Hunting ‘obscenities’ happen all over Europe, Yes camp says

Hunting “obscenities” do not occur only in Malta but across Europe too, IVA Bhala Maltin u Ewropej spokesperson said.

Kathleen Grima, who is also the legal representative of hunting lobby FKNK, was taking part in a televised debate organised by the Broadcasting Authority ahead of next Saturday’s spring hunting referendum.

Grima, arguing in favour of retaining spring hunting, was referring to how hunting could be practiced in Malta during the spring season and how Article 2 of the EU Birds Directive “was clear about reaching a balance between conservation and recreational hunting”.

“Hunting is a tradition, a socio-cultural activity that should not be abolished. Hunting in spring takes place in several countries across Europe … we are not the only ones carrying out these obscenities in spring,” Grima said.

She was however quick to interject when SHout spokesman Mark Sultana referred to her comment, saying that “yes, killing a bird is obscene”.

“I’m not saying that hunting is an obscenity … it is how SHout have described it. I didn’t mean it that way,” Grima insisted.

Sultana, who encouraged the electorate to vote No against the killing of birds in spring, especially since the birds would be migrating to the European continent to breed, said killing birds just for fun and calling it a sport “is a disgrace to sports”.

An upbeat Sultana said that throughout the campaign he realised that there wasn’t much convincing he needed to do “because the Maltese already love animals and the natural environment”.

Urging the electorate not to be “scared of voting for change”, Sultana said that Saturday’s referendum – asking the electorate whether they want to abolish hunting in spring – was “a historic moment that affects the future”.

“I know there are a number of undecided who don’t really know how they should vote but remember that you will be alone in the voting booth,” he said.

Explaining that that the population of turtledoves and quails was on the decrease, not strictly due to hunting, Sultana said killing birds just out of fun “simply doesn’t make sense”.

“Where is the conservation status in killing birds before these can breed? Hunters will still be able to hunt 40 species during the five months of the autumn season. When the Yes lobby says this is recreational hunting they are tell you that the hunters enjoy killing. If you believe in values you can’t twist them around according to your needs,” he said.

Grima, clutching on to the ‘values’ comment, said that people with different religions still respect each other while Sultana pointed out that religion and values were different while different religions shared common values.

The Yes spokeswoman said that spring hunting was about hunting two species, where birds hunted amounted “to 16,000 compared with the 7.5 million that can be hunted in Europe”.

“There is balance in spring hunting,” Grima said, adding that the countryside could still be enjoyed by everyone while seeing the good work carried out by the hunters in conserving the environment. “They create a welcoming environment for the birds and balance is also about respect and tolerance to other people’s hobbies.”

Grima said tolerance meant respect one’s passions. Arguing that voting No in the referendum would be “selfish”, Grima said the birds hunted in Malta wouldn’t have yet paired. She said, that the European Court of Justice itself said that the amount of birds hunted in spring was insignificant.

The opening of the spring hunting season is determined by the amount of birds which hunters would have declared to have caught during the autumn season. Grima said that there was no suitable alternative to spring hunting.

“I appeal for balance … who am I to vote against this right?” she said, adding that the pro-hubby lobby was only asking to be equal to European hunters. “Other countries have to the right to apply a derogation and we should retain the same right. Voting no is denying Malta this right, making Maltese less than other Europeans.”

Questioning how he could be called selfish for being in favour of keeping birds alive, Sultana urged the electorate to weigh the arguments put forward by the two camps and to vote with their minds and hearts.

“Change brings fear, but being part of the change makes you proud. Malta has already shown it wanted to move forward, detaching itself from past practices that weighed it down. We banned animal circuses because we are against animal torture. Now we have a chance to write a small chapter in the rich history of our country. Voting No is voicing yourself in favour of life.”