In his A Turning Point In The Hunting Issue (October 19) Mark Mifsud Bonnici puts out a lot of information which doesn’t bear up to scrutiny.
He falsely states that BirdLife Malta was once not opposed to spring hunting. The hunting lobby is fully aware that this was never the case, as similar allegations have been rebutted by BirdLife Malta in the past. Yet they persist in spreading this misinformation.
Mr Mifsud Bonnici goes on to state that “we adopted the maxim of zero tolerance towards any of our members convicted of serious offences”. While the claim of “zero tolerance” by the hunting lobby is highly doubtful, one must also ask what the lobby means by “serious offence”. An offence is an offence and disciplinary action should be taken by the hunting organisation to which offenders belong.
Furthermore if the hunting lobby were really interested in countering hunting crimes, we would by now see them reporting illegalities to police and going to court to bear witness against poachers, to ensure justice is served and the law upheld.
Hundreds of hunters and trappers are convicted every year of hunting and trapping crimes at the courts but evidence has yet to surface of how many of these people faced the hunting lobby’s alleged “zero-tolerance policy”. The hunting lobby needs to start taking serious action against the illegalities and not just pay lip service. As for his comments about so-called “radicalism”, since when has standing in the countryside with binoculars and reporting illegal hunting to the police become a radical act? The radicals in this debate are the ones who occupy public land, erect illegal hunting and trapping hides without permits, intimidate the public and birdwatchers, attack conservation sites and BirdLife volunteers and issue statements that are full of xenophobia.
As for the spring hunting issue, we would like to remind Mr Mifsud Bonnici that the majority of the Maltese population are against spring hunting as opinion polls showed. The EU Commission, BirdLife International partnership, conservationists in Malta and abroad and the Maltese public are of the opinion that shooting wild birds before they are given a chance to breed is not “good sport”. On the other side of the debate stands the hunting lobby, alone with politicians held to ransom by the voting saga.
The Birds Directive can indeed work in Malta as long as national legislation is in line with the EU Birds Directive and is properly enforced. Until then Malta’s reputation will continue to be tarnished due to failed politics and bullies with shotguns.