From Mr A. A. Farrugia

There are several conflicts at different levels and many of them are not easy to resolve. Environmental conflicts may present similar difficult and sometimes painful issues, so they might need to be very carefully analysed before any type of solution or compromise could be offered.

The question of hunting in Malta is not as simple as some may try to portray it. It is not possible in a short article to cover all the aspects of such a conflict, so I shall limit myself to a few thoughts. Perhaps the representatives of the hunters and trappers and those of the environmental groups could sit together and try to find a win-win solution for all concerned. This is not easy.

For a number of years, a friend of mine and his father used to be very keen hunters, but I never considered sharing their pastime. Perhaps I was not very eager to wake up very early in the morning. I had had enough of that every day for a whole year as I had to get the first ferry to Gozo to teach at the Lyceum there.

There is no doubt in my mind that the singing of birds in the morning is much more pleasant and melodious that the sound of hunters’ guns and rifles firing away. I used to hate the melting pellets that fell on the roof of the car when I used to drive out in the countryside every now and then for some fresh air and park my car.

On the other hand, one needs to remember that the hunters’ favourite pastime has probably been a tradition in their family for a number of generations. This tradition, presumably, goes back to the times of the knights and possibly before. If I am not mistaken, apart from members of the former aristocracy, there used to be very prominent people who took up the same pastime, including members of the judiciary. Here in the US everybody has heard about Vice President Dick Cheney’s hunting incident in Texas in February of last year when instead of a quail he shot his friend, or seen photos of the former presidential candidate John Kerry hunting geese.

Stereotypes?

One of the first things that needs to be done is to do away with stereotypes, or dehumanising hunters. One assumes that there are all kinds of people among hunters, which means that not all hunters are thugs. Those thugs who did not succeed in controlling themselves in the past weeks ought to be brought to justice. If they happen to be hunters, they need to be given a lesson. If they are not hunters, they need to be identified lest somebody is hiring them to give hunters a bad name.

Those hunters who consider their pastime as a sport need to be provided with an alternative activity during the shortened season or seasons so that they can give vent to their impulses or satisfy their perceived needs. This could be done if a number of serious and sponsored competitions are promoted for experienced hunters, say in spring, for clay pigeon rounds, and other more sophisticated competitions, if there are any.

I do not find the shooting of birds to my liking, but there are hunters all over the world for different kinds of species. Therefore in Malta, we need not go from one extreme to the other as long as society worldwide continues to accept certain forms of this so-called sport with controlled rules and regulations. We should also ask, with respect, all those foreigners who think they know better, to take a look at what hunters do in their own countries before they attempt to pass judgement on Maltese hunters.

Local vociferous environmentalists need to be careful about their claims on “bird killing”, which as I have already said, I am not very fond of. But then one should not go to extremes. Do the environmentalists eat chicken? I do not expect them to eat a chicken that is still alive. Perhaps they should not eat any meat. Perhaps they should not even eat vegetables.

Trappers

Trappers may not necessarily be hunters, and the other way round, although it is possible to find people who are both trappers and hunters. It might be useful to make a distinction between the two, because trappers seem to be in favour of keeping the birds alive, even if in captivity. Most probably, some trappers like birds in their own ill-conceived way. It should not be too difficult to persuade those trappers who really like birds to change their mode of operation and their pastime. Perhaps they could be given more responsibility to take care of current and new nature reserves and new large aviaries.

I am aware that the authorities have the very difficult task of trying to find a balance between the demands of the hunters and trappers on one side, and the environmentalists on the other.

It was a pleasure for me to sit down in the open air for breakfast on a couple of mornings at a hotel on the island of Phuket last summer, and enjoy looking at all kinds of birds come and eat the crumbs falling from the tables, and sometimes those that were still on the tables!

I have no doubt in my mind that hunters and trappers in Malta would similarly enjoy such scenes, even if consciously or unconsciously they might wish to have the birds for themselves. If the moderates among the environmentalists and the hunters and trappers were to sit together, they could try and analyse what their basic needs are and possibly look for some common ground.

They could take a leaf from Dennis Sandole’s three-pillar approach to conflict analysis and resolution, and select and consider the elements that might apply. They would need to consider the issues involved, the objectives of each side, and the means of achieving their objectives. They would also need to consider their own orientations, whether it is avoidance, accommodation, confrontation, compromise and/or collaborative problem solving. If the moderates of both sides are not in a position to accomplish these difficult tasks, the authorities need to find facilitators acceptable to both sides, and not necessarily under the official aegis of Ornis. These moderates or facilitators must try and find a way of reaching a settlement in the short run, but eventually they have to try and find a resolution to the problem for the long term, and possibly some change on both sides.

Although this conflict needs to be analysed primarily at the local, regional or national level, the authorities or the facilitators have to consider the implications of this conflict at the international level as well, since the matter has now been brought to the attention of the European Union institutions.

While the environmentalists have every right to seek redress at various levels, if they really have the interests of the country at heart, they should check whether their action would eventually do more harm than good to Malta before taking action. As for the European Union institutions themselves, while the Birds Directive is useful in principle and practice, it might be more appropriate and productive for the European Parliament and the EU Commission to devote more time to the resolution of a real human tragedy where an EU member State like Cyprus is still partly occupied by candidate country Turkey, instead of wasting time and resources on the shooting of a few birds!

Alfred A. Farrugia

Maryland

USA