Birdlife yesterday stood by its claim that the government was proposing an amnesty for hunters to declare illegally stuffed birds, despite the government insisting this was not the case.
If adopted, the proposed amendment would see hunters pay a one-off €500 fine plus €50 for each stuffed bird they had not previously declared.
These would have to have been caught before the last amnesty back in 2003 and hunters would be allowed to keep the birds.
The proposal was tabled for discussion at the government’s hunting advisory committee, Ornis, by the Wild Birds Regulation Unit. At a press conference earlier this week, Birdlife strongly condemned what it termed an “amnesty”, insisting the proposal would effectively pardon hunters for past acts of killing.
This, it added, contrasted with the current fine for possession of protected species which is as much as €2,500 and confiscation of the specimen.
Animal Rights Parliamentary Secretary Roderick Galdes, however, yesterday hit out at Birdlife’s claims, describing it as “a gross misrepresentation of the nature and the context of draft proposals put forward for discussion”.
Mr Galdes insisted none of the draft proposals involved an amnesty for illegally stuffed protected birds.
This is like a thief stealing your family jewels, hiding them for 10 years and then the government giving me a pardon as long as I gave them €50. It’s ridiculous
Instead, the proposal described penalties for declaration of protected bird specimens which had not been declared to the authorities during the 2003 registration exercise, he said.
Birdlife executive director Steve Micklewright shot back saying the proposed fine was significantly lower than those currently in place.
“Getting people to register and then charging them €50 for every illegally kept stuffed bird is the government forgiving illegal acts. This is clearly an amnesty,” he said, adding that the government’s denial was a play on words.
“This is like a thief stealing your family jewels, hiding them for 10 years and then the government giving me a pardon as long as I gave them €50. It’s ridiculous.”
He also questioned how the government would be able to tell whether a bird had been shot before the 2003 amnesty period. Experts contacted by Times of Malta confirmed that it would be forensically impossible to distinguish between a bird shot in 2004 and 2002.
Meanwhile, the hunters’ federation raised concerns over Birdlife having leaked the proposals to the media.
It also warned Mr Micklewright that a gesture of disapproval he made at an FKNK member during a press conference would “only lead to confrontation”.
Asked about this, Mr Micklewright said the gesture was nothing more than an expression of his disapproval and he raised concerns over what he feared was a threat of physical violence.