Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/1391768
8 maltatoday | SUNDAY • 11 JULY 2021 INTERVIEW A derogation too far? In your Facebook video-mes- sage, you talked about 'conti- nuity' from your predecessors – some of whom were very com- bative – and also promised that 'the war will continue'. What does this tell us about the direc- tion you actually intend to take the FKNK in, as its new Presi- dent? First of all, thanks for watching the video. But when I mentioned 'continuity': bear in mind that the FKNK, as an organisation, has a 45-year history. Throughout that time, it has always been the voice of Malta's hunters and trappers. So all I meant was that the FKNK will simply continue in that role. As for the word 'war': obviously, I didn't mean it in the sense many people might think. It's more a reference to all the difficulties and challenges that the Maltese hunting enthusiast finds himself facing every day. And there have been 'challenges' that, unfortu- nately, we lost in the past: among others, when Malta joined the European Union as a full mem- ber. We knew we would be negative- ly affected: even because other member-organisations of FACE [Europe's hunting federation] had warned us that a lot of things were going to change. And it was true: a lot of things did change. The seasons were shortened; the list of [huntable] species became smaller; a lot of restrictions were introduced… including quotas: which, let's face it, we barely even knew what the word even meant, at the time… In fact, you also mentioned that 'some battles might be lost'. Was this a reference to the Euro- pean Commission's case against Malta over finch-trapping? It is one of the things I had in mind, yes… So you're expecting to lose the case? [Shrugs] When you see how the European Commission is approaching this issue – not just with Malta; it is also applying pressure to countries like Spain and France – you realise that this institution clearly does not want to engage in dialogue. It only wants to 'destroy' [teqred]. And I see that as a big problem, myself. What makes the European Un- ion a beautiful thing, if you ask me, is that it is based on 'unity'. But 'unity' doesn't mean 'con- formity in everything'. I have hunted in a lot of European countries; and I have seen with my own eyes how the culture, the practices, the way things are done… it's always going to be different, from one country to another. So you can't realistically expect all countries to conform to the exact same regulations: which might be good for some, but not for all… But the point of this ECJ case is that Malta seems to be (once again) trying to circumvent a Europe-wide ban on trapping… this time, by applying a deroga- tion 'for research purposes'. Is that really the case, though? Or is it just an excuse to allow Mal- tese trappers to continue their hobby, under a different guise? Well, if you're going to ap- proach it from that angle… I honestly don't think we'll ever get anywhere. But no, it's not 'just an excuse'. Let me put it this way: it was the European Commission itself – when it first took us to the ECJ over the issue of trapping, in 2018 – which declared that the Maltese government could not apply a derogation for finch-trap- ping… when there was no scien- tific data to base that decision upon. So the Maltese government de- cided to act on that statement, by applying a derogation for trap- ping for research purposes. We are collecting the necessary sci- entific data – which, after all, the European Commission demand- ed itself… Scientific data about what, though? For instance, about a particular species 'reference populations'… to find out, among other things, where the seven species of finch actually breed. Now: admittedly, the method- ology has so far been limited only to 'ring recapture'… and we hav- en't had many successful recap- tures, in the past year. But even from the few ringed specimens we have recovered… we found out, for example, that at least one of the species also nests in Russia. That's a whole new reference point, for Maltese ornithology: it is something we simply didn't know before. So what I don't un- derstand is: instead of just dis- missing this derogation as 'an ex- cuse'… why don't ornithologists participate in this research pro- ject themselves? If they're really interested in the preservation of birdlife, they should also be inter- ested in the research. And besides: there's no actual 'taking of birds' involved here. All we do is trap the birds, ring them, and release them back in the wild… That, however, assumes that the idea behind the project is indeed 'scientific'. And it applies to other regulations involving hunting, too: like the quotas you mentioned earlier. Statistics suggest that, in practice, only 2.7% of hunters actually report- ed their catch this year. Doesn't this undermine the whole point in having a quota system to be- gin with? If we're going to talk about that 2.7% figure… let's also look at where it came from. In Malta, hunters have a legal obligation to report what they take. During the derogation [for spring hunting], it has to happen there and then: the moment you shoot the bird, you have to report it immediately by SMS. In Autumn, on the oth- er hand, you have to report your total catch – number, and species – only by the end of each session. What this also means, however, is that Malta is the only coun- try in Europe that has a system of live-reporting; and one of the very few that has a legal obliga- tion to report one's catch... The issue, however, is not whether the obligation exists; but whether it is properly en- forced… I was coming to that. The 2.7% figure was for quail, during the spring season. Now: to hunt in spring, you need to apply for a So far, Malta's hunting community has successfully resisted most attempts – at local, and European level – to curb its excesses. But now, even FKNK's new president LUCAS MICALLEF concedes that the net may finally be closing in, on at least one controversial practice: the trapping of wild song-birds Raphael Vassallo rvassallo@mediatoday.com.mt JAMES BIANCHI