Mark Mifsud Bonnici, Kaċċaturi San Ubertu, San Pawl tat-Tarġa
Cats and the plight of bird trapping
The news that bird trapping in Malta ended in 2008 must have come as a sigh of relief for all those accusing Malta's trappers of affecting the European population of song birds.
Apart from the fact that the perception of most people objecting to this practice is based on hearsay, untruths and misinformation, the Maltese government, notwithstanding its pre-EU referendum guarantee of the continuance of both spring and autumn trapping for seven finch species, recently endorsed a €175,000 EU grant to Birdlife Malta which is to be used to initiate a campaign on the detrimental effect of bird trapping in Malta.
The general perception from objectors to this custom are that the birds caught are eaten, blinded or maimed to be used as decoys, millions are caught and that consequently Malta's trappers are to blame for the decline of the species concerned. None of these objections are true and no BirdLife Malta official has ever had the decency to publicly correct these untruths. On the contrary they relish any form of criticism as it only adds support to the abolition of trapping and to their anti-hunting stand in general.
The true facts and figures have been made public by the trappers' association (FKNK). A few thousand finches are trapped annually. All are kept alive for breeding purposes, as decoys for the next year's trapping season and for the enjoyment of their song. This practice is not only a Maltese custom, it is also practised in a totally acceptable manner to the EU, in Spain, France, Italy and Austria. The seven finch species trapped locally, according to the IUCN and based on Birdlife International observations, all share a status of least concern in terms of global population. But who really cares about statistics or the truth for that matter!
If the EU were truly concerned about priorities, the Maltese government about its guarantees to trappers and its country's customs and BirdLife Malta about bird populations, then this bit of information taken from the Royal Society for the Protection of Birds (RSPB) UK website might make them realise how ridiculous and biased their stand against Malta's few bird trappers truly is: www.rspb.org.uk/advice/gardening/unwantedvisitors/cats/birddeclines.asp.
"The most recent figures are from the Mammal Society, which estimates that the UK's cats catch up to 275 million prey items a year, of which 55 million are birds. This is the number of prey items that were known to have been caught; we don't know how many more the cats caught, but didn't bring home, or how many escaped but subsequently died."
So are all the EU efforts, together with those of our gullible government and the RSPB's partner BirdLife Malta truly concentrated on the true culprits of bird decline?
Unashamedly, the RSPB try and excuse these facts by stating on the same website that "Despite the large numbers of birds killed, there is no scientific evidence that predation by cats in gardens is having any impact on bird populations UK-wide."
It seems the only "scientific evidence" available is that which is being used against Malta's trappers. A total of 55,000,000 million birds or more killed by cats in the UK alone are of no concern as they are not "having any impact on bird populations"; it is only the few birds trapped and kept alive by Maltese trappers that seem to matter.
The hypocrisy and deceit of our bird protectionists BirdLife Malta and the RSPB, coupled by the blind support from the EU and our government, should make anyone unbiased realise that bird protection is not the real issue. Malta's hunters and trappers have been targeted for extinction simply to set an example to other EU countries.
This is what the EU Commissioner for the Environment Stavros Dimas stated and this is what our government, that when need be guaranteed these practices, is unashamedly implementing.
What exactly is Malta's government trying to achieve? Certainly not credibility from those expecting guarantees on their practices to be maintained.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
31 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 10th 2009, 22:36
I’m sorry Mr Mifsud Bonnici, but you ask question and after I reply you just ask new questions. I have asked you one question and you have conveniently avoided replying just as you conveniently keep referring to “birds” in general, when you know very well that there are hundreds of species of birds in Europe and each species is a different story.
So could you please explain to everyone why it is OK to catch goldfinches here in Malta just because so many blue tits are killed by cats in the UK??? Do you really believe that your sweeping argument would convince ornithologists, biologist, ecologists and other scientists who really count when it comes to bird protection in Europe?
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 10th 2009, 09:32
RichardCZ
The fact remains that hunting is regulated by the Birds directive. Which emphatically states that hunting can be carried out on those species that are sustainable. In the case of Maltese trapping all the seven trapped finch species are listed as least concern by the IUCN. Which means their global population is nowhere near threatened by cats or humans and therefore their taking sustainable.
Taking this into consideration the EU permits finch trapping in Austria, France, Italy and Spain. Which I presume are as "healthy" as the ones trapped in Malta.
Can you therefore explain why Malta has decided to phase out trapping and also been given a 175.000 euro grant to inform about the harm of trapping.
This is not comparing Maltese trappers to UK cats, but about discriminating between Maltese and other European trappers.
It is here worthy to note that it is Birdlife that instigated these agreements and considering all facts, their stating that trappers are helping in any form of decline is nothing but a lie.
If 55,000,000 birds killed by cats in the UK are no problem. What are the few thousands taken in Malta.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 9th 2009, 20:57
(4) Last but not least you still have to convince us that it is ok to catch goldfinches, greenfinches, linnets, chaffinches, serins, siskins and hawfinches just because English cats kill many house sparrows, blue tits, blackbirds and starling, being the species of birds reported making the bulk of the birds taken. Quite amusing actually knowing that you want to compare the killing of birds by cats in the uk with the trapping here in Malta considering that 2 species that are most commonly taken by cats don’t even occur here in Malta (house sparrow and blue tit), while the other two (blackbird and starling) are legally KILLED by local hunters.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 9th 2009, 20:36
(3) Most of those 50,000,000 birds were destined to die naturally, cats or no cats, just like billions of others do in natural habitats were no cats are around (well at least domestic ones). So these 50,000,000 birds can never be compared to the healthy birds which are trapped or shot by humans. The activity of humans, more often than not is more likely to target healthy individuals. In the case of our islands it is even more so because birds that are shot at or trapped are migratory birds and a bird to migrate has to be in top condition. So whilst the activity of cats in English gardens targets mainly birds that would have died just the same, human activity targets mainly those individuals which could be the future of the species.
CONT.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 9th 2009, 20:35
(2)The health of a bird population depends mainly on availability of food and nesting places as well as rearing enough young to compensate for natural losses through predation, accidents and diseases. A stable population means that all factors are balancing out. A shift of one of these factors could lead to a decrease in the population.
In nature, it is the number of prey available that determines the number of predators and so over predation is unnatural as it can only lead to disaster. In the case of cats, over predation could happen as now we are talking about a man made environment where the cat has become the main predator and if it kills all prey available it can still survive as they are fed and taken care of. But up to now there is no indication that cats are decreasing the garden bird population and that means that they have fitted in the equation of survival by taking over the role of other natural predators and just like other predators, it is more likely that they kill the weaker individuals which after all were already destined to die. If it was otherwise, garden birds would decrease drastically.
CONT.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 9th 2009, 20:33
@MARK MIFSUD BONNICI & S Mizzi
I feel I’m repeating here but let’s give it another try.
(1) Be it lions in the African Savannah or cats in English gardens, it is a well know SCIENTIFIC FACT that a good part of the prey taken by predators is made up of young, weak or sickly individuals. The reason being that they are easy targets. So I don’t know why you are surprised when RSPB says that there is evidence that cats prey mainly on such individuals. It is the norm not the exception.
CONT.
S Mizzi
Jan 9th 2009, 07:29
RCZ, you still haven't answered MMB's question and I quote:
'The fact still remains that the RSPB still consider that 55,000,000 or more birds killed annually has no impact on bird populations. Can you explain what impact the few thousands trapped or killed by Maltese trappers has on the European bird population?'
You cannot use the argument that the birds that arrive here are healthy and the ones taken in the UK are weak and sickly because of course it would be unfair to assume that all are weak or sickly. Let me be generous and say 50% are. That still leaves 27 mio healthy birds being taken by cats alone.
So again I ask, why the different weights and measures?
It really is a simple question, one to which i'm sure you know the answer. It is after all printed in MMB's letter.
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 8th 2009, 21:19
RichardCZ
it might be convenient for the RSPB to say that cats only take the weak and sick. And as I previously stated do the RSPB follow cats to see if this is true. As usual, as with all their other theories, it is pure supposition.
What I find very convenient in your case is the lack of a reply to the following:
"Can you explain what impact the few thousands trapped or killed by Maltese trappers has on the European bird population. When 55,000,000 in the UK only make no difference."
The whole point of my letter was for someone that proclaims to be knowledgeable or the Birdlife full time biologist to reply and justify the reason for the banning of trapping.
Failing this, I have no option but to wait for the 175,000 euro EU grant to be spent by Birdlfie for this purpose.
Hopefully all this money will convince anyone that Malta's bird trapping is harmful other then to cats.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 8th 2009, 19:45
Mr MMB I am quoting from the same source you quoted so if what I'm saying is untrue and totally unscientific, so is what you say.
If I omitted part of the article, you practically omitted the whole thing and just concentrated on the number killed by cats and ignoring the rest. Apart from that I said that finches are hardly mentioned and not that they are not mentioned so I am right.
Last but not least, you want to prove your point by referring to this article but at the same time criticise the bits in this same article that don’t agree with your reasoning, such as the taking by cats of weak and sickly birds. That’s very convenient of you, although nothing new.
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 8th 2009, 18:24
RicahrdCZ
Whether or not the birds that are killed were weak or sickly, starling or not or whether they are killed by cats or not. The fact still remains that the RSPB still consider that 55,000,000 or more birds killed annually has no impact on bird populations.
This figure is not for all of Europe but UK ONLY!!!
Can you explain what impact the few thousands trapped or killed by Maltese trappers has on the European bird population. We certainly never trap or kill close to a million each year.
Also please read this part you omitted which includes the GREENFINCH,
"Gardens may provide a breeding habitat for at least 20% of the UK populations of house sparrows, starlings, greenfinches, blackbirds and song thrushes four of which are declining across the UK. For this reason it would be prudent to try to reduce cat predation"
All finches trapped have a status of least concern (IUCN data) also what is there to prove that cats take are only weak and sick birds. Do the RSPB go prowling with cats to see what they kill??
Your allegations are all untrue and totally unscientific.
Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Jan 8th 2009, 10:49
I am amazed how certain individuals avoid the true argument when faced with facts. But then, what can one expect? After being deceitful in their anti-hunting and trapping arguments, being faced with facts can prove to be a punch below the belly!!
Keep up your good work Mr. MMB!
J. Borg
Jan 8th 2009, 09:52
@MMB
I plead "guilty" as accused in opposing hunting & trapping.
I might eventually oppose (but not hurt) cats IF they
- take over the countryside
- allow me & my family just a short Sunday afternoon to breathe some fresh air in peace.
- threaten to claw me up if I dare walk (on public paths) close to their self appointed blasting spot
- litter the countryside with the poisonous left overs of their "hobby"
- miaw blast endlessly in the early hours of the morning
- twist the meaning of cultural and tradition
- maintain their indifference and reluctance to round up the most dangerous tabbies within their pack.
David Reiling
Jan 8th 2009, 07:57
as a former Uk resident - Cats are not regarded as pests in the UK -PETS yes but not pests
William P Flynn
Jan 7th 2009, 22:27
Although I am not familiar with the numbers or veracity of bird kills quoted by MrBonnici, I am not at all surprised at the devastation domestic cats wreak on birdlife; let alone the feral ones.
Every cat, including MrFrancoFarrugia's, is a killer if allowed to prowl at night. One cutie killed robins and other migratory birds nightly and brought them home in Sliema! It wouldn't surprise me that feral/domestic cats might kill more birds than trappers.
Cats ARE indiscriminate, expert bird-killers. From a bird-lover's perspective, the only good cat is a dead cat. The next best thing is a cat that is kept indoors ALL night EVERY night or risk hefty fines. ALL cats should be licensed and neutered. Cat breeders should also be licensed.
Cats are the Number1 murderer of birds in Australia.
I would be surprised if there aren't strict cat control laws in Britain. I hope Malta has these laws.
I also don't believe you can love birds if you put them in a cage. But reading many comments I am convinced that trappers do love birds, and have gathered useful expertise over the generations. Trappers, please find positive outlets for your expertise and love of birds.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 7th 2009, 20:42
@Anthony Formosa
First you applaud Mr Mifsud Bonnici and then when I quote from the SAME SOURCE to which he referred to…..suddenly that source is no longer valid.
If you just had bothered to read from the web site that Mr Mifsud Bonnici himself was referring to, you would know exactly from where I got the idea that cats tend to take weak or sickly birds.
As for pests, on the 10th December 2008, with reference to starlings, you posted a comment saying “The bird in question is a pest”. If by now you bothered to read the article, you would find that the starling is amongst the most frequently caught birds by cats in the UK. According to you the starling is a pest….So would a cat preying on a pest be considered also a pest? A pest is supposed to be harmful, but as the article tell us, there is no scientific evidence that predation by cats in gardens is having any impact on bird populations in the UK.
Having said that, I personally don’t approve of feral animals roaming the countryside but the study here refers to cats in gardens i.e inhabited areas.
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 7th 2009, 20:38
@MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
You are the one who is missing the point. The 55,000,000 birds killed annually by cats have no impact on the UK bird populations because as the article says, it is likely that they would have died anyway from other causes especially since there is evidence that cats tend to take weak or sickly birds. In nature there is always a high percentage of a population, especially of first year birds, that die naturally. It is the remaining healthy birds, the survivals, that are important to propagate the species.
Unfortunately, unlike in the case of cats, traps or shot guns don’t target only sick or weakly birds. Actually in our case, those won’t even be around as they would have died long before arriving here. It is the healthy birds, the future of the species, that are most likely to be targeted.
Apart from that, the article itself hardly mentions finches. So do you want to convince us that it is ok to trap goldfinches because many blue tits are killed by cats in the UK???
John Meilak
Jan 7th 2009, 17:55
Well it isn't such a bad idea to shoot cats instead of protected birds. There are so many cats running around the streets, leaving pungent excrement and urine all over the place. It wouldn't be a bad thing to institute some population control on cats. The same goes for pigeons, rats, mongrel dogs and other pest animals.
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 7th 2009, 17:12
Alex Ellul
This letter is not about whether Maltese trappers have a right to trap or not, The whole point is a matter of priorities. Priorities as to who is having a detrimental effect on birds. The Maltese hunter and trapper or the British cat.
Cats killing more than 55,000,000 bird annually shows no scientific evidence that predation by cats in gardens is having any impact on bird populations UK-wide." Yet the few thousands shot and trapped in Malta seem to have so much impact that Birdlife, its partners the RSPB and people like yourself want to see these practices banned.
If you can ever justify this claim as being anywhere near realistic. Based on this information it becomes quite clear that it's not the protection of birds you are all after. But the eradication of hunting and trapping in Malta.
All the scientific evidence produced by Birdlfie to show the international effect upon birds by Maltese hunters and trappers has been belittled by the UK cat.
How's that for Birdlfie data and its persistent ridiculous claims of Maltese hunters decimating European wildlife!!!
We'd be lucky to see a million let alone 55,000,000
S Mizzi
Jan 7th 2009, 17:09
I can't believe the absurd reactions and replies to MMB's letter, truly out of context. Can you really try and have us believe that MMB's letter hasn't hit a chord and doesn't uncover hypocrisy at its best? Why the twisted logic and childish replies? What have cat's instincts and weak birds got to do with MMB's letter? Can't you be men enough to admit he's right when it is so blatantly clear?
Mark, I don't understand how you put up with this. You state facts and the people know that what yr saying is entirely correct yet they write in to try and discredit you in an attempt to score a point against the 10 you scored with your letter. Keep up the good work Mark.
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 7th 2009, 16:46
J Borg
I believe you must be confused since you are the one that opposes bird trapping and hunting. So i believe you could be the one shooting cats in order to stop them killing birds.
55,000,000 million lest you forget!!!
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 7th 2009, 16:39
J Borg
I believe you must be confused since you are the one that opposes bird trapping and hunting. So i believe you could be the one shooting cats in order to stop them killing birds.
55,000,000 million lest you forget!!!
Franco Farrugia
Jan 7th 2009, 15:41
I was going to answer Mr Mifsud Bonnici on this never-ending battle of his to try to convince us in favour of his pastime.
But after reading Mr Richard Cachia Zammit's comment, I felt it would be useless, Well done for your comment, Mr RCZ. As if we can ever find fault in cats!!!!
Anthony Formosa
Jan 7th 2009, 15:25
@RCZ I was expecting your usual phrase, that two wrongs don't make a right, however you chose to condemn the local trappers rather than the abandoned cats in UK. In UK Primarily cats are considered as PESTS therefore they fall in the same category of rats, so in your humble opinion you prefer to eliminate the local trappers rather than cats because that is the instinct of a cat.
As a BLM member from where you get this idea that cats take weak or sickly birds only? Do you always have sick birds in the Ghadira nature reserve? Why BLM did cat traps at the reserve? Why BLM did rat traps at Mellieha?, if also have an instinct like cats? Why cats have a good vision at night? What exactly BLM, RSPB wants? Get rid of trappers and make ways for cats and rats? As a hunter, should I stop controlling rats in my field on my own expenses?
Your answers are appreciated. Thanks.
Alex Ellul
Jan 7th 2009, 15:05
@MMB: So according to this letter: Maltese trappers have as much right to trap birds as feral cats and dogs. Hence Maltese trappers stand on the same level as these animals. Not a good standing at all. Can we justify the shooting of a fur seal just because this is hunted and killed by killer whales?
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Jan 7th 2009, 15:02
@RichardCachiaZammit
You seem to have conveniently missed the point completely.
The RSPB categorically state:
"Despite the large numbers of birds killed, there is no scientific evidence that predation by cats in gardens is having any impact on bird populations UK-wide."
Whether 55.000.000 birds are weak or sickly is beside the point, 55,000,000 birds killed annually by cats have no impact on the UK bird populations. So what does the number of birds trapped in Malta have on the entire European population?
Given 175,000 euro as an EU grant can Birdlife please explain?
@PhilHumphries
"killing in the name of Sport or Tradition (Sick Fun)"
The subject is bird trapping. All birds trapped are kept alive. (please do read my letter)
So do consider re-writing your comment as you are completely out of point.
As for what you consider as being "sick Fun", presumably hunting, all birds that are hunted end up being eaten. No less that all other meat.
If you object to "sick fun", being part of civilized society should above all, have taught you about tolerance and respect for a perfectly legal practice.
Andrew Gatt
Jan 7th 2009, 14:52
"Malta's hunters and trappers have been targeted for extinction simply to set an example to other EU countries"
@ Richard.....this is Mark's main point here! And the lies, hype, exaggeration, and misinformation fed to the pulic at large. Incidentally have the RSPB dumped any petitions at the Houses of Parliament in the UK? Nope! They came here and did it at Castile! How's that for hypocrisy?!
@Phil.......that's rich indeed! How on EARTH can you justify your comments when the UK ANNUAL hunting bag is in the region of 22 MILLION BIRDS? By your own admission, your country must truly be a nation of unnatural, mindless sickos....from the Royal Family downwards!
Richard Cachia Zammit
Jan 7th 2009, 12:36
Mr Mifsud Bonnici, I find it amusing that to make your point, you chose to compare the action of humans (local trappers) who are able to reason things out, with that of animals (cats), who act on instinct. Apart from that, you also missed quoting the last bit of the article i.e. “There is evidence that cats tend to take weak or sickly birds”. Local trappers catch birds which are healthy enough to endure an arduous journey. Seems as if even cats are more conscious of the environment than local trappers.
Phil Humphries
Jan 7th 2009, 12:11
The large numbers of birds lost to NATURAL predation is regrettable, however, as far as I am aware, feral and domestic cats do not claim to be members of civilised society. Surely, MMB and his supporters must be aware by now that it is the UNNATURAL predation and the mindless inflicting of pain and distress upon birds that civilised society objects to.
As I understand it, human beings are blessed with the God-given ability to rise above their base urges and to understand that killing in the name of Sport or Tradition ( a.k.a. Sick Fun ) is contrary to the will of society and is no longer acceptable; so get used to the idea.
That said, MMB's letter serves to remind cat owners that their pets should wear collars fitted with a bell to alert birds of their presence.
Anthony Formosa
Jan 7th 2009, 11:18
Well said MMB, just to support your argument, in UK they have many products against dogs & cats which are considered as PESTS. Nevertheless what some TV personalities says that the English people admired for their loving care love for animals. The number of stray cats and dogs they have in UK is out of control and as MMB said they are a serious threat to song birds. This is one of the thousands sites to by products against pests dogs and cats, which some of them are also cruel, unlike in Malta we feed them and make shelter for stray animals and not call them pests.
Pest Help UK - Cat Repellers|Dog Deterrents|Stop|Rid Cats|Dogs
http://www.pesthelp.co.uk/weshop/Cats___Dogs.asp
J. Borg
Jan 7th 2009, 10:40
MMB
May I suggest you start publishing your own enlightening newspaper.
San Umbertu would surely be pleased :)
What are you recommending, open season for hunters to start shooting cats maybe?
Hunters have already appropriated the countryside - hope they don't set their eyes on our gardens as well now!
Andrew Gatt
Jan 7th 2009, 09:40
Nothing to add to Mark's excellent, informative letter. Readers of The Times should judge for themselves and draw their own conclusions. Well said!