Spring hunting plan ‘legal’
Malta given two months to respond
Malta stuck to its guns yesterday after the European Commission decided to re-engage the island in a legal dispute over the government’s plan for a three-week spring hunting season next year.
The Commission’s decision comes just a year after a European Court of Justice decided that Malta had breached the Birds Directive by allowing a full hunting season to take place in spring but that autumn was not a sufficient alternative, leaving open the possibility for a spring season to be allowed.
Last spring, the government allowed a very limited season of a week’s duration, during which hunters could bag 7,500 turtle doves and quails but has since announced plans to open the season for three weeks in which a maximum 25,000 turtle doves and quails can be shot. The Commission holds this would not comply with the court ruling and yesterday issued a letter of formal notice threatening to drag Malta back to court “to request financial penalties”.
The government said yesterday: “Malta submits that the framework legislation fully respects the conservation objectives and the principle of proportionality required by the (Birds) Directive and upheld by the ECJ judgment.
“Malta will continue its dialogue with the Commission to understand any concerns the Commission might still have.”
The row between the Commission and Malta, which, if taken to the ECJ again, could translate into a fine amounting to millions of euros, revolves around numbers. The Commission accepts in principle that Malta has a right to allow a limited spring hunting season, similar to this year’s, but it does not agree with the three-week, 25,000-bird scenario.
It gave three main reasons for its action: in the framework legislation “there is no obligation to consider the conservation status of the species in question when setting bag limits; there is no provision to consider the possibilities for autumn hunting in that year before opening a spring season; and the maximum limits established in the legislation do not suffice to ensure the maintenance of the population of the species concerned at a satisfactory level”.
The Commission has given the island two months to respond.
Commission sources said the framework legislation introduced last April did not fully respect the ECJ decision, particularly when it came to proportionality: “The 25,000 birds in spring are way too many for us and we will take Malta to court if it permits such a season. According to us, the framework law is illegal and we want Malta to change it.”
Last spring, the government had originally intended to allow a three-week season and a national bag limit of up to 25,000 birds. It had sought to reach an agreement with the Commission before the season got under way but Brussels kept resisting its demands. Instead, Malta opted for a much more restrained season to make sure it did not push the Commission into taking it to court, hoping it would reach some sort of agreement later.
The island is now back to square one and avoiding further escalation of the issue looks like an uphill struggle if it sticks to its present stand.
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...
'No need for early election if PM's...
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...
31 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
jsammut
Oct 30th 2010, 09:02
Seems that the election is fast approaching!!
joe felice pace
Oct 29th 2010, 22:25
May I suggest that Government collects the fine from the hunters before the start of the hunting season and deposits it in a bank account. If the EU fines Malta, all it takes is a bank transfer. But not at the expense of all taxpayers.
r sammut
Oct 29th 2010, 21:23
What is the meaning of all this? Is Malta allowed to derogate on hunting as the rest of EU countries, or not? According to the EU, on what and when then is Malta to be allowed? Or does the EU wants Malta to apply its’ derogation during the Autumn season; when all EU and the rest of the world have the regulatory open season? Are these two weights two measures the normal practice of EC justice!!!
Josephine Bugeja
Oct 29th 2010, 20:57
How about a referendum as to whether the majority of the Maltese approves the Government's policy of fighting for the extermination of God's creatures in spring? Isn't the electors' opinion important in this matter too?
John Matthews
Oct 29th 2010, 21:44
Have you conveniently forgotten that God's creatures got to the abatoir as well? Or perhaps maybe you don't eat meat.
c.demanuele
Oct 29th 2010, 23:27
i voted yes for eu and if ther will be another referendum i will vote yes again apart im a life member in pn party.but its not nice to be cheated by mr verhaugen and dr edward fenech adami and dr simon busuttil
Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Oct 29th 2010, 20:19
"lost battle", "fines", "hunters should pay the fines" These phrases were written ad nausea before the ECJ ruling. They are now back! Will they AGAIN be proven as being scary and non-factual arguments?! Please, please try presenting readers with some sensible arguments!
C. Abela
Oct 29th 2010, 20:02
@SCascun "After all thousands of hunters have their right to be first class citizens in the EU" I agree. Also even more thousands of non-hunter citizens (hunters are after all a minority of only 4% of the population) have a right to be first class citizens in for example being able to enjoy wildlife; to go for walks in spring with their family when the countryside isnt taken over by armed men; not to be woken at 5am; not to have lead polluting their soil and water table; etc etc. Those are first class citizen rights too as much as practising one's hobby, dont you agree?
sandro cascun
Oct 29th 2010, 18:56
If Malta incurrs a fine regarding spring hunting its to be paid by the government as it is everyones government.There are many other environmental issues on which Malta might pay huge fines.No one seems to have any objection about these.If the govermnent negotiated poorly now its his problem to face the music.Hunters are not ready to forget written letters (black on white) from prime minister saying that spring hunting will remain after Malta's accesion to the EU. Before accession not even the EU stopped the government from spreading such lies. Am sure that the goverment will stick to his guns. After all thousands of hunters have their right to be first class citizens in the EU. With the election getting closer i am sure that the government just cannot afford it to surrender and be walked over on such an issue after all his promises.
Edward Camilleri
Oct 29th 2010, 16:55
The government can be a puppet on a string for all I care and stick to its guns, but those pulling its string should prepare to pay the fines. This is a lost battle - first there are clear rules that Malta is not abiding with, and second its is completely unethical to continue this massacre of birds unnecessarily.
Instead of subjecting us to pay fines, the government should use that money in proper enforcement, because the laws of hunting/trapping are being flaunted left right & centre - go to Gozo & you will know what I'm saying.
E. Azzopardfi
Oct 29th 2010, 16:14
Well, Malta's government is sticking to its guns and so will the EU. You do not have to be a wizard to predict the outcome. Then, when the bills start coming it will be too late.
I firmly believe that the majority would not want that do happen.
M. Cardona
Oct 29th 2010, 16:39
@ E Azzopardi,
BLM has been dangling these fines for ages. I recall BLM claiming we would be fined in the ECJ and this despite definitely knowing that the procedure then precluded any fines being imposed.
J. Borg
Oct 29th 2010, 15:56
I await FKNK and the Cabinet Ministers on a PERSONAL basis to put up a PERSONAL guarantee to finance any fines imposed on Malta.
Enough said!
M. Cardona
Oct 29th 2010, 16:43
@ J Borg,
for one who's so scared of falling pellets, you sure shoot from the hip. Take cover; INCOMING! ROFL
Anyways, you should listen to "Child in time" by Deep Purple, everytime it reminds me of you. ;-) Enjoy its good music and befitting lyrics.
Regards
Carmelo Aquilina
Oct 29th 2010, 15:20
The government is trying to rescue its credibility with the hunters by fighting this all the way but risks losing even more votes when we get fined by the EU... the hunters have never practiced moderation and restraint and the limited spring hunting offered was not good enough...so by going for broke they risk losing it all and landing us with a hefty fine...thanks for thinking of other people before your obsessive blood sports guys
M. Cardona
Oct 29th 2010, 16:36
Mr Aquilina,
"thanks for thinking of other people before your obsessive blood sports guys"
the last time I did "think of other people before my obsessive bloody sport" was at the polling booth for the EU referendum. Oh my how much I repent that!
Regards
Glenn Micallef
Oct 29th 2010, 15:07
So if I understood correctly, the goverment is pressing for a quota of 25000 birds in spring. I cannot undestand why they are taking the hassle as this would mean 1 turtle dove and 1 quail for each of the 12000 hunters. Why are the hunters not complaining? Is it because they are only inetersted in the 3 weeks hunting season?
Paul Barrett
Oct 29th 2010, 15:00
The Commission is being extremely vague and unhelpful in this matter. Instead of just turning around and saying what we can't do and then tell us to comply with an ambiguous ECJ ruling and equally ambiguous Birds Directive, why on earth can they not come up with a clear and concise opinion on what they consider as an acceptable period and bag that can be taken in the Spring Hunting Season.
At least then the Commission, Government and the Hunting Federations would have a starting point on which to negotiate. At the moment everyone (including Bird Life and their supporters) are floundering around in the proverbial dark.
Claire Busuttil
Oct 29th 2010, 14:13
Is it legal to hunt in the evening, as passing in Rabat, and also Qormi, I heard a lot of gunshots. If it is legal, it is very silly, and dangerous!
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Oct 29th 2010, 12:22
The Data available to Dr. Gonzi is irrefutable proof that a three week derogatory period is more then possible and the 25,000 birds a very conservative calculation based on fact. This explains why Dr. Gonzi is sticking to his guns immaterial of all the wheeling and dealing by the anti hunting lobby and the subsequent threat of fines by the Commission.
The Commission stating "there is no provision to consider the possibilities for autumn hunting in that year before opening a spring season;" shows unbelievable ignorance of fact
Are hunters expected to await the autumn season and then go back in time and shoot during spring of the same year? Considering it has been established by the ECJ that autumn is not a "satisfactory solution" to spring are hunters expected to take their meager chances
in autumn and miss every spring?
We augur that the case again be taken to the ECJ since we are convinced of being proved right. The only sad thing is that we can never be compensated for seasons already lost since fines are only imposed in the eventuality of losing a case immaterial of its correctness.
C Mallia
Oct 29th 2010, 13:16
The ostriches dig their head deeper into the sand, MMB.
What probably the commission means is that, for example: Statistics of Autumn 2010 serves as a basis for opening a very limited Spring 2011 hunting...which is not so ignorant after all, is it?
If you vouch so much about this Data, thats is so good and cannot be disputed, then go all the way and give a personal guarantee in the name of your organisation and your members to pay any fines that Malta may get from any eventual court cases, of which BTW Malta has already lost the last one.
Chris Finch
Oct 29th 2010, 16:06
Mark,
Check out your forum from yesterday. Read the bit that says (I paraphrase for the simple) according to 2008 figures, the same number of birds were shot in autumn as in spring. Therefore autumn is a satisfactory alternative.
Also the last ECJ ruling ruled AGAINST Malta. What makes you so sure that it will be different this time.
All Gonzi is doing is buying time. He knows that it will take years before the case comes before the ECJ and he will be sitting pretty after being re-elected (although he thinks we will forget all the scandals outside of the hunting issue of this tenure) or out of office.
Its time for him to show he cares about this tiny island and its people. After all it is us that will be paying millions of euros in fines. That will be less roads paved, less children benefitting from education grants, less investment in tourism, and all because some people want to kill things. Pathetic.
Michael Grech
Oct 29th 2010, 11:07
WHat amazes me is that despite the Government's inconsistency, U-turns and abject record regarding the environment, a good number of so-called environmentalists will still vote PN come the next general election (which does not mean that they should vote Labour).
Chris Finch
Oct 29th 2010, 10:39
Just a few days after a budget which saw many of us worse off financially, the government will risk a fine of millions of euros just to secure a few votes at the next election.
Wake up Gonzi, most of the hunters have stated that you have lost theirs and their families votes already. Will you risk losing thousands more because we have to pay this avoidable penalty?
J.Tonna
Oct 29th 2010, 11:23
Mr. Finch - This is a double sided sword. If the government gives in to hunters it will lose many of the votes of the rest. If not it will lose the votes of a few hard headed hunters.
After all governments are not there for votes only.
C Cassar
Oct 29th 2010, 09:38
Oh dear, why are the Maltese making themselves look so uneducated - again. Look, the EU has far more experience in environmental and wildlife issues since it is made up of a large number of countries with far larger land masses which are more diverse.
Malta is like a small stubborn child that needs it's toys removing from it as punishment.
M. Cardona
Oct 29th 2010, 10:38
@ C Cassar,
one may be excused for assuming that strict adherence to mainstream ideologies, interests and aims, being subservient, obedient, submissive, compliant, lacking any diverse and/or personal opinion, values and interests; makes an ideal EuroNUMBER oops sorry, "Eurocitizen".
Good bye democracy, welcome timarchy!
Regards
C Cassar
Oct 29th 2010, 11:33
er, no. It's simply that others have more experience is certain areas and the Maltese being mature enough to admit that they are right. Why don't the Maltese ever do this? Why do they never take on board the experience of others? Maybe it explains much of what is badly wrong in Malta and yet virtually next door and free of charge, much better ways of implementing and managing similar projects exist.
Just look around you and compare to what other EU countries are doing in the same situations. Learn from those who have much better and proven ideas.
M. Cardona
Oct 29th 2010, 12:26
"Just look around you and compare to what other EU countries are doing in the same situations. Learn from those who have much better and proven ideas."
Good point, Malta's doing just that, its called DEROGATION. Only that BLM and EU Commission as lobby mobilitated can't yet fathom that tiny Malta's doing just that and in line with EU Directives, as furthermore legitimated by the ECJ last year.
Now who's the "small stubborn child that needs it's toys removing from it as punishment." ?
Regards
C Cassar
Oct 29th 2010, 12:54
You can remain in a state of denial but the rest of Malta has moved on because since joining the EU people have had a chance to get some real education on this subject, including from those from other EU countries that come to observe and record the massacre every spring and autumn. The momentum is now huge and unstoppable. The EU will finall ban all hunting & trapping within the next 5 years at the very latest. Meanwhile FKNK will continue to humiliate themselves until the very end.
M. Cardona
Oct 29th 2010, 15:30
@ C Cassar
"The ostriches dig their head deeper into the sand"
"The EU will finall ban all hunting & trapping within the next 5 years at the very latest."
Anti-hunting sentiments are not of contemporary origin. Historically, they know their basis and are particularly related to social unrest especially following periods of relative harmony and stability. These sentiments traditionally mirrored discontent towards the ruling classes (which also happened to be the landowners and thus the authorised hunters). Within the local context, anti-hunting sentments are more elitist based, (local land owners are the farmers, most of them are hunters). Nonetheless, anti-hunting sentiments may reflect an inner discontent/unrest which goes way beyond hunting per se.
So you might actually have a point there, but with current recession, turmoil and dissent over EU legislation and applicability, widespread discontent over austerity measures and that's to name but a few, I pray daily the EU is presently "sowing the very seeds of its own destruction".