Government should stop giving trappers false hope

Malta has been trying to appease trappers for years by adopting derogations that attempt to justify the capture of wild finches in defiance of the EU Birds Directive. 

Every attempt so far has failed to convince the European Commission and a European Court of Justice ruling last week shot down the ‘scientific research’ justification pursued over the past few years. 

Under the guise of scientific research, government allowed all registered trappers to capture finches using the traditional claptrap nets on the premise that the birds would be released again to the wild. It was supposed to be a conservation programme of sorts, conveniently labelled by the hunting lobby as ‘citizen science’. 

However, reality showed this was everything but a scientific exercise. Science was simply used as an excuse to allow thousands of trappers to continue capturing finches. The policing of this scientific programme was also questionable. 

The ECJ saw through the sham. The judgment was clear enough: “The Republic of Malta has failed to establish that its derogating regime pursues a research objective because that regime is – not based on scientific methods; gives rise to defective application; pursues an objective unconnected with wild finches conservation and, in any event; is inappropriate for attaining the declared objective.” 

The ECJ ruled that the Finches Project “does not establish a genuine research purpose” thus shooting down the government’s bogus justification. 

Gozo Minister Clint Camilleri, who is also responsible for hunting regulations, has said the government will be studying the judgment. It is clear from his statements that the government does not intend to give up its quest and we can expect it to put forward a new set of rules over the coming months to justify the scientific basis for finch trapping to be allowed. 

Camilleri has tried to make light of the ECJ’s ruling, almost suggesting that with a few adjustments here and there, trappers will be able to pursue their hobby. 

The truth is that any scientific justification for trapping would require major surgery of existing rules and not a few simple adjustments. 

For starters, no scientific argument can ever be justified if the rules allow all registered trappers – thousands of them – to go out in the field. No scientific argument can be justified unless the few trappers that are recruited for this exercise have some form of basic training in scientific methods. No scientific argument can be justified unless the rigorous methods are adequately monitored. And the decision-makers setting out the rules and making recommendations to government should be scientific persons and not simple lobbyists. 

But it is very unlikely the government will go down this strict route because it would mean that only a few dozen trappers at most would be tasked with capturing finches. 

The plain truth is that government’s efforts to try and find a plausible justification for finch trapping only have one aim – to allow all trappers the possibility of going out into the countryside and capture finches with the least restrictions possible. Camilleri is intelligent enough to know this is not possible and that any attempt to camouflage this in scientific language will be shot down by European judges. 

The ECJ has seen through government’s ruse and the latest judgment is clear enough, which begs the question as to why Camilleri wants to persist in leading trappers down the rabbit hole. 

Government’s insistence that it can deliver a derogation that would allow trappers to continue enjoying their hobby is not only deceiving but constitutes a waste of taxpayer money in legal fees to defend the indefensible in Europe. 

Government should stop giving trappers false hope that it can magically appease them unless it decides to breach EU regulations, ignore court rulings and face the unsavoury consequences for doing so. Such an approach would be irresponsible. 

Trappers should stop hoping government can give them what they want. They must come to terms with the fact that their hobby has reached the end of the line.