Malta's strategic position along the central Mediterranean flyway makes it a vital stopover for migratory birds. Yet over the past decade, a succession of policy decisions has gradually eroded protection for wild birds, intentionally favouring hunting and trapping over long-term conservation.
A shift in priorities
In 2013, the government established the Wild Birds Regulation Unit (WBRU) under the Parliamentary Secretary for Agriculture, Fisheries and Animal Rights. Though intended to streamline the regulation of hunting and trapping, the move coincided with relaxed protective measures. One such change pushed the afternoon hunting curfew from 3pm to 7pm, effectively two hours after sunset, exposing roosting birds of prey to greater risk of being shot during autumn migration.
Institutionalised trapping seasons
The Maltese government has continued to open annual autumn trapping seasons through EU Birds Directive derogations. These allow the live capture of species such as the Song Thrush and Golden Plover, with national quotas reaching up to 5,000 and 700 birds respectively. While presented as tightly regulated, monitoring remains inconsistent, and enforcement reports repeatedly highlight widespread illegal trapping and under-reporting. The result is a system where trapping has become a near-permanent fixture of Malta's wildlife policy, rather than the strictly limited exception envisioned under EU law.
Finch trapping disguised as research
In recent years, the government authorised the capture of seven finch species under the guise of "scientific research". This followed the 2018 European Court of Justice (ECJ) ruling that found Malta guilty of allowing finch trapping, a practice that contravenes the EU Birds Directive. Over 3,500 trappers were permitted to capture wild birds on a large scale, effectively mirroring previous frameworks with little or no meaningful scientific basis. Such mass capture is unnecessary for legitimate research. This blatant abuse was again found illegal by the ECJ in 2024, yet the government persists in challenging the rule of law.
Rabbit hunting season amended to target waders and breeding birds
The 2019 amendments to the Protection of Wild Rabbit Regulations (Legal Notice 100/2019) further weakened wildlife protection. The changes removed the restriction that rabbit hunting be practised only on private land with the landowner's permission. This meant that rabbit hunting could take place anywhere, except in a few bird sanctuaries, creating a smokescreen for hunters to target migrating waders around the coast and breeding birds in valleys and wetlands, including Natura 2000 sites.
Spring hunting controversies
Spring hunting remains a thorny issue. With a 1,500-bird national bag limit for the 2025 season, the Turtle-dove (Streptopelia turtur) had already been unlawfully shot this year, three days before the hunting season officially began. Permitting spring hunting of the already vulnerable European Turtle-dove is not only ill-advised but also a direct contravention of the EU Birds Directive, which prohibits hunting during the species' critical return migration and breeding periods. The European Commission has repeatedly challenged Malta's compliance with the Directive in respect of spring hunting.
Challenges for enforcement
Despite the WBRU and other regulations, illegal hunting continues unchecked, particularly during migration when thousands of birds pass through Malta. Enforcement authorities are deliberately under-resourced and frequently find it difficult to keep up with widespread activity. On paper, quotas and regulations may exist, but there remain serious issues with compliance and verification.
All derogations, including trapping for Song Thrush and Golden Plover, trapping under the guise of research for finches, and spring hunting, along with the lack of enforcement of bird protection laws, have led to the opening of infringement proceedings by the European Commission.
Relaxations in laws and regulations
Legal Notice 251 of 2025 further relaxed restrictions on scientific bird-ringing. The intention was purely to allow trappers to be labelled as bird ringers in the near future, a further attempt to justify trapping derogations. The possibility of trapping under the pretence of "research" risks undermining data integrity, animal welfare, and enforcement.
Constitutional protection for traditions
The government has announced plans to embed hunting, trapping and other "traditions" as constitutionally protected hobbies and cultural practices. This elevation may hinder future legislation and prioritise cultural rights over science-based conservation, even if it is presented as protecting Maltese heritage.
A harsh truth
This feature only scratches the surface of the deliberate obstacles currently facing bird conservation in Malta. The cumulative effect is undeniable: the preservation of Malta's natural heritage is lagging far behind its exploitation. Policy decisions are consistently skewed towards short-term gain over ecological stewardship, from extended hunting curfews and trapping seasons to the constitutional entrenchment of hunting traditions.
In Malta, conservation has repeatedly taken a back seat to convenience and cultural indulgence. Leisure and personal interest have been prioritised over the future of our shared environment. Unless enforcement, monitoring, and policymaking are realigned with scientific evidence, Malta risks losing much of its biodiversity, not through necessity, but through deliberate political neglect.
As long as these detrimental policy choices persist, no political party can credibly claim to support environmental conservation. Reversing these actions, restoring science-based decision-making, and investing in long-term conservation rather than temporary appeasement are essential steps towards a genuine commitment to nature.
Antonia Micallef is Public Engagement Executive, BirdLife Malta