Issue link: https://maltatoday.uberflip.com/i/897139
maltatoday SUNDAY 5 NOVEMBER 2017 Interview 14 THERE are few things in Malta that do not include some form of po- litical controversy in their ancestry: and it seems the 'Majjistral Nature and History Park', covering the Xaghra l-Hamra area in the north- west of the island, is no exception. Indeed, the park itself can be said to have been born of precisely such a controversy back in 2007 (it is in fact celebrating its 10th anniver- sary). In the early days of the Gonzi administration, the area had been earmarked for the development of a golf course. But following a con- certed campaign by civil society, the plans were eventually dropped in favour of a natural park. Even then, however, a new controversy arose. Within a few years, govern- ment decided to permit hunting and trapping to take place in the park until 9am. With the advent of a Labour administration in 2013, the hunting hours were extended until 10am. Now, the same government is proposing to extend them once more: until 12.30 in the case of hunting, and 2.30pm for trapping. Yet all along, Majjistral Park still doubles up as a tourist attraction, a popular site for visits by schoolchil- dren, among other frequenters. It seems at a glance that one set of vis- itors is about to be given privileged rights of access over all others... and it doesn't help that the activity fa- voured by the bias is largely viewed as 'incompatible' with all other uses for a national park. None of this is to the liking of Sammy Vella: the outspoken former Mellieha mayor, now the chairman of an eight-man board entrusted with the park's management. "It's ultimately a management problem," he will later tell me. "I cannot envisage how the park can be managed properly, when you have cultural, educational and tour- ist activities at the same time as there are hunters prowling around with guns and dogs. That's abso- lutely folly. It's just asking for trou- ble. That is why I appeal to the au- thorities: reconsider. This is a bad decision. This is wrong. It is unsus- tainable, and it should be changed. There is still time to change it: nothing is etched in granite. I really think there should be a rethink at Cabinet level..." Before coming to the rethink, however, let's start with the thought processes that led us to this situation in the first place. We are talking about an 'extension' to hunting hours: almost as though we have all tacitly accepted the idea that hunting should even be permitted in a nature reserve in the first place. So isn't part of the damage already done? "It wasn't the original idea to per- mit hunting and trapping there. In fact, the facility's full name is 'Maj- jistral Nature and History Park'. It was supposed to be a place where families, schoolchildren, research- ers, nature photographers, eco- tourists, could go and visit, enjoy nature, the geological formations, the biodiversity... without being disturbed by anything else. But even at that time, in 2007, the ad- ministration felt pressured to al- low the hunting and trapping lobby some concessions. It was decided that hunting and trapping would be allowed until 9 o clock; so that after that time, park management could host other activities. For a time, that worked. But in 2013, a new administra- tion came in, and eventually, after a lot of lobbying, it was decided to extend hunting hours until 10. The park management had to revise its schedules, so that they would not accept schoolchildren before 10; they would recommend that tour operators would not bring tour- ists to the park before 10... etc, etc. Activities would not be organised before that time, to avoid any con- frontation between these very an- tagonistic types of activities..." Speaking of which: has there ever been any incident involving 'confrontations' of this nature? "It's been limited. What we do get all the time are complaints and funny questions from tourists. They can't understand this strange cohabitation between hunting, and a nature and history park. We try to explain to them that they [the hunt- ers] used to hunt there before the park was instituted, and therefore we allowed some concessions. That is why we try to divide the time al- lotted to these contradictory activi- ties. But if tourists wander in before 10am; or hikers, or photographers... how can you tell a photographer - who came to photograph birds or other creatures at dawn, when the light is crystal clear, or when cob- webs are covered in dew - to come back after 10? Can we postpone dawn? There are a lot of activities that can only be carried out at that early hour, and at that time you do encounter hunters and trappers. But besides a few altercations, we haven't had that many problems. We had found a modus vivendi. But now, with this amendment... basi- cally, the whole day is finished. The only way to avoid confrontation now, is to chase all other activities out of the park..." Nonetheless, Vella concedes that – so far – hunters who actually make use of the Majjistral park are few. "There are not that many. But that was because a lot of hunters wouldn't bother coming to the park if they had to leave by 10. If they could occupy a hunting position elsewhere, they knew it would be taken up by others by the time they got there after leaving the park. But now, with this extension, the whole hunting day is available at Maj- jistral. And it's a sprawling area, a very large expanse of land. It's easy for a hunter to lose himself there. Surveillance is very difficult..." There is also an irony in this situ- ation. Vella reminds me that, were it not for the efforts of past en- vironmentalist campaigns, there wouldn't even be a park for them to hunt in at Xaghra l-Hamra. "Ten years ago, several NGOs and organisations fought against the idea of converting that whole area of garigue into a golf course. They militated against that pro- posal; they organised a campaign against it; until finally, the admin- istration of that time gave in, and accepted the proposal that the area be declared a national park. That way there could never again be the possibility of developing that area into something artificial and un- natural. So basically, if that hadn't happened – if those NGOs had not campaigned for the formation of a park, that area would now be a golf course. This is something that the hunting and trapping lobby fails to acknowledge. If it hadn't been de- clared a park, there would definitely be no hunting or trapping in that area whatsoever. And there would be no agricultural land there, either. So it is ironic that the same lobby that owes its continued activities there – as limited as they were – to the NGOs that manage the park, are now taking up arms against the same NGOs..." On a practical level, the extension would also entail safety issues: and with it, added responsibility (and expense) for the park management itself. "Normally, when we have school visits, we ask if the children will be accompanied by a teacher who is already aware of the nature of the park, and would be able to guide their own students themselves. If not, we appoint one of our guides. But of course, if you have four or five school visits at the same time, we don't have the personnel to pro- vide guides for everyone. And the personnel we do have are volun- teers. The park gets E69,000 a year in grants. That barely covers the sala- ries of two full-time and two part- time rangers. We can't afford four full-time rangers. So we certainly do not have surplus cash to pay for ex- tra guides. Therefore, we have so far charged a fee of around E5 a child, if they come for a guided walk. Now, we can't afford to allow any group of schoolchildren wander around the park on their own. We have to send a ranger with them... to make sure that, if there is some form of confrontation, they would be able to iron it out. Because we can't af- ford to have schoolchildren in any kind of hazardous or doubtful situ- ation..." Aside from 'confrontation', there are certain self-evident dangers involving the use of firearms in close proximity with other people: especially children. In the (admittedly hypothetical) scenario By Raphael Vassallo I cannot envisage how the park can be managed properly, when you have cultural, educational and tourist activities at the same time as there are hunters prowling around with guns and dogs. That's absolute folly Still in time to save Majjistral It is ironic that the same lobby that owes its continued activities there – as limited as they were – to the NGOs that manage the park, are now taking up arms against the same NGOs IRONY FOLLY