Tempers flare as hunters, Greens clash over spring hunting referendum

Article updated with correct version

Alternattiva Demokratika deputy chairperson Carmel Cacopardo said an abrogative referendum to ban spring hunting was necessary to protect birds migrating in spring.

Cacopardo was talking during a debate on spring hunting held at the University of Malta, where he accused the government and Opposition of politicising the issue.

The Coalition for the Abolition of Spring Hunting recently announced that the number of signatures for a petition calling for the government to hold a public referendum on the future of spring hunting had surpassed the 25,000 mark.

"Hunters have no right to kill birds during any hunting season. As a result, Alternattiva Demokratika and the Coalition for Spring Hunting are seeking to resolve this issue by vesting the choice in the people's hands," Cacopardo said.

The debate saw both sides of the hunting divide make angry and loud representations.

Hunters' lobby (FKNK) president Joseph Perici Calascione slammed AD for "spreading false rumours" that spring hunting was is illegal. "Hunters are abiding by a European derogation that was solely approved due to the lack of alternatives to the spring hunting season. Hunters cannot practice their hobby during the other months and they certainly cannot go and practice their sport on another habitat, such as the small size of Malta.

"We are a minority who is merely exercising their hobby. It is unconstitutional for the coalition to call for a referendum as this quashes the rights of the hunters, a feat which goes against all constitutional maxims."

Perici Calascione also accused AD Arnold Cassola was on a personal quest to make all hunting illegal and accused it of vindicating the hunters.

St Hubert's Hunters spokesperson Mark Mifsud Bonnici also argued that Maltese hunters should not be discriminated against and treated differently from its European counterparts.

FKNK chief executive Lino Farrugia even claimed the referendum would mean nothing would stop AD "from gathering signatures for a referendum in favour of abortion or against fireworks and horse racing."

On his part, Cacopardo lambasted the PN and PL for politicising the issue, insisting that the votes of 15,000 hunters were being used for political leverage and consequently, none of the two parties were taking a clear stand. "Hunters are bullying the political parties through the spring hunting issue."

Parliamentary Secretary for agriculture and animal rights Roderick Galdes argued that his government's position was made clear in its electoral manifesto. "The Labour Party had previously said that it seeks to balance the rights of the hunters and those of the conservationists. Consequently, the government will not repeal the spring hunting referendum but it will still be committed to tackle illegal hunting and rectify any irregularities within the field."

His Nationalist shadow, MP Charlò Bonnici said the PN would respect the result of the referendum. "The referendum is the ultimate democratic tool for people to voice their opinion. If it comes to a referendum and if the country votes in favour of the abolition of spring hunting, the PN will accept the result and respect the majority's wish."

Both MPs refuted claims that their parties had forged pre-electoral agreements with the hunters' lobby. Galdes insisted that law-abiding hunters should not pay for the behaviour of poachers, but also admitted that an agreement between hunters' and environmentalists was near to impossible. "The government will not take sides but will balance the rights of the hunters and environmentalists, and seek to strike a balance between Maltese and EU law."

On his part Birdlife executive director Steve Micklewright posited a scientific argument against spring hunting. Micklewright argued that despite hunters claiming that they were the best conservationists, the issue of hunting stems down to simple ecology. "Why kill the birds that will replace the birds?" he argued. "Irrespective of whether you are a conservationist or a hunter, the reality is that in killing the birds, the hunters will lose their hobby while more severely, species would be lost.

 "This is not a sport, birds belong to Malta and the Maltese have every right to enjoy them. The shooting of a migratory bird is hindering all efforts of conservation. It is crazy to shoot down a bird with five eggs inside."

Micklewright also said that he hopes for an amalgamation of ideas with FKNK but conceded that at present, the time was not right as BirdLife does not have enough confidence. "Hunting is not a privilege; hunters are excluding the people from enjoying the countryside and are spoiling Malta."