Hunting may be a controversial pastime but it contributes at least €32.4 million a year to the economy, according to economist Mark Bonello.

The figure, based on the average annual expenditure to maintain the hobby, equates to almost €2,300 per hunter, considering there are about 14,000 registered.

Mr Bonello, a hunter himself, originally conducted field research in 2007 and has since updated the figures to reflect the annual increases in inflation.

“The expenditure is equivalent to 0.4 per cent of GDP, not an insignificant amount when taking into consideration it derives from a minority in society,” Mr Bonello said.

He spoke to the Times of Malta on the eve of the autumn hunting season, which opens tomorrow and is likely to bring about a fresh bout of wrangling between bird conservationists and hunters.

Hunters pay a licence fee and insurance that tot up to some €1.3 million a year.

The amount is actually bigger because some opt for a higher insurance premium.

There are also some hunters who choose to pay an additional licence of €70 to hunt at sea, which is not factored into the equation.

But the hobby carries other costs like gun maintenance, dog rearing, cartridges, rents paid on fields to be used as hunting grounds and fuel costs during the hunting season.

While such expenses help the economy spin, bird conservationists have often decried the cost of enforcement on the public purse, especially during the spring hunting season.

Mr Bonello was unfazed by that argument, insisting that a judicious analysis would weigh the cost of enforcement today against the cost of enforcement if hunting were to be abolished.

“Abolition of anything invariably necessitates greater surveillance and enforcement, which automatically increases costs,” he said, adding that enforcement would not end if hunting was banned.

Impact on tourism

A regulated hobby where enforcement was aided by the thousands of hunters out in the field was of greater benefit to society and less expensive than a ban that would still have to be enforced, he pointed out.

Adopting a cost-benefit approach to the hunting issue, Mr Bonello does recognise hunting’s impact on bird numbers.

“Sustainability is a downside of hunting but this concern has almost been eliminated by the Birds Directive, which imposed measures to ensure bird conservation is safeguarded,” he said.

Another impact of hunting is on land use, which can cause conflict with other sectors of society.

This issue is also linked to what some perceive as the detrimental effect hunting has on tourism, which has a direct contribution of 15 per cent to GDP.

Mr Bonello disputed this, insisting it was not borne out of fact. “Tourism has been growing year-on-year despite the annual anti-hunting hype in Malta and abroad by some bird conservationist organisations.”

Tourism has been growing year-on-year despite the annual anti-hunting hype

He drew a comparison between the 2008 and 2010 interlude, when spring hunting did not take place, and subsequent years. Tourist numbers in relative and absolute terms increased after 2010 despite the return of spring hunting, he noted.

Mr Bonello acknowledges tourist complaints about hunting, something which was eloquently raised by European Environment Commissioner Karmenu Vella during his questioning in front of the European Parliament last year. Mr Vella told MEPs that when he was tourism minister not a day had passed that he did not receive letters from tourists complaining about hunting.

But Mr Bonello insisted complaints did not necessarily translate into threats, adding that, despite two decades of negative publicity against hunters, tourism continued to flourish.

“If tourists do not come here because of hunting, where can they be expected to go if hunting is permitted all over Europe?”

He said tourist complaints were not exclusively about hunting but also included the state of roads and traffic congestion. And, yet, hotels were operating at close to full capacity, he added.

The question does crop up about the impact on tourism in the shoulder months, when countryside walks coincide with the autumn and spring hunting seasons.

Mr Bonello said the conflict could be removed with more education about the 33 no-hunting zones around Malta. Hunting cannot take place also near beaches and within a certain distance from residences and arterial roads.

“Most of the undeveloped land is privately owned and in use for agricultural purposes, which raises trespassing issues but, as far as public land is involved, it would be unfair to exclude hunters from it,” he said.

He believes a compromise to share public spaces can be found. At the Majjistral park, hunting has to stop at 10am when many tourists would still be finishing their breakfast, he noted.

“Basing decisions on value judgements caused problems of fairness in society,” Mr Bonello said.

But, in view of what some would consider an expensive hobby, the question remains whether it is worth the cost. Mr Bonello is not deterred.

“It is cheaper for me to buy two frozen quails from Miracle Foods. It is the same for fishing. It will be cheaper to buy my fish from the market. But nothing can replace the satisfaction of catching your own game.”

It is this reasoning that keeps many hunters going. It could also explain the collective sigh of relief hunters let out after they won the spring hunting referendum held earlier this year.

A hunter’s typical expenditure

Expenditure may vary depending on a number of factors including the number of dogs, the rent paid on the land and the type of insurance policy taken out.

Licences:	€59
Membership and insurance:	€35*
Dog and bird food:	€1,200**
Vaccinations and vet:	€225
Extra fuel:	€440***
Rent or opportunity cost of land:	€500
Cartridges and paraphernalia:	€200****
Total:	€2,659

*Basic premium

**Based on three dogs and rearing of quail

***€20 per week for 5.5 months

****Includes gun maintenance, clothes, decoys and other items

kurt.sansone@timesofmalta.com