• Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.

    Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
ZEISS DTI thermal imaging cameras. For more discoveries at night, and during the day.

Birdlife is overdoing it (Times of Malta) (1 Viewer)

What planet are you on? There are massive differences between legal and illegal practices whether 'supported' by the government or not.

But the government lied and a 'legal' and acceptable (in Maltese eyes) practise became 'illegal', after pledging it would'nt do so. The backlash from that has resulted in more birds being killed right or wrong. When governments upset its electorate through 'such spin', people rebel, sometimes illegally. Not saying its right, but its a realistic fact of life, like it or not. I may be wrong but I suspect there are Maltese politicians who thought 'if we are totally transparent, we may not get enough votes to get us into the EU, (and its riches) so we ll elaborate a little, or 'forget' to mention a few things'. You should know all about government rebellions, Im sure its not legal to blockade the ports, but it still happens. If the Maltese government had have been transparent from the word go, nobody would have any reason for such action.
 
The birds would still be being shot whether the government lied or not. In fact greater numbers in the past so it's no rebellion and it's not a fact of life.
 
. The backlash from that has resulted in more birds being killed right or wrong.

The 'backlash' is a result of the hunters of Malta being told they are acting illegally under European Law

When governments upset its electorate through 'such spin', people rebel, sometimes illegally.

So why isn't the majority of the citizens of Malta 'rebelling' and demanding their Government withdraw from the EU?
Because they want the benefits - that's why. Fair enough, so why aren't the majority of citizens calling on their government to abide by the Laws their Government have subscribed to?

I may be wrong but I suspect there are Maltese politicians who thought 'if we are totally transparent, we may not get enough votes to get us into the EU, (and its riches) so we ll elaborate a little, or 'forget' to mention a few things'.
Malta didn't join the Union until 2004 and the Directive dates from 1979 - it takes all of 5 seconds to find out the content of the Birds Directive http://europa.eu/legislation_summaries/environment/nature_and_biodiversity/l28046_en.htm

Ignorantia juris non excusat

It's still a legal argument

Your real gripe, judging from your earlier posts is against politicians and governments in general - Perhaps you should do a little research on political and legal issues, it's more empowering in the long term than being an arm chair revolutionary!
 
Last edited:
Andrew Gatt(on 4/5/10)No, J Cutajar, they are LIARS because they LIED to us. They told us repeatedly IN WRITING that Spring Hunting would remain THE SAME as it was prior to EU Accession. Hah! The untruth of the century.....to win our votes and get Malta in the EU.

Have you ever stolen prey from your cat, it will not forgive you for days. 4,000 ex nationalist hunters and trappers have longer memories and they have been betrayed to pander to birdlife

Opinions from hunters themselves, sounds like there is a lot of ill feeling to me, all common criminals? With such hostile feelings, do you think the maltese government and Birdlife have handled this situation well? Do you think this will help regulated hunting in the future? And therefore protect endangered species? I think many birds could have been saved by now and in future years, through truth and comprimise

they counted oveer 600 shooting incidents this spring

After the restrictions came in place, and they knew this is illegal? This is not a stiff two fingers up to the government?

Rosbif, If this same situation happened in France, you know there would be a reaction.

(PS. Is it still ok to eat songbirds in France?)
 
For anyone not clear on the law as regards Malta (as reviewed and laid out in 2005!!), it's clearly provided by Anne on this thread

http://www.birdforum.net/showthread.php?t=41945

It's also clear that Malta from the outset was determined to avoid their responsibilities under the EU Birds Directive

To suggest Maltese hunters have been 'lied' to is a JOKE - it was the HUNTERS who wanted to keep anti-hunting commentaries/letters out of the mainstream media - they knew about the Birds Directive and the possible effect it would have PRIOR to Malta's accession. Restrictions have been put in place by the Maltese Gvt as a direct result of Malta's comittments under EU law - however, clearly not enough to allow them to fulfill their committments

ACTION TODAY

From The Malta Independent November 27, 2001

FKNK want to stop anti-hunting material

Staff Reporter

The Federation for Hunting and Conservation has said that publishing anti-hunting material will certainly influence voting in future general elections or a referendum on EU membership.

In the third of a series of five press releases, FKNK secretary Lino Farrugia said the anti-hunting material which seems to be distributed by foreign sources, especially by members of the European Union, will
certainly influence the vote of local sportsmen at the polls.

He said the federation had already sent several messages to newspapers asking them to refrain from publishing this anti-hunting material.

Mr Farrugia added that the last two press releases will be released by the federation at a later date.''

Comment from editorial

Very interesting article, suggesting that Malta's accession to the EU might be in danger because of the effect upon the votes of hunters of anti-hunting letters in the Maltese press.

These, containing the suggestion that Malta will have to abandon its current hunting liberalism if it wishes to accede to the EU, represent something the hunters obviously don't want.

What is to debate, obviously, is whether this is a double-bluff on the part of the hunting organisations - so terrified are they of anti-hunting legislation that they would like us to flood the Maltese press with articles so that the referendum on accession goes against Malta's joining the EU because of the votes of hunters. Maltese students of mine tell me the vote is on a knife-edge, Norwegian-style and that this kind of issue (affecting c.10% of the population) could swing it to vote against accession and keep Malta beyond Brussels' influence
. ''
 
Last edited:
(PS. Is it still ok to eat songbirds in France?)

Skylark, Song Thrush, Mistle Thrush, Redwing, Fieldfare, Blackbird, (Turtle Dove) are all legal 'game' and the well-known poaching of Ortolans still continues on a large scale to which the authorities turn a blind eye in the name of keeping traditions alive.
 
Opinions from hunters themselves,
(PS. Is it still ok to eat songbirds in France?)

Your some joker3:) - Andrew Gatt spends most of his life hanging around such forums justifying every kind of criminality perpetrated by his Rambo buddies on Malta - all the while blaming Birdlife Malta for most of the evils in the world. Basically he's a pathetic shrill|8||
 
Last edited:
Can we keep focused on Malta?

Perhaps you can address the comments I raised on the previous page Russ and on this one

(or do you, like the hunters in Malta, prefer to ignore what you don't like! Well at least it's not illegal to do that on a bird chat forum ;))
 
First of all, I have been a birder for 20 odd years, Im not pro-hunting. Im saying the prohibitive approach has not changed attitudes. The hunters are in Malta with birds flying over them every day, where we cannot physically protect them. Like it or not we have to comprimise or the slaughter will continue. Fact. By going down the current path we are not changing Maltese attitudes, birds will get shot. The directive has yielded some results, but has obviously hit a plateau. You keep on doing what you've always done, you'll always get what you've always got. Maybe its time for the carrot and stick approach, and get to the core issues, and what we could do to make them stop, and permanently change attitudes. I ve no doubt there are some who will carry on regardless, there always are, but for so many to have this resentment is not good for anyone. They are humans like us, they do not see hunting as wrong, they must be treated with some respect. Some must think that the rights of birds are being made more important than their human rights to do what they 'enjoy'. Why should every country in the world be tipped into the same way of thinking, our way of thinking. Not so long ago it was the British that shot the Great Auk to extinction. It is their home, not ours, the point Im constantly trying to make is that they are there with the birds, we are not, we cant police the whole island all the time, as long as they are unhappy, birds will die. Maybe its time for people to stop being so idealistic and face up to the fact we may have to change tactics, for long term action. What ever action has been taken over 30 years is simply not working
 
Today there were quite a good number of falcons mostly lesser, Common Kestrels, Marsh Harriers and Hobbies Alot were SHOT AT. this happens yearly when the camps are over. The Maltese hunters nearly all of them should not be trusted they shoot at anything that flies i have school mates who are proud to shoot at protected birds with their father

This continues with my dis respect towards my country i chose the wrong hobby to practice on this stinking rock..
 
Today there were quite a good number of falcons mostly lesser, Common Kestrels, Marsh Harriers and Hobbies Alot were SHOT AT. this happens yearly when the camps are over. The Maltese hunters nearly all of them should not be trusted they shoot at anything that flies i have school mates who are proud to shoot at protected birds with their father

This continues with my dis respect towards my country i chose the wrong hobby to practice on this stinking rock..

This is the ugly reality of what is happening on Malta - amazingly some here would have us beleive otherwise|<|
 
I appreciate that Adin, and there are many who feel like you, but it doesnt stop them. We need to stop them. What is worrying is the attitude of schoolchildren.There are not the resources to police the whole island and lock up every bad hunter, in fact this would breed more resentment. We have to find some middle ground. One bird being shot is better than two birds
 
I appreciate that Adin, and there are many who feel like you, but it doesnt stop them. We need to stop them. What is worrying is the attitude of schoolchildren.There are not the resources to police the whole island and lock up every bad hunter, in fact this would breed more resentment. We have to find some middle ground. One bird being shot is better than two birds

Yes its true that is decreasing and still there are much more school children that are not into hunting. In my opinion the hunting and trapping situation developed from times were teenagers had nothing to do in their free time so they opted to hunting and trapping in large numbers... Nowadays schools are campaigning against illegal hunting and many children are growing different then they use to grow up

There more civilized and do know the damage that is done by illegal hunting. Also another factor that children are growing and not practice hunting because in modern time there are loads of things to occupy them from Computers to Sports Activities But as birdwatchers there are fewer i am one from other five of young birders its quite bad compared to the whole population. We still do not surrender we are here to stay and keep working for the Environment. The ignorant is that who destroys
 
First of all, I have been a birder for 20 odd years, Im not pro-hunting. Im saying the prohibitive approach has not changed attitudes.

Its not supposed to. It's supposed to prohibit behaviour outlawed by the EU. There are many laws in the UK I don't like, but I obey them (mostly!)

The hunters are in Malta with birds flying over them every day, where we cannot physically protect them. Like it or not we have to comprimise or the slaughter will continue. Fact.

We wouldn't have to physically protect them if Malta implemented EU Law effectively.

By going down the current path we are not changing Maltese attitudes, birds will get shot. The directive has yielded some results, but has obviously hit a plateau.

Again, the LAW is not about 'changing attitudes' that's the job of priests, polititians, writers/artists, campaigners etc etc - the 'change' has already been made amongst the European Community, hence the Bird Directive which Malta agreed to when signing up to the EU


Maybe it's time for the carrot and stick approach, and get to the core issues, and what we could do to make them stop, and permanently change attitudes.

We have 'carrot and stick' already - the carrot is Malta's economic/social and political benefits as a Member State of the EU and the 'stick' is penalisation if they refuse to comply with its CONDITIONS.

I ve no doubt there are some who will carry on regardless, there always are

Yes, there will always be repeat offenders of any crime - what normally happens is that they are incarcerated so they don't inflict their damage on the wider community.

, but for so many to have this resentment is not good for anyone. They are humans like us, they do not see hunting as wrong, they must be treated with some respect. Some must think that the rights of birds are being made more important than their human rights to do what they 'enjoy'. Why should every country in the world be tipped into the same way of thinking, our way of thinking.

Some vague and idealistic notions of human rights/morality/inverted imperialism is irrelevant and armchair hyperbole.

Stay focused. We are talking about illegal hunting. Maltese hunters are breaking EU Law and Malta is failing to address it.

It is their home, not ours, the point Im constantly trying to make is that they are there with the birds, we are not,

Wrong. Malta is in the European Union. As far as the Law is concerned and who must abide by it, it's a shared home. Oh, presumably if you've been a birder for 20 years, you'd realise we are actually with the birds they are shooting illegally - just not at the same time of year.

we cant police the whole island all the time

No. We can't. That's the job of the Maltese authorities.

, as long as they are unhappy, birds will die.

If they are only happy when disobeying laws they've agreed to and/or shooting discriminately at everything that flies over them, they need THERAPY imo.

Maybe its time for people to stop being so idealistic and face up to the fact we may have to change tactics, for long term action.

Agreed. Either Malta complies by EU law by investing in the necessary infrastructure/policing/wildlife crime teams/shows political will to obey the Directive (ie. does far far more to control illegal hunting) - or they should suffer the political and legal consequences of failing to abide by EU Law.

What ever action has been taken over 30 years is simply not working

Not true. Word of mouth from the ground (Adin) and from BL agencies is that some inroads have been made in Malta. The Birds Directive is working in most countries, who've at least provided a lot more resources and infrastructure to implement the Directive (although still away to go with regard to habitat protection/natura 2000 etc but there is progress even there). Perhaps you missed my earlier point on the previous page where I mentioned the need for international regimes (and compliance!) to address global environmental issues, but implementation and obeyance of the Birds Directive is crucial for protecting both endemic and migrating birds. Derogation from key areas in the Directive, does not work for the protection of listed birds under the Directive and is counter to the ethos and objectives of the Legislation. (see my earlier link 2 posts previous). Malta's attempt to drive a coach and horses through one of the most critically important pieces of environmental legislation to come out of Europe in recent years and their failure to control better illegal hunting on their sovereign territory in direct contravention of EU Law is a blatant disregard for the EU itself as well as it's fellow MS who do comply with the laws.

The EU is being too soft. If it were human rights abuses, Malta would have been kicked out of the community by now.
 
Last edited:
The EU is being too soft. If it were human rights abuses, Malta would have been kicked out of the community by now

a)Its not human rights abuses though its birds being shot, as in France, Italy, Greece, Cyprus etc etc..., perspective, if you prefer birds to your own species I think somethings gone wrong somewhere

b)Britain wasnt kicked out for human rights abuses after an illegal war. We can ignore the UN.....
 
Last edited:
Am I so wrong?

That's it? That's your argument? That the European Law shouldn't apply to the Maltese hunters because they didn't agree to it? That's laughable in the extreme.

Both the Maltese Government and the hunters are accountable. The first for failing to do enough to enforce restrictions/sanction criminal behaviour and the second for failing to abide by the laws that Malta has entrenched into Maltese Law but has not implemented effectively.

Again, this is an issue of LEGALITY under both Maltese Law and European Law but, given the one word responses of your last post, an issue that is a tad too subtle perhaps but lies at the very heart of the argument against Malta and the hunters.

It's entirely inappropriate to use the debate on illegal hunting and trapping in Malta as some kind of platform to air rather nefarious views about the weakness of 'democratic' representation and vitriolic rants about politicians - save it for the Revolution! It's insidious to present this as an apology for the Maltese illegal hunting or as a basis to argue a compromise on criminal behaviour.

Do some research. The Maltese 'people' have better representation in their Government than you do in England! They use the STV system which is far more proportional than FPTP.
 
a)Its not human rights abuses though its birds being shot,

Exactly my point - if their human rights record was as attrocious as their record on dealing with hunting banned under EU Law, they'd have been kicked out.

if you prefer birds to your own species I think somethings gone wrong somewhere

Supposition and not connected to upholding the Law against illegal hunting.

b)Britain wasnt kicked out for human rights abuses after an illegal war. We can ignore the UN.....

Irrelevant and argumentative

(more relevant would be the case of Turkey's associate membership of the EU if you really do want to compare how the EU treats those with a poor human rights record)
http://www.wcl.american.edu/hrbrief/v4i3/turkey43.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accession_of_Turkey_to_the_European_Union

But ... it's really not relevant either way other than just to indicate the priority the ECJ gives to human rights over environmental 'rights' which is even more reason that what legislation is in place to protect the environment/birds/fauna is upheld and enforced
 
Last edited:
My contribution to this thread has been to highlight and try and clarify the legal situation in Malta because, given the entrenched attitudes of the hunters, the Law of the Union is the only effective vehicle with which to protect birds flying over Malta in the long term - it quite obvious they will never do it unilaterally outside membership of the EU - nor will they need to as long as they reap the benefits of being in the EU - other Member States/NGOs and the ECJ will continue to put pressure on them until Malta complies with her obligations under European Law.

I've nothing else to say really.

We need clarity. Malta needs clarity. Obey the law or face sanctions.
 
the European Law shouldn't apply to the Maltese hunters because they didn't agree to it

Im not saying that, Im saying its caused bad feeling. I didnt agree to European law either, we joined the EEC, no referendum on the EU, that isnt democratic. I dont want European Law dictating my freedoms. If the Maltese population did vote yes, its likely down to bribes, look at Ireland? Laws are created by governments of politicians, what qualifies them to dictate anything in my life? The point Im making is this is how the hunters think, despite 'the legalities' as you keep saying, attitudes ARE important, Birdlife should also look at social aspects, its one package. Drugs are illegal in this country, 'the law' doesnt stop people doing it. 'The law' locks them up, gives them no help, dumps them on the street even more likely to commit crime than before. You have to tackle the root causes. The fundamental argument is getting them to stop doing it. NOW, not after we wait for some law to be enforced. Can a small state like Malta really afford a dedicated bird police? Birds become rarer by the day, time is of the essence. Birdlife, the EU and Maltese government have to go much further than just 'its illegal, you get caught you go jail'. That doesnt stop people, and thats exactly what we all want.
 
Last edited:
Warning! This thread is more than 14 years ago old.
It's likely that no further discussion is required, in which case we recommend starting a new thread. If however you feel your response is required you can still do so.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top