Heavy responsibility of Ornis committee

The idea behind setting up the Ornis Committee was that of putting together a group of persons with a scientific and legal background that could direct EU legislation in a pragmatic manner to local hunting regulations and practice. This idea was subsequently warped during the Malta/EU negotiation process into what it is today, a committee that spent the better portion of its existence dealing with enforcement (a police issue), and that sees anti-hunting members having a ball by just throwing mud and using scaremonger tactics to influence the less knowledgeable committee members.

The July 15 news-item FKNK Says Government Pulled Out Of Ornis Meeting On Trapping is a perfect example of this committee's ineffectiveness at making decisions. I do not blame the government-appointed chairman or the three other impartial government appointees. On the contrary, I admire their pluck at sitting on a committee dealing with subjects that are totally alien to them, often risking ridicule for having agreed to nonsensical proposals from the anti-hunting committee members. None of these appointed persons has any knowledge about the subject. Yet whether or not a proposal is approved ultimately depends on their vote.

The subject meant to be discussed and decided at this failed meeting was a scientific report prepared by the hunters' federation FKNK on sustainable finch trapping, Ironically Birdlife planned to present their report rebutting the FKNK report on the same day. It would appear their intentions were to disrupt and confuse the less knowledgeable committee members.

Regulations governing hunting and trapping are governed by the EU's Birds Directive. There is no way any member state can practise any form of hunting or trapping if it does not comply with this directive. This is what the Ornis committee is meant to ensure, with or without the interference of BirdLife Malta.

As for trapping, BirdLife have made their position clear well before presenting their report. They even secured a €175,000 EU grant to campaign about the harm of trapping to Malta and Europe's biodiversity that so far has been totally unconvincing as it only resulted in nothing but a few provocative billboards. And yes, BirdLife Malta do have a vote in this matter that automatically nullifies the FKNK's. So really, it is now up to the very confused government appointed members to decide whether to adopt the FKNK proposals for sustainable trapping that according to the EU representation in Malta can be practised under derogation from the EU birds directive, or to consider BirdLife's proposals that preclude it.

Is it surprising that Lawrence Gonzi says he is not trusted by the hunters? He is certainly responsible for allowing such a situation to arise. If trapping is allowed under derogation as acknowledged by the EU Commission, is he or the government-appointed members to believe a report prepared by those that consider any form of hunting as a threat to their objectives? Dr Gonzi might want to be reminded of BirdLife's press conference whereby they agreed to spring hunting of quail and turtle dove when judging the sincerity of BirdLife's report.

Allowing Maltese hunters to exercise their EU rights has always been conditioned by a fear of arousing the anger and extremist reactions of BirdLife Malta and its European mentors. Burdening the impartial Ornis committee members with decisions that affect a way of life for many is not the way the government is expected to shoulder its responsibilities towards hunters and trappers. Even more so when their requests are in conformity with EU directives and the continuation of their practices a signed guarantee by his own party.