Is spring hunting now history?

Last week, the European Court of Justice ruled that by authorising spring hunting of quails and turtle doves from 2004 to 2007, Malta had failed to comply with EU law. And so the hunting saga that has dominated the local political scene for the best part of the last decade comes to an end.

Or does it?

Is spring hunting in Malta history?

Not quite.

Contrary to initial media speculation, the court did not actually say that.

On the contrary, it suggested that it is indeed possible to authorise spring hunting provided that this is done in a restrained and judicious manner.

The court found that Malta breached EU law. Not because it allowed spring hunting (through the use of an exception in the law known as a "derogation"). But because it allowed it in a manner that was disproportionate.

This is the long and short of it.

The question therefore remains: What exactly constitutes a proportionate use of the derogation? Or, to put it in other words, under what conditions can spring hunting be actually allowed?

I will come back to this question but first let us look at the main elements of the judgment, which makes very interesting reading.

First, the court noted that the two species concerned, quail and turtle dove, are not endangered and are in the "least concern" category of the list of threatened species.

Second, the court dismissed the view of the European Commission that spring hunting should be banned in Malta because hunting is possible in autumn and this should be a sufficient alternative.

This was a key point for the Commission because this view was upheld by the court in a case against Finland a few years back. The law only allows the use of the derogation if no other satisfactory solution is available and the Commission sought to argue that the possibility of hunting in autumn was a satisfactory alternative to hunting in spring. If the court agreed with the Commission, it would have effectively sealed the end of spring hunting in Malta. But the court dismissed this argument and held that, taking into account Malta's "very specific circumstances, hunting for quails and turtle doves during the autumn hunting season cannot be regarded as constituting, in Malta, another satisfactory solution".

Having established that spring hunting was indeed possible, the court then moved on to determine whether the conditions under which Malta had allowed spring hunting were proportionate to the law's objective of conservation of the species.

In the event, the court found that the conditions allowed by Malta were not proportionate for a number of reasons, namely: (i) that the spring hunting season for the two species had lasted for several weeks (approximately two months), (ii) that hunting was allowed each year and (iii) that the mortality rate was three times higher for quails and eight times higher for turtle doves than hunting in autumn.

The court therefore ruled that these conditions did not constitute an adequate solution that was proportionate. So the question in Malta is not whether spring hunting is possible but under which conditions it is possible.

The court did not, itself, spell out under which conditions spring hunting is possible.

But, in declaring that the above conditions failed the test of the law, it opened the door to allowing spring hunting under more restrained and judicious conditions. This suggests that spring hunting could possibly take place if the season was opened for shorter periods (for example, for under two months or for alternate years) and for lesser numbers of birds. Or a combination of these conditions.

Would hunting organisations be willing to engage with the authorities to find such a solution?

Would hunters be willing to accept such restraints rather than face a permanently closed season?

And would the authorities be sufficiently equipped to police such restricted conditions?

Somehow, these questions sound familiar and it feels like we have already been there.

Far from chapter closed, it looks like we are back to square one.

Ask Your MEP on www.simonbusuttil.eu.

Dr Busuttil is a Nationalist member of the European Parliament.