Hunting  groups have offered their support to the government after the European Commission opened infringement proceedings against Malta concerning the research derogation related to the seven species of wild finches, and BirdLife Malta said it is "ironic" that the FKNK is portraying itself as "a victim".

The European Commission initiated infringement proceedings against Malta concerning the research derogation related to the seven species of wild finches.

The FKNK in a statement said that now in its fourth consecutive year, the Finches Research Programme (FRP) is endorsed and supported by the Federation for Hunting and Conservation - Malta (FKNK). 

"Following a quick read-through of the infringement formal notice letter, the FKNK believes that BLM and EURING instigated the infringement as a 'pay-back' gesture against Malta's recent amendment to the relevant legislation, which removed any direct reference to EURING. This is totally unrelated to the conservation of finches, all of which enjoy a healthy 'least concern' conservation status in the wild. EURING is not an authority, but another organisation that coordinates bird-ringing schemes."

"It was therefore unprincipled and possibly illegal for EURING to be specifically mentioned in the local regulations in a manner that prevented any other bird-ringing scheme from operating in Malta.  Moreover, this granted BLM's scheme a self-designated monopoly on local bird ringing from the early eighties to the present, precisely because EURING is BLM's bird ringing records databank."

"Therefore, in the FKNK's humble opinion, the insults and unfounded, BLM-influenced assumptions in the vocabulary of the letter, such as the allegation that the FRP has scientific purposes, does not pursue genuine research, is hunting in disguise and the 'cherry on the cake' that it does not ensure appropriate enforcement, are not becoming of the EC and clearly reflect the language we have all become accustomed to from BLM."

"The FKNK vows to continue safeguarding the interests of its trapper members by offering expert advice on this issue to the Maltese government, particularly to the Honourable Minister Clint Camilleri and his legal team."

Kaccaturi San Ubertu statement

Kaccaturi San Ubertu said it considers the European Commission's latest infringement procedure against an ongoing research programme on finches as nothing less than "a blatant blind show of support for Birdlife Malta that has long strived to ban trapping in Malta simply because it abhors the practice even if used as a scientific tool."

When one considers the repeated actions by the Commission in the light of the 2008 "massive two-year information campaign against bird trapping by Birdlife after the European Commission  approved funding for the €350,000 project, it becomes pretty clear that the Commission, in the case of  Malta, has no intention of permitting trapping or even considering it as a means to study birds."

"In all its action against trapping, the Commission infallibly refers to the lack of ornithological data for the Maltese Islands, which before the trapper's initiative was solely conducted by Birdlife Malta. It now acts against a study aimed at addressing this shortcoming purely on the deceitful allegations of Birdlife Malta. With it's years of a monopoly on Bird Ringing and Euring, Birdlife Malta openly opposed the changes in our laws that permitted hunters or trappers to become bird ringers and their right to form ringing schemes."

"The European Commission persists in its denigration of Malta's trappers with no intention to verify fact but based purely on the fabrications of Birdlife Malta, an organization it funded and blindly supported to ban bird trapping."

"In the light of all the above Kaċċaturi San Ubertu offers it full assistance to Government to see justice done. "

BirdLife statement

In a statement of its own, BirdLife Malta said that "it is ironic that, after a deafening silence from the FKNK on two recent and very serious incidents - first, when two Top Council officials were caught hunting illegally in Sicily, and second, when one of their own captive Barn owls, recently released, was shot in Buskett - the organisation has now suddenly found the energy to portray itself as a victim following the new infringement proceedings initiated bye the European Commission."

BirdLife Malta categorically rejects the "false accusations made by the FKNK regarding the current infringement procedure opened by the European Commission on the so-called Finch Research Programme (FRP)."

The Commission's action is the result of clear and persistent breaches of EU law, not the result of "attacks" by BirdLife Malta or EURING, BirdLife Malta said. "Malta has, for four consecutive years, attempted to justify a mass capture of protected finches under the guise of 'research', despite repeated warnings from the EU and overwhelming evidence that the activity does not meet scientific standards required under the Birds Directive."

"On the scientific validity of the FRP - The FRP has never been recognised by independent scientific authorities as a legitimate research programme; The methods used, including the trapping of large numbers of birds with no meaningful scientific output, are incompatible with established international ringing standards; EURING is the official European coordinating body for bird ringing, recognised by Member States, research institutions, and the European Commission as the central authority ensuring scientific consistency and data quality."

"The attempt to remove references to EURING from Maltese legislation was a clear attempt to pave the way for non-scientific, unregulated trapping activities, undermining decades of internationally coordinated research that Malta itself has benefited from."

BirdLife said that the suggestion that the infringement procedure was "instigated" by BirdLife Malta is both inaccurate and revealing. "The European Commission acts only when a Member State fails to comply with EU law. Malta's repeated attempts to disguise finch trapping as 'citizen science' have drawn widespread concern across the scientific community, not only from BirdLife Malta."

The fact that a species is listed as "Least Concern" does not justify derogations for trapping, the NGO said. "EU law is explicit: derogations may only be granted when strict conditions are met - including genuine scientific necessity, no suitable alternative methods, and strict enforcement. The FRP fails on all counts."

BirdLife Malta said that it will continue to "Defend Malta's compliance with EU environmental law, protect the country's natural heritage, provide expert evidence and data to the European Commission and other institutions, and advocate for the conservation of wild birds through genuine, internationally recognised science. All this for the benefit of the common good of our country."

"We urge stakeholders - including the FKNK - to engage in constructive, science-based dialogue rather than issuing unfounded accusations that misinform the public and undermine Malta's environmental obligations."