It was not an easy decision to take, in the prevailing circumstances.

Last Thursday, the government announced that it was closing the spring hunting season with immediate effect after it had received reports of yet more illegal hunting of protected species the day before.

Hunting has been a contentious issue in Malta for decades, and more so over the past few years since Malta became a member of the European Union. With hunters insisting they had a right to practise their hobby, environmentalists claiming that laws were being broken and the European Commission keeping a close eye on the situation, the government was walking a tightrope.

It chose to allow spring hunting again this year, changing dates relating to the duration of the season and at the same time introducing new, stiff penalties and fines for hunters found breaking the regulations, to act as a deterrent. The move pleased neither side of the fence – the hunters because the penalties were increased and the environmentalists because the season was opened anyway – and at the same time it must have rankled with the European Commission too.

Let us also not forget that before the spring hunting season opened, the European Commission sent a supplementary letter of formal notice, amounting to the initiation of legal proceedings against Malta, to extend the bird hunting prohibition not only to 2005-6-7 but for any other subsequent year.

Now, 10 days before the hunting season was due to close, the government took the decision to end the season abruptly in the light of reports that illegal hunting of protected species was taking place. There has always been illegal hunting, sometimes it was rampant, and mild steps were taken to deal with the situation. This time, the government tackled the issue with decisiveness.

Whichever way one looks at it, it was a bold decision on the government’s part. The political strategists of the party in government know that the government has taken a political risk that could prove costly. Yet it is precisely this that adds weight to the government’s decision.

With an election in the offing – it could possibly be held before the next spring hunting season – it is now evident that hunting will be, as never before, a burning political issue which will likely play a decisive role in the electoral result.

The government knows that its move could have its political consequences, but it realised that it could no longer tolerate a situation where, in spite of the tougher penalties, hunters continued to shoot at protected species.

The Hunters’ Federation insists that only a few of its many members were not observing the rules, adding that it was unfair that the rest of the law-abiding hunters had to suffer too. But the warnings that had been given remained unheeded, and the government felt it had no other option but to act the way it did.

As said earlier, Thursday’s decision will have an effect on the coming general election. How decisive that effect will be cannot be gauged. Elections in Malta are normally decided by a difference of a few thousand votes, and considering that the hunters’ lobby is rather large, the way hunters will vote when the time comes is likely to play a part in the final result. As such, the position that will be taken by the Malta Labour Party on the hunting issue will be a determining factor too.

To look at the issue from the opposite end, the government may have lost hunters’ votes, but it may have earned others.

There are many who may not necessarily be active environmentalists, but who were pleased that the government has taken a strong stand on the issue.