Raymond W. Zammit, San Pawl tat-Tarġa
BirdLife credibility at stake
Without any shadow of doubt spring hunting has been proven perfectly legal. Having run out of fools to promote a campaign to “Stop illegal spring hunting”, BirdLife Malta now declare their determination to stop spring hunting at all costs.
After years of claiming that spring hunting is illegal, conditioning the public to believe heavy fines were imminent and criticising the government of appeasing hunters and acting illegally, it now transpires that all such talk was nothing but false propaganda aimed at denying the hunter of his rights. Hunters were right in criticising BirdLife’s excesses and the government was even more correct to ignore all their vile propaganda and persevere in defending Malta’s right to derogate. Considering BirdLife state the majority of Maltese are against spring hunting, if indeed the government acted on the assumption of gaining votes, it is either foolish to ignore such a majority or in all probability, it acknowledged that the surveys which provided such findings did not give the real picture.
BirdLife have now lost their credibility. In an article in The Times, following their boycott of the Ornis meeting, the government reminded BirdLife Malta of the joint statement signed by BirdLife International and the European hunting body Face urging all parties involved to respect the court judgment. Far from respecting the court’s judgment, they have ever since been nothing but an obstacle to the course of justice and now pledge, to “fight tooth and nail for the elimination” of what even the European Commission confirms as being legal.
Now that the spring hunting season has been declared possible, according to their own website they have again invited foreigners to participate in their Spring Watch Malta camp, which forms “an integral part of BirdLife Malta’s fight against illegal spring hunting”.
BirdLife’s director reportedly proclaimed: “Spring hunting just has to stop. It’s as simple as that. The hunting of birds during spring just cannot continue. It is one of my main objectives to put an end to spring hunting”.
Following propaganda aimed at attaining their objective and their blatant disregard of an agreement to respect the court judgment, who can ever believe whatever they intend staging together with their foreign lackeys in order to prove the impact of intensive hunting. We can now only expect more of the same from our declared abolitionists who deceitfully declare not being militant.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
28 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Apr 6th 2011, 10:45
D Borg, "So those chaps who" commit rape, irresponsible drivers, drug-pushers, robbers, tax-evaders and other criminals - are they people like you??!! Using your yardstick, should I call you a rapist / irresponsible driver / drug-pusher / robber / tax-evader / criminal? Or do you consider yourself as "virginity personified"???!!
Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Apr 5th 2011, 21:05
Charlie Borg SPRING HUNTING IS LEGAL! Persisting in stating that it is illegal only serves to show that you live in a world of make-believe!! Hunting is a LEGAL practice worldwide. Just because you do not like it does not make any difference whatsoever. Actually, the Maltese hunters will be enjoying their traditional pastime within the parameters of the law! Regarding "They (referring to BLM) have nothing to gain", I suggest you inform yourself about the millions of Euros coming from the EU! Should you truly believe that BLM "deserve this country's gratitude", might I ask for what reason?
J Caruana, we are here discussing Birdlife's credibility. Using your warped reasoning, are all citizens "not credible with anyone & need to be supervised like little children in a playground", once we have the Police Force and the many Wardens around?!
D Borg, since you chose to tarnish the reputation of the many law-abiding hunters with the wrong-doings of poachers,should I tarnish your reputation with the wrong-doings of people like you?!!
D.Borg
Apr 6th 2011, 08:40
Ah!
So those chaps who chopped off the trees and Natura 2000, and the pal who shot at Ray Vella (all of whom happened to carry a hunter's licence, and were apparently pissed off with some hunting restrictions) - they were not hunters BUT poachers.
It seems that all criminal acts that are finally proven are dusted on Poachers so that in your opinion, your idols the hunters (and their actions) remain virginity personified!
Johnny Xerri
Apr 6th 2011, 15:57
D Borg,
If the crime was solved, please enlighten me.
For all I know the person who shot Mr Vella was never caught...so you cannot say whether he was a hunter or a criminal (with or without a weapons licence)...however, if you have proof I suggest that you forward it to the competent authorities.
D Borg can you please state some of your social links...that way I could point out to you some of your blackest sheep...not mentioning what hobby and employment you have simply means you are ashamed of the black sheep that I may pull out of the closset.
Anthony Formosa
Apr 5th 2011, 19:02
The main objectives of BLM to fight against spring hunting was to attract funds. However I'm pleased that part of the special spring license which will amount to thousands of euros will go towards the environment.
@ J.Borg, Just be quiet for know, let us enjoy the LEGAL spring hunting, and when the season is over you can comment as much as you like. Please be reminded to of the lead showers when you are on your arm chair :)
J. Borg
Apr 5th 2011, 17:00
let us just agree that Birdlife's credibility is far more robust than the type and number of birds killed that hunters declare ....
and this brings us back as to why there are calls to ban spring hunting.
Likewise if you now feel that no fines will be incurred by Malta, then surely hunters would not find any objection to formally pledge to meet any such (impossible according to you) fines from their pockets....
Sylvana Zarb Darmanin
Apr 5th 2011, 13:12
One is credible or not through one's words and actions! To all those defending BLM, do they have such a short memory?! Remember BLM stating that Spring Hunting is illegal only to be found to be LEGAL? Remember BLM stating that the ECJ ruled against hunters? Remember the famous black t-shirt worn by BLM officials and other personalities? Remember BLM's friend David Conlin stating that they will not relent in their activity until Malta is a bird hunting-free zone? Well, does the outcome of these events give credibility to BLM??!!
Charlie Borg
Apr 5th 2011, 15:38
Hunting cannot be legal and that is what BirdLife Malta is all about. It is impossible for hunting to be legal. Even if it were to be declared so, due to political pressure - remember last election, with emails doing the rounds to elect this member and that? - it would still be illegal to kill birds that do not belong to you, birds in the sky, birds that if in some way had to 'belong' to hunters, they also 'belong' to peace-loving, non violent people such as myself. We have to say NO to the killing of birds. What's the big problem with the wearing of black t-shirts? At least the wearers did not stoop to violent intimidation in Valletta during protest marches, and in the countrside. Yes, full credibility to BirdLife Malta. They have nothing to gain and everything to lose, even their very lives, by defending birds in the sky. They deserve this country's gratitude as a relentless voluntary organisation. Keep up the work, BirdLife.
J.Caruana
Apr 5th 2011, 16:12
Precisely why hunters need constant policing, because they are not credible with anyone & need to be supervised like little children in a playground.How can you trust someone that enjoys killing animals?
D.Borg
Apr 5th 2011, 17:57
If something is somehow made unilaterally and temporarily legal, it obviously does not denote that such action/inaction is morally, culturally, socially, ecologically or ethically correct.
Speaking about memory and rememberance, the bloodstained dead flamingoes, storks, and swans, just to mention just three majestic (when alive) supposedly protected birds are still vivid.
Likewise the arson attacks on Natura 2000 sites and Nature Reservers, and the shooting of the natura 2000 ranger, again just to mention a few deeds, which some hunters had the gall to live up to!
C Mallia
Apr 5th 2011, 12:17
This letter is nothing but to discredit all the hard conservation work and educational purpose that Birdlife has striven for decades to instil in Malta, where hunting was a free-for-all because politicians always cared for votes.
People like Mr Zammit are simply biased and love to have a try in minimising Birdlife, because Birdlife will persist in its conservation efforts according to EU rules when our politicians wouldn't.
What the likes of Mr Zammit do not see or choose to ignore is that it is ultimately not Birdlife which has changed hunting rules but the EU. Birdlife is not a political party which can change things, but just an NGO. It is within the scope of Birdlife to work in controlling rampant hunting, otherwise who will in Malta? The politicians? The hunters?
Mr Zammit, be happy that Malta got some kind of spring hunting concession from the EU (which still needs to be time-tested) when in other countries this is completely forbidden and so illegal instead of taunting Birdlife with your silly destructive piques.
Let us see now if the hunters keep their much promised discipline in hunting properly. Mr Zammit ignored this in his letter and the hunter's credibility.
Andrew Gatt
Apr 5th 2011, 14:16
Conservation is one thing.
Fomenting a campaign of hunter-hatred, exaggeration, misinformation, confusion, threats of fines, mythical central migratory highways and an extremist position is entirely another.
These last few years Birdlife has been so much more anti-hunters than pro-birds. And cosying up to that other bunch of hypocrites CABS does their cause no good either.
peter galea
Apr 5th 2011, 11:43
The hunters have the right to practise their killing hobby, but for me it is pure cruelty, irrispective of any arguements brought up by any one. It makes my hearth breaks when seeing that beautiful bird like the turtle dove, with those innocent eyes, bleeding and injured with gun shots.
Johnny Xerri
Apr 5th 2011, 15:26
Mr Galea...pigs have eye, fis have eyes, lambs have eyes, sheep have eyes, chickens have eyes, cows have eyes, deer have eyes, ducks have eyes...since many people kill them for food (if they buy them they are directly ordering there kill, and inderectly killing them)....what makes their eyes less innocent then those of Doves?
What makes a farmed animal guilty and sentenced to death, executution to take place @ the slaughter house...and yet wild animals are innocent?
Please answer this.
C.chircop
Apr 5th 2011, 17:00
JX .
it's the enjoyment you get from killing animals that's disturbing.
It's taking from the wild never to breed again & depriving everyone else the simple pleasure in watching a bird alive like you own the things & then having the gall to call yourselves conservationists & nature lovers.This is all about an obsessive addiction to kill birds & nothing else.
J. Borg
Apr 5th 2011, 17:47
Mr. Xerri,
I am vegetarian ..... so according to you, I may be allowed to air my objection to hunting, especially in Sping?
Johnny Xerri
Apr 5th 2011, 19:43
C Chircop,
We have the gall to callm ourselves conservationists & nature lovers because we preserved land and created habitats that are enjoyed by us during the open season and enjoyed by nature during the closed season....unlike those who used their land to build and earn money...
We have the gall to call ourselves conservationists & nature lovers because we clean our fields, weed in order to prevent fires, prune trees, rebuild rubble walls and other endless work all year round not just in the open season.
We have the gall to call ourselves conservationists & nature lovers because we manage the land from our own pockets and not from donations or EU funding.
We are proud to do this work even if out of the 2 million harvested turtle doves just by EU 25 member states (no mistake data is avaiable for 25 not 27 member states) we only manage a miserable amount...
What you and your ilk do not have the gall to admit is that you still kill animals when you buy meat.
What you and your ilk do not have gall to admit is that BLM was wrong in claiming that spring hunting is illegal
Johnny Xerri
Apr 5th 2011, 21:12
Not unless your objections are linked to non adherence to the Birds Directive....because when you air things that are not backed by the Birds Directive or scientific sustainability documents the air you produce is similar in quality to the air I produce after a couple of beers and bigilla.
You and your ilk can give you opinion, whenever you please...but never impose on others...if you are a vegetarian then fine...enjoy your veg...if I am not then let me enjoy my pound of flesh...be it coming from the butcher or from the field...as long as the butcher has all the docs and the slaughter house is run within the EU directives and the hunting is practiced within the EU legal framework as prescribed by the Birds Directive....you have no right to impose on others
Joe Camilleri
Apr 5th 2011, 11:39
m.bugeja
please tak a look at yesterday's dotEU programm and see what Joe Hennon said regarding the verification of data.
http://public.di-ve.com/streaming/on_demand_media_streamer.aspx?id=4779&encoding=8&backUrl=streaming%2fon_demand_event_encoding.aspx%3fid%3d4779
Lino Farrugia
Apr 5th 2011, 11:08
It should be known that both the FKNK and BirdLife Malta were asked to be parties on the BirdLife International and FACE statement of the 9th September 2009.
The FKNK had agreed to be party on the condition that so did BirdLife Malta.
BirdLife Malta refused.
Secretary General - FKNK
m.bugeja
Apr 5th 2011, 10:16
I've seen the light. I want to go buy a shotgun & blast every bird out of the sky.The more convincing hunters try to be, more unconvincing they sound & remember if you don't report your bird killings then Autumn becomes a satisfactory alternative to Spring.
Johnny Xerri
Apr 5th 2011, 10:41
Hunters do not need to convience; you or BLM....but the ECJ and the EU Commission...so far they have managed...the ECJ ruled that Autumn does not in Malta's case result in an acceptable alternative, and the EU Commission went as far as accepting the 2010 and 2011 season.
The fact that you will not buy a shotgun and 'blast' every bird in sigh is a big relief...we only accept hunters who shot at game species and during spring only at turtle dovs and quail...but you are allways free to see if the poachers will take you up!!
As for autumn becoming an alternative....dream on the ECJ court case is final...so much so that Bird Life International & FACE had signed an agreement to abide its ruling...a ruling that gave right to Malta to reopen the spring season.
Joe Camilleri
Apr 5th 2011, 10:16
Mr Raymond W. Zammit,
without this false propoganda, BLM bank account would start to see the bottom
Johnny Xerri
Apr 5th 2011, 09:50
BLM never had any credibility...even one of their most hardcore founding members left when the then MOS changed to BLM...with this same member going as far as revising hunted bird figures down that he had published in a previous book. This ex-member has even casted a serous doubt on the Yelkouan Shearwater status, which BLM claim is 10% of the world Yelkouan Shearwater population....yet he claims its more likely to be around 5.5% (and provides data to support his claim).
Moreover, only yesterday, on DOT EU, the EU evnvironemnt spokes person (unlike what BLM&AD claimed) said that they concied that the ECJ found that autumn does not consitute an alternative to spring and that spring hnting IS POSSIBLE IN MALTA, SUBJECT TO A DEROGATION AND PRACTICED WITHIN THE PARAMETERS OF THE BIRDS DIRECTIVE. So once again BLM have been proved wrong.
How can one lose credibility, if to start with the main ideologies are riddled with misrapresentation of facts, down right manipulation peoples perceptions, and a Foreign Director who legged it just as they were proved wrong!!!
SPRING HUNTING IS LEGAL PUNTO E BASTA!!!!
Charlie Borg
Apr 5th 2011, 10:36
Well, BirdLife Malta certainly would not be 'credible' to people like you, Mr Xerri. Whether people who are in authority agree with hunting or not, for reasons best left unmentioned, including political reasons and mileage, the facts are there for all those who have a 'grain of salt' to see: natural justice, by its very nature, demands a complete halt to hunting, punto e basta. You can continue breaking the natural law but the fact remains: in today's world, there is no place for hunting in modern society. It will be a long and arduous struggle to convince all concerned about this, but again, you cannot hide from the truth. The way society is, in Malta, proves it.
A SPITERI
Apr 5th 2011, 11:30
SUR BORG .
GOD DINJA KOLLHA GHADA TEZISTI IL KACCA , MUR FEJN TRID GO L ERBA KONTINENTI U ISSIB IL KACCA. MUR FIHEM LIL DAWN IS SOCJETAJIET KOLLA MELA HABIB U ITFALHOM IL MELH INTI GO MOHHOM. TRID HAFNA MELH TA IMMA GHAX KIF DIGA GHATTLEK GOD DINJA KOLLA GHANKA GOL EU SUR BORG LI HIJA SOCJETA MODERNA IMORRU GHAL KACCA. LA JMORRU HUMA IMMORRU AHNA. PUNTO E BASTA
Johnny Xerri
Apr 5th 2011, 16:07
@ C Borg,
Which modern EU member state has banned hunting?
Is hunting banned in the modern USA?
Or in modern Australia?
This is not about Malta...its about a Birds Directive that if we comply to then we can enjoy hunting spring, summer and autumn (actually summer is not even subject to the Birds Directive since it is only for wild rabbits).
Unless international laws change then no bunny hugger is enpowered to force his principles on me or other hunters. And as long as hunting is sustainable then laws will not change and bunny huggers will still be left with their best practiced hobby...that of weeping and sulking...maybe at least their crocodile tears can be collected for some watering...since that is the closest conservationist effort and input that bunny hugger will ever arrive at!!
Charlie Borg
Apr 5th 2011, 09:37
BirdLIfe have certainly NOT 'lost their credibility' as far as I am concerned. Hence, I am voicing the fact that Zammit does not write on my behalf. Definitely not.