Birds from hundreds of species are shot in Malta, including swifts, Montague's harriers, kestrels, quails and the European turtle dove. The European turtle dove is particularly vulnerable: populations have fallen by up to nearly 50% in the last 16 years leading it to be put on the IUCN Red List of species at risk of extinction. The Maltese government has introduced quotas for number of turtle doves allowed to be shot in one season (5000 birds each Spring; 7000 birds each Autumn), but Birdlife Malta questions whether these quotas can be accurately stuck to, and many more turtle doves are shot illegally outside of these quotas.
 |
| European turtle dove. Source. |
The Federation for Hunting and Conservation Malta (FKNK), the Maltese hunter's association essentially, regard bird shooting as "Maltese indigenous socio-cultural way-of-life", and that to ban the hunting and capturing tradition "kills or rather murders an integral part of that individual". Indeed, reading some of FKNK reports, I find it striking how emotive the language is, and while I understand that hunting and trapping is steeped in Maltese tradition and deep-rooted personal identity, it's worrying how much this passion obscures willingness to accept the scale of problems associated with the practice. Shooting may have been acceptable in the past when the birds were a source of food, but nowadays it's simply all about the fun of the hunt. Regarding trapping of birds, the FKNK explain that birds are trapped for captivity; live-decoys (presumably to enable further hunting and trapping?), for "their song" (surely it's nicer to hear birds singing outside than cooped up in a cage?!) and for "captive breeding enthusiasts" (doesn't sound very official). Are any of these reasons really good enough for continued hunting and trapping of the wild migratory birds?
It's not just hunting and trapping either: in discussing the 2011 Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations, the FKNK emphasizes how its members have transformed the arid Maltese "semi-desert" into "miniature oases" through the planting of indigenous trees such as olive and Aleppo pine as well as non-native Acacia and Eucalyptus. According to the FKNK, the Maltese and Gozitan countryside now "looks a great deal better than it did a generation ago", and they are offended that the Trees and Woodlands Protection Regulations will result in these trees being cut down again. But this is it, the Regulations aim to preserve Maltese woodland communities and particularly endangered, threatened or endemic flora and fauna species. The regulations specifically mark Acacia and Eucalyptus in the "invasive, alien or environmentally-incompatible species" category as they are not compatible with these aims of protection. The FKNK report doesn't seem to understand this however, as it goes on about, for example, how Accia Karroo (the FKNK made a mistake there as it should be Accia karroo- you should only ever capitalise the genus, not the species!) is "one of the most beautiful and useful trees", and gives information about the tree that is irrelevant to the Maltese context. The tree may be beautiful, but it is an invasive species, thus impacts the stability and biodiversity of the native ecosystem, and can reduce ecosystem service delivery. The FKNK has the word "conservation" in their official name but that seems to just be a formality to make them seem more eco-concerned than they are- they seem quite ignorant on ecology and hunting impacts.
 |
| On the left, non-native Acacia saligna; on the right, native Pinus halepensis (Aleppo pine) |
Birdlife Malta is active in opposing the Spring and Autumn shoots. The organization is critical of the Maltese government's lack of action in safeguarding migratory birds, pressures the Maltese government to suspend the hunting season to allow safe passage for migratory birds; reports illegal hunting to the police and Wild Birds Regulation Unit (WBRU); watches over key hunting areas even when hunters react violently; tends to injured birds; and educates the public through environmental education programmes and training of environmental youth leaders who engage children and the public with wildlife.
Overall, I've always supported communities keeping up old traditions and being proud of their heritage, but this hunting and trapping seems to be nothing more than an outdated practice at odds with the bigger picture of conservation. The Maltese government really needs greater political will to crack down on illegal shooting and trapping, and make sure those legal shooting quotas are strictly adhered to; a running theme in Packham's "Malta- Massacre on Migration" mini-documentary seems to be weak Maltese police enforcement. Unfortunately, a referendum in 2015 that proposed banning spring shooting of birds before they have the chance to breed saw the hunters win by a tiny margin of just 2,200 votes, or 50.44% to 49.56%. It seems the hunters still have quite a lot of political influence, but Birdlife Malta is doing a great job pressuring the government to do more, as well as educating and engaging the Maltese public about the issue. I am sure that with time and education, and maybe even some international pressure from the EU, this harmful bird shooting practice will decline.
Lastly, this whole case study reminded me that hunting is one of the more dangerous of human activities for threatened species:
 |
| The big killers of threatened and near-threatened species. Source |
No comments:
Post a Comment