datasets.iitb.crawledDocs.yn_08Oct08_file_211 Maven / Gradle / Ivy

    22°C Mostly Cloudy Feels like: 22.4°C UV Index: 6 Quick Search Information Services Media Sections Subject The government's hunting debacle Name (your name) To (email address of the recipient) Message (optional) Comment about "The government's hunting debacle" Full Name (your name) Email (your email address) Home town Phone Name Comment Please limit your comment to a maximum of 200 words. Word count: 0 Tuesday, 7th October 2008 The government's hunting debacle Mark Mifsud Bonnici, Kaaturi San Ubertu, San Pawl tat-Tar!a Anthony Caruana's letter Punishing All To Get At The Few (September 30) deserves an answer since the deceit behind the exaggerating of illegal hunting statistics is unknown to the government and most hunters. His comparison to football "criminal behaviour" cannot be used as an example because football hooliganism, though rampant, unlike illegal hunting in Malta is not being manipulated and used as an excuse to ban football. As he did, I too endorse Publio Danny Rosso's views. However, I tend to disagree that the problem of illegal hunting cannot be controlled. Considering that hunting is practised in an area of 118 square kilometres, control is more than possible. But does the government have the will to control? Hunters might not be in a position to effectively control all abuse but they have suggested ways of doing it. Among other sensible proposals to safeguard the future of hunting, Kaaturi San Ubertu put forward a proposal whereby the monies collected from hunting and trapping licences go towards the setting up of an environment warden system. Another proposal is that the hunting area in Malta be split up into zones, each with its own warden unit. The government has not only ignored these proposals but did not even have the decency to acknowledge them. The government can, to say the least, save face. On BirdLife's insistence, the government chose to implement a two-week afternoon hunting ban in September for the past two seasons. While denying the hunters their right to hunt, this ban proved utterly useless as the number of poachers caught was insignificant. It however gave our local and foreign "ornithologists" a chance to roam our countryside unhindered. Given police assistance and using all the sophisticated equipment normally used for bird watching, what was intended as a chance to apprehend the poacher in fact resulted in a series of alleged "massacres" that were not even backed by concrete proof. These alleged massacres and a few other illegalities were used by "ornithologists", who are obviously anti-hunting, to stir up public opinion, through the media, to a problem that is, in all truth, well below the alleged. If one had to consider the 16,000 licensed hunters and the number of reported illegalities my point is made perfectly clear. The reaction was, judging by most people's online comments on The Times, to a call for a permanent hunting ban on Malta. These foreign and Maltese anti-hunters are led by David Conlin. A member of CABS, a life member of BirdLife Malta and the RSPB, Mr Conlin, who coordinates the spring and raptor camps in Malta, is circulating a petition addressed to EU Commissioner Stavros Dimas to ban hunting in Malta. Most Maltese calling for this ban have already signed it as have another 1,000 foreigners. The intended amplifying of figures related to hunting illegalities (see ) is aimed to gain support for this ban from the gullible Maltese public and from foreigners who do not even know Malta existed. The government, rather than implementing our proposals, seems to prefer the presence of foreign anti-hunting activists, posing as birdwatchers, whose interest is not controlling this abuse but of amplifying it to their benefit. After the government's spring hunting debacle, which can only be blamed upon the government's trust in an anti-hunter as its EU hunting negotiator, the PN's guarantee of the continuance of hunting in spring has resulted in its suspension. Would it surprise anyone if autumn shooting were to follow the same fate? The anti-hunter's intention is to see Malta become a hunting-free zone. The government's request to investigate their reports clearly shows that their credibility is being questioned. The government was deceived into guaranteeing spring hunting to the hunter by an anti-hunter. Hopefully, it will not allow itself to fall into the same trap again by blindly believing what they state. Allowing the amplified illegalities, which these anti-hunters unquestionably report in the local and international media, to escalate, as they have, into mass anti-hunting hysteria is misleading people into supporting a hunting ban. Apart from investigating these exaggerated claims the government should take on proposals directed at curbing the illegal hunting problem and, most importantly, aimed at clearing the misconception that the government is incapable of controlling abuse. Subject The government's hunting debacle Name (your name) To (email address of the recipient) Message (optional) Comment about "The government's hunting debacle" Full Name (your name) Email (your email address) Home town Phone Comments A.Farrugia (4 hours, 53 minutes ago) @Mr. K. Cassar I remember some years back, being (and still am) an avid rambler, I was in M'Forn with my family, more specifically Ghar Qawqla (appologies for the wrong spelling my fellow Gozitans). There next to what is (rightly or not) known as the Richard England flats, there is a path that leads to magnificant open countryside. The path leads to Ramla l-Hamra. We do this trail often as it's magnificant. Well on one occaison, paint was used to write RTO, DO NOT ENTER THIS PATH, on the ground by I am sure fellows of the conservazjonisti. There were some locals there who saw me fuming and told me, ignore those signs, proceed, it's just the hunters trying to keep you off their illegally posed limits. So as you say, there are hundred of illegal RTOs. @Mark Mifsud Bonnici To state that "The illegal hunting problem can only be blamed on Government's persistent disregard of suggestion from the hunters associations for proper control and regulations" is cheeky. So since there is no policeman at every corner, I should take it upon myself to disregard every law ? Further comment would be very superfluous suppose. J. Borg (20 hours, 6 minutes ago) Mr.Gatt You allege most of the countryside is privately owned then its high time such owners ensure that a system is introduced confirming and clearly demarcating such land. To date every hunter can practically occupy a site, brandishing a shotgun and claim the land is his, whilst shooting (lets just say at flies). Do you think anyone can walk quietly/safely along the (surely) public paths? It seems you concede that birds are not hunters property but still kill them. Further restrict hunting areas & hours? Are they really restricted, apart from obvious urban areas and some meters from public roads (not paths) not to mention the sea. The public has to do with the handful of reserves (albeit these are favourite hunting grounds). September to Spring (bird hunting) bar after 3pm only when CABS were around and just Sundays (+1pm) gift to the public! It is families, tourists and those whose activities do not impinge on the environment that have an overriding right to enjoy the countryside and for longest duration rather than a bunch of arrogant and selfish hunters, who stubbornly persist in occupying the countryside just to thrill themselves with the kill Andrew Gatt (21 hours, 9 minutes ago) @ J Borg....most land in Malta is privately owned. May I suggest you invest in a couple of land parcels rather than parroting away that hunters occupy public land to the public's detriment? You seem to have fallen victim to Birdlife's "Reclaim your Countryside" lies!! And thank you SO SO much for your excellent suggestions to further restrict hunting areas, hunting hours etc. All of us hunters are eagerly awaiting the next words of wisdom! U hallina! Tghid mhux hekk, jewwww!!??!! @ Roger Flett......most shotguns used in Malta are of the automatic variety that does not break. However, walked-up game like quail and woodcock will certainly not hang around for you to load your gun's chamber when flushed! It simply doesn't work that way! Besides, most hunting is done on privately owned or leased land - and the countryside is not exactly knee-deep in corpses now, is it? ;) Seriously, though, given our limited areas and countryside, it is far, far more important for a hunter to be aware of potential accidents when the gun is actually fired at quarry, rather than when carried during the hunt. MARK MIFSUD BONNICI (21 hours, 17 minutes ago) Mr/ Flett. I agree with you entirely. Safety and Gun handling are not part of the hunting "Test". All one requires to own a shotgun for hunting purposes is to undergo a test which my 10 year old would pass with flying colours. Another of our proposals is to scrap the existing licensing procedure. New applicants must (a) be sponsored by two licensed hunters under forfeit of their own license, and undergo a two-year probationary period supervised by at least one of the two sponsors (b) pass tests in bird identification, in weapons and their handling, and in hunting techniques; (c) produce a police certificate of good conduct; and (d) install a gun-cabinet at their residential address subject to police inspection. This proposal too has been totally ignored by Government. The illegal hunting problem can only be blamed on Government's persistent disregard of suggestion from the hunters associations for proper control and regulations. On years of a total lack of enforcement. And on hundreds of licenses issued to people who can never be considered as hunters. The law abiding hunters who number in the thousands want change. It is Government that doesn't Ray Bajada (23 hours, 50 minutes ago) @ George Attard Mark is right. The government is capable to control abuse but is UNWILLING to do so! Government is assisting the Birdlife game!!!!! Where there is a will there is a way.......but......government has no will to give hunters what they deserve and what they were promised. Roger Flett (23 hours, 57 minutes ago) It makes my toes curl to see the way that hunters walk in the country side with their loaded gun either slung over their shoulder (as in the picture) or cradled in their arms. If they pass close , then invariably at some stage the gun is pointed directly at you. Whether the safety catch is on or not, this is mind bogglingly stupid and dangerous behavior. I have only ever once seen a gun broken and correctly carried pointing at the ground. Many guns do not break but they should have empty chambers and be pointing at the ground when the shooter is moving. Surely Malta has laws governing the safe handling of guns in public places? If so why isn't it enforced? Sylvana Zarb Darmanin (23 hours, 57 minutes ago) Mr. Mifsud Bonnici, a very good and factual letter. I hope that comments posted to it will be similarly respectful and factual. george attard (1 day ago) mark i agree with your letter except the very last sentence : there is no misconception that government is incapable of controlling abuse THEY ARE INCAPABLE full stop. J. Borg (1 day, 1 hour ago) Valid point Mr. Mifsud Bonnici, to allocate hunting (trapping is over?) licences, to finance watch points to deter, and if not enough, identify the hunters who break the law. However this can never be used as an excuse to reintroduce Spring hunting. Two members from CABS and the hunting federation can 'man' these points - obviously hunters will have to trade their shotguns for binoculars when on duty. As to the self assumed 'right' to hunt - pls. note that hunters, apart from killing birds (hopefully unprotected) that aren't hunter's property, hunters also force the public away from the countryside - that again is not (in its greater majority) any hunter's property. In this regard, selected days - but surely not Saturdays and Sundays - should be 'allowed' for hunting, whilst specific hunting locations (not the other way round), be designated for such urge to kill and eat a dozen of turtle doves/quails. Such set-up will enable a more effective watch to be maintained - easily expose abuses in non designated areas - and finally free the countryside to the far greater number of people who long to enjoy the countryside without insisting on killing a single bird (or rabbit). Kenneth Cassar (1 day, 2 hours ago) @ Mark Mifsud Bonnici: Your proposal regarding the establishment of an environmental warden system is a good one. However, it is worrying to read further down that you complain of "ornithologists (having) a chance to roam our countryside unhindered". Unless it is private property, everyone has the right to roam the countryside unhindered. But perhaps you were referring to the entry into private property, in which case I would agree with you. I once suggested that MEPA provide signs to be given to true owners of private areas in the countryside. This would help expose the illegal RTOs and reveal the true ones. This way, people would have no doubt regarding what is private property and which is not, and so would only enter private property at their own risk. Previous article  Next article  Article © Allied Newspapers Ltd., printed on Wednesday, October 8, 2008. This article is for personal use only, and should not be distributed. Poll Have the proposed power tariffs affected your use of electricity and water? yes no don't know don't care Fun Stuff | | | | | R 1040