Kurt Sansone
Proposals for 'sustainable' spring hunting under wraps
Proposals drawn up by hunters for "sustainable" spring hunting have been passed on to the Ornis Committee, the hunters' federation said yesterday.
No details were given as to what the proposals contain but the Federation for Hunting and Conservation said they were aimed at allowing "sustainable hunting and trapping of turtle dove and quails in April and May".
"After March 4 the Prime Minister should announce the application of a derogation from the EU Birds Directive," the statement said.
The Ornis Committee, which is entrusted to make recommendations on when and if the hunting season is to open, brings together representatives of the hunting lobby and Birdlife.
The next meeting of the Ornis Committee is scheduled for Tuesday but the hunters' proposals were not yet on the agenda yesterday, sources said.
The European Court of Justice had ruled last year that the autumn season in Malta is not a satisfactory alternative for spring hunting of quail and turtle dove. The government and hunters say this has left the door open for limited spring hunting.
Europe's high court had also decreed that Malta was in breach of the Birds Directive when it allowed spring hunting to go ahead after EU accession in 2004.
The court had said the number of birds shot in spring - figures presented by the government and based on what hunters had reported - was also excessive. This effectively means that with around 17,000 licensed hunters each one would only be allowed to shoot one quail and two turtle doves for the whole spring season.
Birdlife has argued that allowing any form of spring hunting would produce the same results as it did in previous years, landing Malta in court all over again.
Popular Stories
Update 3: Woman found dead in car,...
Updated: Woman dies in car crash
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Part of Dwejra 'Azure window' collapses
The end of the bar that ‘never closed’
Bundy does not know whether to...
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
This WAS the night - Kurt makes it...
Petrol price up 6c
In Discussion
Updated - Jason Micallef demands...
Gozo tunnel could take 5-7 years to...
CABS remote controlled aircraft shot...
Carm Mifsud Bonnici resigns after...
Joseph Calleja condemns portrayal of...
Updated: Labour would give...
CABS drone shot down
Second group of migrants arrives
Adrian Vassallo in scathing...
4 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Feb 23rd 2010, 00:01
Rather then mere speculation and sensless scaremongering, can you use your purported knowledge of EU matters to list all the possibilities of EU fines Malta is facing.
Judging by all the directives we are obliged to fulfill, we should be begging in a few years time.
Surely the Mosta environment should help remind you about the dust and noise pollution directives or perhaps the alternative energy windfarm debacle.
Please reply as we soon need to start counting our cents to get Malta out of its mess.
Johnny Xerri
Feb 22nd 2010, 22:30
@ Paul Barrett,
If you objectively bothered to follow the hunting saga you would be aware that the government did not study the judgment and the implementation of a season on its own accord. In fact an article on the times of Malta stated that government was in consultation with the EU Commission on how the season may be opened within the parameters of the Birds Directive and in the spirit of the ECJ ruling.
I believe that the EU commission would not suggest anything that was outside the Birds Directive just so that it can reopen a court case. Do you?
If the commission had to open a court case after having consulted with government on the opening of a season (and obviously if government would have followed the commission's suggestions) then I for one would be ashamed of having voted yes in the referendum, and ashamed to form part of the EU.
But to date I have no doubt that if a season is opened within the parameters of the birds directive and the recommendations of the EU commission, Malta would face no court cases and no 'hefty fines'.
clifford john williams
Feb 22nd 2010, 20:48
Figures for the number of birds shot based on what hunters had reported....Is this some kind of joke? Even the hunters have admitted that these figures are an underestimation.A hunter approached by the EU inspection team didn't have his documents for recording his kills with him. Did these figures include those shot LAST SPRING when shooting took place in the Garnaw Valley every day,or was that a"Limited,Strictly Controlled,Derogation" that nobody except the hunters knew about?
Limited & Strictly Controlled is as big a sham as Conservation is in the hunters title and nothing more than a loophole through which to carry on" BUSINESS AS USUAL".
Paul Barrett
Feb 22nd 2010, 11:20
I am not against legal hunting however I strongly suggest that Malta sends the unexpurgated ECJ ruling and a copy of the Birds Directive to an independent law firm abroad that is able to interpret both without prejudice. Personally I can not see any derogation being allowed explicitly for the purpose of sport hunting during the migration to the breeding grounds. Both the documents need to be read in full and cherry-picking sentences or half sentences to come to a conclusion will only end up in bitter argument and indeed may end up in more embarrassment for Malta and indeed more costly Court action. Birds Directive is at: http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=CELEX:31979L0409:EN:HTML ECJ Ruling is at: http://curia.europa.eu/jurisp/cgi-bin/form.pl?lang=en&Submit=Rechercher&alldocs=alldocs&docj=docj&docop=docop&docor=docor&docjo=docjo&numaff=C-76/08%20&datefs=&datefe=&nomusuel=&domaine=&mots=&resmax=100