The costs of administering and policing the spring hunting season far outweigh those of holding a referendum on the contentious hobby, according to the anti-spring hunting lobby.
Speaking during a televised debate organised by the Broadcasting Authority yesterday, Shout spokeswoman Moira Delia argued that the hunting season was costing the tax payer significantly. “Every season comes with several studies on crime and bird migration, not to mention the cost of policing the season and prosecuting law breakers. These are all coming out of taxpayers’ pockets,” she said.
A national referendum can cost several million euros, with the last one, which brought the introduction of divorce, running up a €4 million bill.
Ms Delia was joined by another spokesman from the Spring Hunting Out camp, Mark Sultana, who argued that hunting was a privilege and not a right.
Mr Sultana said the pro-hunting lobby often used the word ‘right’ when discussing spring hunting.
Every season comes with several studies on crime and bird migration, not to mention the cost of policingthe season and prosecuting law breakers. These are all coming out of taxpayers’ pockets
He said the derogation allowing spring hunting was meant as an exception to the rule and was not to be abused.
“This is meant for situations where birds are agricultural pests, for example. In our case, it is being used to appease 10,000 hunters.”
Reacting to this, pro-hunting lobby spokeswoman Kathleen Grima insisted the derogation was also used to allow a sustainable hunting option.
“The point of EU legislation here is not to do away with hunting altogether. On the contrary, it is to allow it to flourish in a sustainable way,” she said.
The two sides of the debate offered their own interpretation of sustainability. While that of the pro-hunting lobby was based on the EU legislation that set strict controls on hunting, the anti-spring hunting lobby argued that spring hunting could not be carried out sustainably.
“This is when birds are on their way to mate; we are killing them before they have had a chance.
“This goes against the concept of sustainability,” Mr Sultana said.
Meanwhile, amateur fisherman and author Stanley Farrugia Randon said fishermen have nothing to fear from the referendum on spring hunting because there were already regulations in place.
Speaking at a press conference in Buġibba held after the debate, Dr Farrugia Randon said fishermen already behave responsibly by not catching fish that are breeding. “Rules and regulations are already in place to ensure fishermen behave sustainably.”
Fishermen also had nothing to fear from the referendum because the sector is already regulated – unlike spring hunting.
At a separate event the hunting federation launched a campaign “towards the conservation and safeguarding of local resident bird species” and is offering free bird-feeders embossed with their logo for distribution.
The federation said a number of these were already in use in some schools. “The cold weather and heavy rainfall of winter, at times, renders the survival of local resident bird species difficult due to the lack of their food supply,” it added.
Additional reporting: Juan Ameen