Mark Mifsud Bonnici, Kaccturi San Ubertu, San Pawl tat-Targa
BirdLife's objections to falconry centre
The news about injured raptors alleged to have been illegally kept in a legally run falconry centre raises quite a few questions.
How can a falconry centre, that is primarily an educational tool set up to help people appreciate raptors, allegedly be denied the right to treat injured birds of prey?
Is a falconry centre not the most obvious place to take an injured raptor?
Do injured birds have to be sent overseas to be treated when we have experts in our midst? Surely a local centre where the progress of these birds can be appreciated by all would have more impact on the public as would the visual awareness of the wrongdoing of such acts. It's surprising, to say the least, that Birdlife Malta should object.
This pathetic state of affairs should be clarified forthwith. The minister concerned should ensure that this centre is granted all necessary permits to operate as a rehabilitation centre for any injured raptors. Hopefully BirdLife do not have a say on who can be granted such permits and their expected objections will not influence the minister's decision. It might be worth considering that these birds were probably taken there by members of the public who are sick and tired of seeing their noble gesture turned into a publicity stunt.
As things stand, any injured birds found by the public are handed over to Birdlife Malta. Does Birdlife Malta have the necessary permits to keep these birds? Considering that they might, under what pretence does Birdlife get a permit and an expertly run raptor centre be denied one?
It is worthy to note that the owner of the falconry centre was the same person that so kindly donated a purposely built transport cage that was used to send the injured Lesser Spotted Eagle to Germany for treatment in 2007. This same eagle was given the name of Sigmar, this being the name of the German Environment Minister. Here again in true anti-hunter style, the return of an injured eagle was turned into a publicity stunt aimed at arousing the German minister's support.
The only apparent reason for this charade is that the falconry centre is denying Birdlife the opportunity to create the usual fuss whenever an injured bird is found. It's not surprising BirdLife Malta is opposing such a noble act since it lacks the publicity they are after.
Are BirdLife after rehabilitation of raptors or the usual slimy anti-hunting publicity? Judging by this case, it's definitely the publicity they're after since the rehabilitation was expertly being taken care of locally before BirdLife intervened.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
11 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Dec 23rd 2008, 13:12
@Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Maybe you would like to look up the photos I referred to at that time and refresh your memory.
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20081013/local/birdlife-investigating-how-flamingo-was-injured
http://www.timesofmalta.com/articles/view/20081023/local/shot-flamingo-doing-well-save-complications
Richard Cachia Zammit
Dec 23rd 2008, 12:07
@Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
As always you want to comment without actually knowing what you are talking about. The Flamingo left the reserve and came back after about an hour or so with blood in the head as well as in the belly. The bird could still fly and was never caught, so how could it be handed over to the authorities??? Hallina trid.
Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Dec 23rd 2008, 11:18
An interesting question has been presented here! Is BirdLife Malta authorised to keep injured birds? If not, I believe that the same yardstick should be used for all.
"he should have handed over the injured birds to the authorities concerned just as BLM does". Really, Mr. RCZ?!! Only 3 weeks ago you referred to a photo of the flamingo at the Nature Reserve as being the one previously reported as being injured. But then, maybe, this flamingo was actually handed to the authorities and it got free and flew to the Nature Reserve at Ghadira!
Richard Cachia Zammit
Dec 22nd 2008, 20:03
@MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
As far as I remember, when posting comments here in relation to injured birds, practically all those in favour of hunting say that they never came across an injured bird and now you want to teach us on how birds get injured here in Malta?
@Andrew Gatt
This letter might not be about illegal hunting but about keeping protected wild birds in captivity, which is illegal just the same. I myself believe that the owner of the falconry centre had good intentions but just the same, since he did not have the proper permits, he should have handed over the injured birds to the authorities concerned just as BLM does. Unlike in the case of the falconry centre, every single bird handed over to BLM is reported to the authorities.
C Mallia
Dec 22nd 2008, 18:34
If the Falconry Centre (or BLM for that matter) kept illegally protected birds, then it is only themselves to blame. I do not know how you claim that The falconry Centre has been "denied some right", if that right does not exist in the first place. Is the Falconry centre licensed and qualified professionally to double up as a bird hospital? Is the owner or any of his employees a specialised bird vet? With what expertise do you conclude that the Falconry Centre is the most obvious place to take injured birds? With what expertise are you concluding that the Falconry Centre can pose as the experts in this field? Can we have your ornithological qualifications please?
On one thing I agree. There must be a professional legal framework about bird hospitals, if one does not exist, and then BLM and the Falconry Centre can regulate themselves as bird hospitals, until then, no one is the expert.
J. Borg
Dec 22nd 2008, 18:15
MMB
As far as I am aware BirdLife objected to birds being kept in an unapproved centre - where there were no adequate records to establish which birds where actually captive bred or not, and when they were brought in.
If your concern is really about the birds of prey - then you should dedicate yr time to assist Rennie to get his house in order so that his centre is duly approved.
Moreover, you can extinguish what you term as publicity of the abuses carried out by your fellow hunters - by simply reporting the hunters you obviously see hunting illegally - whilst you are on yr 'legal' activities.
Birdlife and Rennie will always have a duty to report the injured birds that are handed over to them - especially if this is due to the illegal acts of some hunters - but obviously you have a big problem with this - as these are neither few, nor out of the freezer.
Andrew Gatt
Dec 22nd 2008, 18:06
No, Richard, this letter is NOT about illegal hunting. This letter is about the spoiled-brat-don't-wanna-let-anyone-else-play-with-my-toys mentality of Birdlife. Your organisation wants a monopoly on injured birds to be able to gleefully display them for PR and funding purposes. I can't imagine any other reason for this treatment of Mr Rennie Camilleri's Falconry Centre.
And I notice - with GREAT interest - that you have not commented on whether Birdlife members have ANY permits to have protected species in their possession - whether shot, injured in accidents,sick or in collision with a lit-up hotel in Mellieha.
So. Let's try again. Are Birdlife in possession of the required permits/licenses or not?
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Dec 22nd 2008, 15:44
@Richard Cachia Zammit
Are you implying that all injured birds found have shotgun related injuries?
You should know well enough that birds, that in their vast majority migrate at night, are very often found with injuries compatible with flying into unseen obstacles. Strangely enough Birdlfie never report any such cases!!! (Apart from their light pollution Shearwater report) and all recovered injured birds are attributed to illegal hunting.
Also can you explain the reason why Birdlfie object to the falconry centre treating injured birds. This was after all the reason for this letter.
How Birdlife can object to a centre that is offering its expertise in the treatment of birds is beyond comprehension!! Then again most of Birdlife's actions usually are.
Charmaine attard
Dec 22nd 2008, 15:16
M. M. Bonnici, I think that you are right, because a few months ago,when was it August or September ,Birdlife showed in the news an injured protected bird, and they said that this bird had to be distroyed, because in Malta there is no vets who work on birds, if I`m not mistaken this bird only had a broken wing. My mother knows nothing about birds,but about 5 years ago she found a turtle dove with a(shot) broken wing and she brought home and she clipped the broken wing and put paper tape so to keep the wing at the right position and it is ok now ,the turtle dove is still alive and she keeps it in the family kitchen as a pet, so bird wings do heal and birds can fly again without the need to destroy the bird,but Birdlife are more interested to get publicity than to care and heal birds.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Dec 22nd 2008, 12:43
Many injured protected birds that are found by the general public are handed over to BLM as well as to the police and MEPA. Further to that, now we know that injured protected birds are also handed over regularly to the falconry centre as well. This shows clearly how rampant illegal hunting is here in Malta.
Philip Grech
Dec 22nd 2008, 09:56
"It is worthy to note that the owner of the falconry centre was the same person that so kindly donated a purposely built transport cage that was used to send the injured Lesser Spotted Eagle to Germany for treatment in 2007"
BLM are really equipped to transport birds. Do you think that whenever an injured bird is taken to the centre, Blm should be notified so that one of their member goes there with a camera? I think its only pictures that they are after.
Keep it uo Mark Mifsud Bonnici