only a matter of an EU trying to impress other member states by bullying tiny Malta, as stated in less undiplomatic language by Commissioner Stavros Dimas. If all the true facts and figures were to be taken into account without being manipulated, Malta should win the ECJ case hands down. Unfortunately, however, Malta has become an EU pawn in a game in which logic is replaced by the bible of the birds directive, at the expense of justice.