Mario Vella, Naxxar
Elusive ‘known poacher’
BirdLife’s Spring Watch 2011 online diary on Tuesday, April 12, states: “A known poacher was seen inside the Foresta 2000 nature reserve with a shotgun. He ran as soon as he realised he was being watched by our team.”
Following the incident where the Foresta 2000 park ranger was shot in the face a few years back, how do BirdLife explain not having taken action against a “known” person hunting within the same nature reserve?
From this incident it would appear that BirdLife Malta have no interest in eradicating the problem but use any act of poaching for their own publicity in their bid to tarnish hunters. Comparing the numerous reports made by BirdLife to the actual lack of arrests of criminals they reported only leads one to conclude that their allegations give rise to far more questions than they in fact answer.
Popular Stories
In Discussion
10 Comments
Post comment
Please sign in or create your Account to post comments.
Mr J. Borg
Apr 22nd 2011, 12:19
mr. Vella,
1.For a starter you may state that you are a hunter
2.The BLM Ranger was ACTUALLY injured and suffered arson attacks - as duly evidenced
3.The hacking of trees at Natura 2000 site was another BLM invention according to you - albeit some of your peers declared their guilt in Court.
I find it awkward why so many hunters and their female apologist, spend so much effort to attack an NGO which has effectively detered the killing of protected birds - by kicking goverment to at least try to feebly enforce the laws (notwithstanding how flawed they may be).
Would we had FKNK condemning (verbally) illegal hunting? Would government had curtailed (on paper) indiscriminate hunting? Would a single policeman respond to a call? ....... if BLM members had not (and continue) thanklessly work to save the little we have!
Mr Johnny Xerri
Apr 22nd 2011, 14:04
Would we have BLM do this work unless they got a wage for doing so....a wage which they never make public?
BLM would never admit that sustainable hunting exists...even if declared so by the ECJ and the EU Commission...even if in line with the Birds Directive...so if we are to be credible everybidy must admit to when at fault...I condem each and every illegal hunting practice...do you like wise condem the extrimism of certain NGOs? Do you condem BLm for claiming that spring hunting is illegal...when presently evrybody knows this was false?
MARK MIFSUD BONNICI
Apr 21st 2011, 12:06
Ramon Casha
You seen to know a lot about drug traffickers, pimps and human traffickers as much as you know about poachers. Could you please pass on some names of any such criminals.
As for the police being unable to do anything without evidence what stops Birdlife from providing evidence of a poacher "known" to them?
Charlie Borg
Apr 21st 2011, 17:58
MMB, you jolly well know how slippery certain evidence is. BirdLife neither has the resources nor the time to spend in such matters which should be in the hands of the Police, if such Police were found to be really capable in such matters as hunting.
Ramon Casha
Apr 22nd 2011, 07:11
It's a widely known fact. Like I said, ask a police officer. They probably won't name names, because as I said without evidence they can't proceed and they might be tipping their hand. As for Birdlife, I'm sure that when they get their evidence they will pass on that information to the police.
Ah but then of course we'll get irate individuals claiming that this constitutes a breach of the data protection act and these poor individuals' privacy.
Ramon Casha
Apr 21st 2011, 11:05
Ask any police officer how many people are KNOWN to be drug traffickers or pimps or human traffickers but who are out and about because, without evidence, there's nothing the police can do about them.
Mr Chris Xuereb
Apr 21st 2011, 10:46
If he's illusive then how do you know he's a poacher? my bet is it's a guy with a gun bent on shoots birds,
Call him what you like
John Neville Ebejer
Apr 21st 2011, 08:54
With incidents like the shooting of a ranger in the face in a protected area, any allegations, even if false, should take background attention by all interested in civil behaviour including and during hunting activity.
A concerted effort in weeding out criminals like these should be on the agenda of all. There is no comparison between a mud throwing campaign and the shooting of a ranger in the face. So anyone wishing to be taken seriously in what he writes and says, should make this clear.
Once such elements are removed, then one should strive to have recognised as sustainable, responsible hunting of game, as it is in other parts of Europe. Such activity is sometimes permitted in Natura 2000 sites, for example and has rangers and hunters collaborating. But then, in such countries, the condemnation of poaching, breaching of the regulations and criminal acts is total and without reserve, expecially, by the hunter communities themselves.
Charlie Borg
Apr 21st 2011, 08:50
Dear Mario Vella:
1. Hunters need no further tarnishing - they did and do a splendid job themselves.
2. BirdLife need no publicity - all they are interested in is the wellbeing of the natural environment, with special emphasis on birds.
3. BirdLife's job is not to 'take action'. Only the Police can 'take action'.
4. Indeed, yes, Birdlife's 'allegations give rise to far more questions' but the questions raised are not directed at them but at the Police and at the local authorities.
In conclusion, you and your type can continue trying to throw dirt - and stones! - at BirdLife for however much you want, but the Maltese people know who to believe.
Mr Johnny Xerri
Apr 21st 2011, 21:46
Dear Charlie Borg,
1. Using your yard stick (not mine) I assume that you are rather tarnished as well since you are a male like the priests who abused kids, like the judges who accepted bribs, like the husband who beat his wife...it is only petty mind who take advantage of the shorthcomings of the few in order to tarnish the many...I for one would never do this...every social strata has its black sheep...so if you are a member of society your duty is not being a black sheep and helping in eradicating the black sheep and not tarnishing others with their black sheep.
2. Birdlife need no publicity...lol...forgot the misinformative black t-shirts? Forgot the posters and Tv appearances claiming spring hutning is illegal? Forgot the conservation project whicheven a founding member of MOS now BLM discredited n his book? BLM go to great lenghts to 'promote' their good heart...who konows why!!!
3. Qoute " BirdLife's job is not to 'take action'. Only the Police can 'take action'."
So in your words (again not ine) BLM are not able to report a known poacher because their job is not to take action...yet they had no problem taking action and searching Mizieb without police and a search warrant...who knows why?
4. Well if BLM give the picture of a war zone and the police only catch a few culprits per season...somewhere there is a discrepancy...either the rampant abuse is only a minor abuse or the police are not doing a good job...well I guess from the evidence that BLM presents I for one know what to conclude...and so do the readers...if rampant abuse had to be the order of the day...one would have numerous filmings and dead birds to show...BLM's few filmings & pics per season contardict their own allegations.
In concusion...it is not important what the Maltese people believe...what is important is that the ECJ and EU Commission did not believe BLM.
Moreover, from the feedback I got this year from people I did not know but was apporached by, is that the Maltese have indeed realised that even though hunting was banned for practically 3 years... breeding birds did not spring out of every courner & contrary to what they were lead to believe by BLM spring hunting is not illegal...so now people know better and the Maltese peopleknow who to believe.