Contrary to claims by Birdlife Malta and other budding experts trying to influence the Maltese public that hunters are shooting protected birds, the only available official population status (IUCN Red List of Threatened Species http://www.iucnredlist.org/) on the turtle dove and common quail on which any hunting is approved is that provided by the International Union of the Conservation of Nature the IUCN.

This official classification of birds indicates quite clearly, and in black on white, that the species in question are considered to be of Least Concern... meaning that hunting such birds is sustainable. The European Commission publishes all the required data for each country in EU that hunt the turtle dove and quail in autumn. These amount to four million quail, while turtle dove number three million. By permitting such a significant number to be shot, the European Commission, which oversees any excesses wherever hunting is concerned, disproves all the nonsense being fed to an uninformed public by those abolitionists out to ban spring hunting with a vengeance.

The European Court of Justice, from available data, concluded that Maltese hunters have "insufficient hunting opportunities in autumn" and ruled in a legally binding verdict the right for the government to apply a derogation for a 19 half-day period under very strictly supervised conditions in spring. This derogation and the way it is being applied also share the European Commission approval in that it "follows the spirit of the court's ruling".

Both the ECJ and the Commission are well aware that Malta's derogation is being applied "when birds are on their way to breed" and accept this fact as part of their argument that autumn hunting for these two birds in the "exceptional case of Malta" does not offer a "satisfactory solution". So much so that spring hunting under derogation is also practised in other EU member states for similar valid reasons. The UK permits the eradication of certain species by hunting and the destruction of their eggs and nests as do another 17 member states.

It is only in Malta that the ECJ ruling and the Commission's approval of a derogation and the government's application of it is depicted as a disgrace and ridiculed. What the electorate certainly realises, taking into consideration the incessant bad press, is that "foreign" interference and harm to Malta's image is a means to an end, and no abolitionist out to ban a legally applied EU concession can match the expertise of the European Courts or the scrutiny of the European Commission and their approval of spring hunting. The choice of whether the electorate can be fooled is in their hands.

Emanuel Portelli

Naxxar