-
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.
Birdlife is overdoing it (Times of Malta) (5 Viewers)
- Thread starter Jacana
- Start date
Russlac123
Well-known member
You never had a ring ouzel pasty? mmmmm lovely
Adam W
Well-known member
No there isnt which is the whole point of this problem, okay people might not like shooting no matter what but there is a point to me in Britain shooting a Pheasant or a Duck or a Pigeon etc that is all sustainable and done in a responsible manner and there is a purpose behind it(even if you personally agree with it) but whats happening in Malta is completly pointless slaughter and there's no way of justifying it.There is a very big difference between the two situations and they should certainly not be classed as one and the same as they sadly all too often are.
captaincarot
Well-known member
pheasant shooting is certainly not sustainable, pheasant farmers poison shoot and trap , sparrow hawks, buzzards, and goshawks in order to farm their pheasants just so that they can be shot. there's no essential difference between pheasant farmers, grouse farmers, Maltese hunters and the people who support them.
Jacana
Will Jones
from your point of view maybe, which you like to remind us of in every thread on this topic, however as Steve says, maybe we should move on from this now...
Adam W
Well-known member
Sorry but thats just rubbish and as you can see I'm by no means the only one to think that,now as others have said maybe its time to move on.
deborah4
Well-known member
Because in the case of Malta, as a Member State of the EU since 2004, it's the Maltese Government (the supposed representative of the 'majority' of the populace in Malta!) who is in infringement of the law in that it has failed to invest in effective law enforcement infrastructure required for Malta to control and police the widespread illegal hunting and trapping. It receives generous funding from European taxpayers and in return there is a legal commitment to enact European legislation. Part of that legislation governs how all EU members must protect migrant birds - the ‘Directive on the conservation of wild birds (79/409/EEC)’ (the 'Birds Directive'). As such, Malta, has not enacted European Legislation in a way that makes it possible to fulfill their legal obligations under European Law. They are, as a 'majority' in infringement of EU Law. The majority elect the governing Party. The Government, acting on a mandate from the People, are infringing the Law as applicable to a Member State of the EU.
Until the 'majority' of voters in Malta, condemn and withdraw political support for their own Government for failing to invest in resources/infrastructure to protect migrating birds, all are 'guilty' by omission. Until that happens, anyone who uses arguments in the context of ILLEGAL hunting in Malta to defend LEGAL (or illegal!) hunting in Malta as some kind of inalienable right, is acting on self interest which has little to do with the wholly separate issue of the illegal hunting of birds protected under European law.
The argument against Maltese hunters is a legal one that they've brought upon themselves by joining the EU and making a legal commitment to abide by and implement EU Law. It's not a moral one and nothing to do with the 'right' to hunt per se, or 'right' to bear arms, exercise cultural and historical pleasures or the right to self determination etc etc.
Last edited:
Adam W
Well-known member
Deborah, I agree if you are just talking about whats happening in Malta,my line that you quoted was said in reply to the suggestion that shooting in this country or even just in general eveywhere should be banned,which would then be a case of punishing the majority for the actions of the minority but I'm aware that that doesnt seem to be the case in Malta it would appear that the majority may well be at fault.
deborah4
Well-known member
I was Adam. I think it's essential to focus on the specific issue of legality under EU law in Malta - that's the mandate for both BL, the ECJ and 'foreign' individuals' intervention in Malta's affairs.
General debates about the morality and effects of both legal and illegal hunting isn't helpful - we need clarity. Malta needs clarity. For international/supranational regimes to work effectively requires upholding the legislation, rules and codes of conduct laid down by the institutional charters and statutes. In return, member signatories receive a wealth of benefits including milliatry, trade, fiscal, developmental and educational advantages. The EU in particular benefits individual citizens of member states by freedom of movement/employment, Civil and Human Rights protection, access to medical/health treatment throughout the Union, recourse to a higher Court of Justice than that provided in each Member State etc etc.
If Member States of the EU or any signatory of an international Charter want the benefits they must also comply with the terms of membership or expect punishment from other Members/Signatories, including trade/economic sanctions or expulsion as well as widespread condemnation from citizens of other Countries.
This is the only way global issues effecting species protection, such as conditions for migratory birds, conservation, habitat protection, climate change etc can be addressed since very very often they require economic, political and cultural changes that nation states are unprepared to make unilaterally.
Last edited:
Adam W
Well-known member
Couldnt agree more with that which is what I've been arguing about because others have been confusing the two and critisicing all of it instead of focusing on the problem in Malta.
captaincarot
Well-known member
so your suggestion is we castigate the Maltese for doing exactly what the British farmers do supported by British shooters, yet let the British contingent get away scot free, how can we call for the Maltese to end their slaughter of endangered species, while doing absolutely nothing about it in this country.
utter hypocrisy of the first order saying do as i say not as i do
Andrew Rowlands
Well-known member
Please try to keep on topic?
captaincarot
Well-known member
you managed to cut both mentions of malta out of that
Russlac123
Well-known member
It seems to be Maltas government that is at fault here, if their politicians have lied to their electorate to get the result they so wanted (join the EU cash machine), suprise suprise, there will be some kind of backlash. Doesnt take a genius? Why does that sound so familiar? Maybe if politicians stopped bulls****** , putting their fingers in the till and were straight with people (!!!!!) there would have been clarity for everybody involved, greater trust and respect between all parties and ultimately less birds shot dead?
Adam W
Well-known member
Dream on,thats about as likely as me becoming a vegan.
Russlac123
Well-known member
I know Adam, crazy arent I?! If some people on here got their way, they'd ban everything going, including a 12oz rump
rosbifs
PutAin STOP
What planet are you on? There are massive differences between legal and illegal practices whether 'supported' by the government or not. Also, there is a massive difference between shooting responsibly and irresponsibly.
Yes other countries need to get there house in order, however, again the wider issue is the application of the law not the law itself.
Adam W
Well-known member
Phew, at least someone realises that.
Similar threads
