The revelation that, in 1986, the then Labour Prime Minister had given the hunters’ federation exclusive use over public land in Miżieb and l-Aħrax tal-Mellieħa – an agreement which was subsequently endorsed in 1989 by the Nationalist Party then in power – prompts two immediate thoughts.

The first exposes one of the major governance fault lines about politics in this country. This is the way in which politicians are prepared to use public land, which they are meant to hold in trust on behalf of the nation, to placate different minority interest groups for short-term political gain.

The so-called hunting reserve at Mellieħa – which allows hunters unfettered monopoly to shoot in the hunting seasons over a large swathe of beautiful countryside to the detriment of the rest of the population – is of a piece with the approach taken over the Armier and St Thomas Bay boathouses and elsewhere.

Hunters would argue that similar land concessions have been made to Birdlife, which has been given two nature reserves from the government. The comparison, however, is spurious because the nature reserves are there to protect wildlife and the fences are invariably necessary to stop hunters from killing migratory birds resting or breeding in them.

However, the exposure of this hitherto unknown political agreement between governments and hunters leads to the very heart of Malta’s unique problems over hunting and may also prompt a possible solution to this vexed issue. It is advanced here, not completely tongue-in-cheek.

Hunters are a minority in Malta. Given a chance to express their view freely in a referendum, the Maltese people would probably vote to see spring hunting banned. Thousands regard it as a vile and uncivilised sport. Still, like all minorities in a democracy, hunters should be given freedom, within the law, to be allowed to practise their pastime.

Better management of hunting is the precondition for success. This means recognising the fact that 10,000 hunters as a proportion of the population constitute only about one 40th of those Maltese who wish to enjoy Malta’s increasingly scarce countryside.

Malta’s and Gozo’s combined total of agricultural and dry open land amounts to about 200 square kilometres. A proportional split in allocation of land would therefore give hunters about five square kilometres for their own hunting use, with the balance of about 195 square kilometres allocated to the rest of the population.

The figures not only highlight the problem of the incompatibility in such a tiny island of hunting and enjoyment of the countryside but also give a possible clue to the introduction of a proper management regime. If hunters were to be given their own hunting areas – as they already have been at Mellieħa – of, say, 15 square kilometres in Malta and Gozo for their own exclusive use during the hunting season only, this would have a number of benefits.

Effective policing and control of hunting would be possible. Hunting within these areas could be properly regulated by the hunters themselves. It would allow diverse bird species to be enjoyed elsewhere in the Maltese islands by birdwatchers. And, most importantly, those wishing to enjoy the beauty of the Maltese countryside would be free to do so outside the designated hunting areas throughout the year without being confronted by hunters carrying guns.

Hunters should be allowed to practise their pastime. But they should do so in space allocated in direct proportion to their numbers so that the majority of the population can enjoy the rest of the Island in proportion to theirs.