Wednesday, 17th September 2008
Online hunting polls
Does the presence of foreigners to monitor bird hunting in Malta constitute foreign interference?
This is the question appearing in the timesofmalta.com poll. Assuming Maltese nationals are being asked to express their views about this matter, since by "foreigners" I assume one refers to anyone not being Maltese, please allow me to explain what we hunters consider as foreign interference and how this interference influences and affects people's opinion.
I am listing a number of websites that show how "foreign interference" manipulates not only the perception of hunting here in Malta but also The Times surveys that are meant to indicate the population's opinion about a particular topic. It is also to be noted that these surveys are used as official indicators of what the Maltese population think. They have been referred to by the EU and also by several foreign newspapers as being proof of the population's pulse. Having these polls manipulated in this manner renders them useless and of no scientific value. Their continuance make a mockery of The Times.
These sites - http://physis.pnw.fi/pipermail/ebn/2008-April/002520.html ; www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=76459 ; www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=106526 ; http://physis.pnw.fi/pipermail/ebn/2008-January/002374.html and www.kaizenlog.com/2008/04/25/times-of-malta-online-poll-on-spring-hunting - indicate how a survey about spring hunting earlier this year was circulated among all Birding societies worldwide in order to urge members to vote against hunting.
The poll, which for most of the day showed a result in favour of hunting, began to take on a different result as the "foreigners" started voting. The end result, as was to be expected, was a poll in favour of a spring hunting ban. Foreign interference at its best!
I am also quoting from one other similar site - http://physis.pnw.fi/pipermail/ebn/2008-January/002374.html - stating what David Conlin, from Proact, the life member of Birdlife Malta, the RSPB and CABS, co-ordinator for this year's Raptor Camps, had to say to all his disciples and followers. "There is a poll on The Times of Malta today regarding spring hunting; The question is 'Should the government fall in line with EU insistence not to open the spring hunting season?'
Please visit the link and vote Yes! ... it is currently on 79.4 per cent yes with 228 votes... David Conlin - Proact International".
We now have a poll asking whether the presence of foreigners to monitor bird hunting in Malta constitutes foreign interference. I leave it up to readers' intelligence to guess what the result will be.
Editor's note:
Online polls by The Times and timesofmalta.com are never promoted as being scientific. In addition, they are never "manipulated" by anybody at The Times or at timesofmalta.com.
RSS
Comments
I'm not playing around with words. "Confrontation skills" have nothing to do with violence. But if you want to persist in thinking so, suit yourself. As they say, you can bring a horse to water but you cannot make him drink.
You say that "When one asks a question, one is definitely not slandering anyone". That depends on the context in which the question is put.
As for attacking all hunters because of a few law-breakers, I never did so. What I "attack" about hunters is their killing of sentient animals. All hunters kill sentient animals. So no, I do not slander anyone.
On the otherhand, I do insist that hunters who do not break the law should not fear being watched by ornithologists.
You tell me that you will not disclose your reasons for choosing 1a. Therefore, you will excuse the rest of us that you just used that in the vain attempt to win an argument, or alternatively that your reason for choosing 1a is simply prejudice without any evidence at all.
Regarding not shutting up, suit yourself. Neither will I.
As an aside I wonder what the EU has done or intends to do about the situation in Bavaria. Hopefully they will take it as seriously as they have tackled Spring hunting here, although, to be honest, I doubt it
I agree with you that a proper enforcement unit should be able to control the situation. In that case CABS will obviously not be required. Even more so if the penalties contemplated by the law for serious offences (shooting raptors) are applied. Unfortunately, despite all their efforts and good intentions an understaffed and underequipped ALE can only do so much. Birdlife have long been calling for better enforcement.
Given that this is not forthcoming, I think that it is only logical that Birdlife gladly accept to work with volunteers to help fight illegal hunting and trapping.
As for my reasons for chosing 1a, sorry I will not disclose it to YOU.
Sorry to disappoint you but NO I WILL NOT SHUT UP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
I think in your original quote from the dictionary, you might have missed or added a word by mistake. But I could be wrong. If you wish, you could provide me with a link so that I will check (I have no time to search all the archives).
You tell me that you have reasons for opting to choose 1a. Would you kindly share your reasons?
As for asking me to assure readers whether these bird guards are being armed against Maltese hunters, that is as absurd as me asking you whether hunters take drugs while hunting. The question cannot be answered since we can only be sure of our own actions.
That said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so if you are suggesting that CABS are terrorists, which they would be if they are being "armed against Maltese hunters", I would suggest that you provide evidence if you are to be taken seriously. Not only that, but if you indeed have indications that CABS are terrorists, you have a duty to inform the police.
If you don't have any evidence, however, it is in your own best interest to shut up and stop slandering people.
Now, are you, Sir, prepared to assure readers whether these 'bird guards' are being armed or not against our Maltese hunters?
Not only is the situation worse in Germany its even official
"Only Germany’s southernmost state Bavaria has to date blatantly ignored the EU bird protection guidelines and permitted the annual killing of hundreds of Goshawks and Buzzards. Elsewhere the perpetrators find their own way around the law."
This is taken from CABS own website.
http://www.komitee.de/en/index.php?raptors
So what CABS come here to scrutinize is officially allowed by the state of Bavaria in their own country.
Indeed 20 members can cover the whole of Malta and record illegalities. But it is publicity they are after and justification for the donations these people receive from the gullible who believe no where is worse than Malta.
It is nothing short of shameful that our government welcomes such people to come here to point out illegalities, making a mockery out of Malta and fails miserably to invest in a proper enforcement unit.
The illegal hunter could easily be controlled given the small size of our islands. It is all a matter of whether the will is there. Rather than putting pressure on our Government together with the hunter, Birdlife Malta chose to turn Malta into a villain at the expense of all its citizens.
Ok, since I believe there is no such thing as too much modesty, I took your suggestion and picked up my hardback Concise Oxford Dictionary (Eight edition, Edited by R. E. Ellen - Clarendon Press, Oxford). As expected, I did not find the whole phrase "confrontation skills", since one will not find complete phrases in the dictionary. However, I did find "confront" (page 240 in my edition).
Here are the meanings of Confront:
1a - face in hostility or defiance; b - face up to and deal with (a problem, difficulty, etc.)
There are three other meanings, but it is the first two that concern us.
Obviously, Ms Zarb Darmanin conveniently chose meaning 1a, completely ignoring 1b. I would like to know how she came to the conclusion that it is meaning 1a that applies in the case of "confrontation skills", when first of all, meaning 1a (as opposed to meaning 1b) does not require any particular skills (it only denotes an attitude), and secondly, meaning 1a (as opposed to 1b) does not require one to be qualified.
Let's see if Ms Zarb Darmanin is humble enough to admit her mistake.
Last time I checked, the constitution failed to mention that "foreigners" are legally prohibited from criticizing a sector of Malta, legally prohibited of roaming in public places, legally prohibited from reporting illegality to local police, legally prohibited from reporting illegalities to the media, etc.
This is the "foreign interference" we are speaking about.
But perhaps we have a different version of the constitution.
As for the dictionary, I suppose you are referring to the "confrontation skills" issue, which you insist that they involve violence when the opposite is the case. Once again, google the term "confrontation skills" and you will find several legal courses on it.
May I also suggest once again that when pretending to quote from dictionaries, (as you did elsewhere), you take good care that at least, to look credible, you use proper English?
86 dead raptors found in a 5 hectare area in Duren, Germany is NOT an indication of the situation in Germany - Mind you it is a very serious case but in no way is it representative of the situation in Germany as a whole.
As to CABS coming to Malta, it is probably more a case of practicality than hypocrisy - after all they highlight illegalities in Germany in no uncertain way and make no attempt at minimising what goes on in their country - In practical terms, a small group of 20 CABS members (just as an example - I do not know how many are around) will be pretty useless to try and monitor Germany - but here in Malta, given our small size they can be very useful in monitoring illegalities.
Please look at the links, eagerly provided by hunters, to show the abuses occurring in other countries in this and other threads. You will see that exposing illegal hunters in their own countries is exactly what conservationists are doing. The hypocrites are those hunters claiming to be against illegal hunting whilst also claiming that none of their many thousands knows anything about who might be responsible and are therefore powerless to stop it. Strange indeed when a very small number of temporary visitors to the islands manage to find and uncover abuses every day.
Similarly, the same sources that hunters keep quoting to somehow justify a position that illegal hunting happens in other places so it should be ignored in Malta show that those abuses are exposed and action taken. Malta is not being picked on because it is small, there are other bird camps in other, much larger, European countries. Stop the abuses and the bird camps will stop too.
This is plain and simple fact. Whoever disagrees may campaign for a referendum to take Malta out of the EU - though I doubt that this would be successful.
Welcome to the Europe I voted YES to form part of.
Let us for a minute say that what you say is true that these surveys are being circulated to all Bird Societies worldwide urging them to vote against hunting. What is keeping you to circulate these surveys to your Hunting Societies worldwide urging them to vote in favour of hunting? Or have you done that already??? Even if you urge them to do so, the vast majority of people ''worldwide'' (using your word) are against hunting. The survey will ultimately come out heavily against hunting. Defending the indefensible is no use. End of story.
You seem so convinced of what you say and yet it is all supposition. Indeed the ratio of hunters to the population is high. But this has no significance to the argument since the number of hunters has no bearing on illegal shooting.
The fact that our islands are minuscule and are at present invaded by people intent on exposing any hunting illegality accounts for the illegalities reported.
If you had to apply the same ratio of "bird guards" per sq. Km now in Malta to either Germany or the UK the findings would be alarming.
If a reported increase of 40% in raptor persecution in UK is not enough proof . Consider the whole area of the UK. The far greater presence of resident birds and the difficulty to monitor all of the UK. The reported 40% as rightly stated by the RSPB is far below actual figures.
if 86 dead raptors found in a 5 hectare area in Duren, Germany is not an indication of the situation in Germany then what is.
Are you aware that in Germany raptors are regularily hunted See this from the CABS website these people are hypocrites http://www.komitee.de/en/index.php?raptors
Come on Mark, you have to compare like with like - how can you compare the UK (population 60 million , 800,000 hunters) and Germany (population 82 million, 340,000 hunters) with the Maltese islands with a population of 400,000 and 15,000 hunters.
Does the fact that we have less car accidents in Malta than in the UK make us better drivers than the British?
Given the small size of our country, the scale of illegal hunting is definitely far, far worse than in the countries you mentioned.
The point I am trying to make is that why do societies like the RSPB refer to Malta as the villain of illegal hunting. Why do German Bird Guards converge upon Malta. It is known fact that illegalities in Malta are few when compared to what goes on in Germany and the UK.
So as a hunter who goes by the law like thousands of other like me. I ask you to explain why pick on Malta?
Are you aware that in order to accommodate these foreigners all forms of hunting have been banned in the afternoon. This is why we complain. Could you ever imagine a similar situation in the UK. Pathetic don't you think?
Also can you please point out the "personal insult" since i make it a point to argue in a very proper manner.
Of course, this can still be bypassed by proxies, but it's more complicated to vote in this way.
You will have to work very hard to get what you wish as in no country in the world is hunting illegal! Out of curiosity, do you eat chickens?
@ Mr Finch,
It is unfortunate that such things happen, however these are illegal activities (and i condemn them) that need to be tackled. Once again take a look in your own backyard and look at whats happening there.
Ask the Queen, she knows a thing or two about hunting.
Trying to resort to personal insults is the last desperate stand of a dying breed.
I am British and you are right, the report is disgraceful. What is your point.
A report from a CABS member is a good piece of local police work? Well done to the police but it was neither them or the FKNK who reported it.
Also with my surname you are assuming a lot. Maybe I am a married woman.
Going out of context and not commenting on the issue itself is a practice being adopted by the anti-hunting lobby. I am truly disgusted with the insults, hate and disrespect being dished out in certain comments.
How about you proving your sportmanship and recognising the right to hunt.
As for your reference to our Neanderthal behaviour indeed hunters have evolved since then as they now use modern weapons to hunt. It is people like yourself who brag and are totally intolerant that have remained unchanged since the Neanderthal period.
@ChrisFinch
Hopefully the police will be even more successful in their work against illegal hunting. This is what legal hunters like to hear. It is when we are invaded by hypocrites that have far worse problems of illegal hunting in their own country that we protest.
Assuming you are British a quick look at DEFRA's report of illegal wildlife crime in the UK http://www.defra.gov.uk/paw/prosecutions/default.htm will explain what i am referring to.
The instance you refer to has no relation to my hobby nor does it concern foreign interference. Since it is purely a piece of good local police work.
Incidentally does your surname "Finch" have any bearing on any ancestors that might have had an interest in finches?. Like trapping for the pot. I believe this was quite common in England up to some time ago. Normally surnames derive from ancient practices particular to a person.
Should not be shot but, in Malta, are on a regular basis. If the FKNK wants to illegal hunting stopped then they should welcome ALL efforts to stop it. The fact that they do not speaks volumes in itself.
If the only argument you have is that mindless killers who abuse the law exist in other countries so it's okay to ignore those in Malta then you have already lost your argument.
No thanks,I already have a life ! I hunt !
You owe it to yourselves and to your children to prove that you have evolved from your Neanderthal behaviour and move with the times.
We should have a Referendum "Should hunting and trapping be banned" to see how many support hunting in Malta and put paid once and for all to all this talk of unfair polls.
I believe that most Maltese have evolved and the outcome would drive the point home unequivocally.
Then the onus would be on the hunters to prove their "sportsmanship" and honour the majority's decision.
Legal hunting is practiced around the world. All birds that can be taken locally are edible and not endangered. Legal hunting is just another sustainable use of biodiversity. It is similar to consuming meat, rabbit, fish, octopus or what not.
The problem remains widespread illegal hunting. For the small size of our islands, the problem is far worse than in mainland European countries. Any help in dealing with the problem (including from foreign conservationists) is more than welcome.
In any case, where rights of minorities are concerned (including 'traditional rights' which stem from recognition of long standing customary / traditional use of common property resources) a referendum is definitely not an appropriate instrument to decide matters.
Why not tell that to your countrymen and try to stop THEM Geoff?
How patronizing of foreigners when their own countrymen do much worse!
Hunting is legal in ALL the world, you need to understand this and stop portraying hunting as an evil thing as it is not. If you cannot understand the concept of hunting game then please do not try and argue something you cannot understand.
By your same reasoning then we should all swallow vitamin supplements and not eat fish , poultry, vedgetables, pork or beef!
@ Mr Boulton.
These same birds that you are harping on about are not game birds and as such should not be shot. However why dont you look at whats heppening in the UK before pointing out the problems tiny Malta causes? Could it be that the Hunting Federation in the UK is too strong for you to bully?
As to your remark about a few hundred mindless killers, once again check what happened in the UK recently where several protected birds of prey have been killed, you might realise that there are more within your own country.
finally no one seems to comment on the blatant lies and deceipt that this letter is meant to bring out! I wonder why?????
I just wasted my time reading your comment !!
So you"re saying we hunt rare and endangered wildlife ?!!!!!! emmm....by any chance haven't you realized that we're talking about Malta not Africa or South America ?!!!!!!!!!!
@ George Caruana, I presume that you're one of those persons who have no self confidence and no self respect. I agree with you the most of the people voted for the EU because our politicians had no political will in every aspect, apart from AD that was always against hunting but never succeeded. Four years later the Maltese didn't reach their expectations in the EU, however instead of making a referendum on hunting, how about making one to go out of the EU, which I’m also convinced that the majority will ask to leave, if it will be respected, but in such democracy it’s only a few people who decide my future and my children future.
if this where Switzerland this is what we could hunt
http://www.jagdschweiz.org/it/attualita.
No referendum stopped hunting in Switzerland so what exactly are you referring to.
in fact this quote should explain hunting's popularity in Switzerland
"CacciaSvizzera rappresenta gli interessi di oltre 30.000 cacciatrici e cacciatori svizzeri."
Stop hallucinating that is unless you are referring to a revival of the long defunct "Svizzera fil-mediterran" concept.
These deceitful tactics may ultimately prove to be detrimental to the hunters in Malta. Now that things have been exposed, should The Times continue to help out in these deceits?
Who's saying that the online polls are being manipulated ? wouldn't even cross my mind,but when you have foreigeners voting ( probably more than maltese ) one cannot really know what the population's opinion is.
I'm sorry to say that I consider the online polls regarding huntings issues null and void,when ONLY local people will vote we'd really know what the opinion is of a section of our population.
you don't seem to be following my corrspondence.
We presented a proposal to the Prime Minister to allocate all monies collected from hunting licenses towards an Environment warden unit. But our suggestion has so far been ignored.
As for fines, 14,000 euro and two years imprisonment are the maximum fines for illegal shooting of protected birds. Would you consider this as inadequate?
As for reporting illegalities, like any other person in society, hunters pay their taxes in order to have a proper police force that monitors and apprehends any illegal activity. Why should hunters be different to all the rest.
In Switzerland the public refused to pass the no-smoking laws after a referendum was taken. would this result have been accepted here? I doubt it.
The gist of this letter is quite clear, the online poll is worthless since it is being manipulated by BIrdlife and is clearly proven by Mr Mifsud Bonnici.
It is true that there are a number of uneducated hunters but it is also very true that there are extremeists within the anti-hunting lobby who would do anything, including organising the manipulation of an online poll by asking people who have no idea about the real hunting situation on our island and indeed anywhere in the world.
Illegal hunting is a bad thing but it happens in every European country, these people should better look at what is heppening on their own doorstep (like in Turkey, Germany and indeed the UK) before pointing fingers at tiny Malta.
You state "online polls are never promoted as being scientific". It would interest readers to know their intended purpose.
Presumably, as is generally accepted, your reply would be that they are an indication of the Maltese population's opinion about a particular topic.
I am sure you agree that the correspondence indicated in the quoted websites show that the results of this particular poll and others related to hunting are being manipulated by foreign birding societies urged on by Birdlife Malta for support.
I also referred to the fact that these polls and other hunting surveys appearing in The Times are being quoted as an indication of the Maltese perception of hunting, even in the Case against spring hunting.
Knowing that the results of these polls and surveys are not a genuine reflection of the truth makes these surveys totally worthless.
At no time did I ever refer to these polls being "manipulated" by anybody at The Times or at timesofmalta.com." as refereed to in your last sentence. But is The Times accepting the result of this particular poll when "foreigners" are expected to vote against their presence!!
I would have imagined The Times to be more serious!
I challenge hunting enthusiasts to lobby for a referendum on this matter. I am morally convinced great majority of Maltese would want outright ban.
As for 'foreign interference', this slogan went out of fashion in the 1970s so it's not impressing anyone.
In 1775 Samuel Johnson famnously said that "patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel" and the huntering fraternity is simply proving that this is still true now.
Mr Mifsud Bonnici will impress me one day when he asks for stiffer fines and even prison for poachers, demands more money for the anti-poaching police enforcement and a few of his members actually help convict people who are still killing protected birds. As for Patrioaytism then getting illegal bird trapping sites out of the Hagar Qim powuld be a start !