The referendum will ask you to say whether you want this particular bird to be shot in spring
Published:
January 21, 2015 at 12:28am
The prime minister and the Opposition leader have said already that they are quite content to have the people of Malta shoot down turtle-doves in the spring while those turtle-doves are on their way to nest and breed elsewhere in Europe.
The referendum will ask us to say whether we are just as irresponsible as they are, or whether we are better than them.
That is about the crux of it.
23 Comments Comment
Leave a Comment
http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/nature/nature_studies/nature-studies-the-disappearing-turtle-dove-8607728.html
The referendum question needs to be more specific: should the ban cover all turtle-doves, or just those intent on breeding?
Ask a silly question, and you’ll get a silly answer.
Are you implying the electorate is stupid, Observer?
Are you serious?
Are you suggesting that the referendum should ask if we should agree on hunting down every gay turtle-dove?
What does that even mean? Birds fly north to breed in spring, hence the referendum to ban spring hunting
Ah ha, yes, but some of them are flying north for the heck of it, Chris. I think our hunters should be allowed to shoot them down.
It is very easy to identify those intent on breeding.
1. They usually fly in pairs.
2. They trail a number of ribbons tied to their tails with a sign “Just partnered”.
Yes, of course I’m serious. And there is also the gender factor – we can afford a few less male turtle-doves to females.
I think a spirit-of-the-Union referendum would also include sexual preferences, size, age – but we’re not there yet.
No offence but that’s pretty dumb. Why not put up a picture of a little fluffy bunny with a nice bow and ask who is ready to kill and eat it?
The referendum is not about abolishing hunting or trying to tickle those humane chords with pictures of beautiful birds.
The referendum is about abolishing a small hunting time frame within the year, allowing birds to repopulate.
[Daphne – The point here is not that the bird is beautiful, but that it is under threat of extinction. However, people are more likely to care about the extinction of a beautiful bird than they are about an insect.]
I completely disagree with hunting, be it any time of the year. But Busuttil has, from the get go, ensured to get rights for hunters to hunt, in spring, all through the EU accession talks.
Muscat, on the other hand, only seems to have gotten onto the bandwagon recently. Further to this, Manuel Mallia or his “associates’ have been legal counsel to the FKNK for a while, so is there something that we are missing here?
Simon Busuttil, as PN leader and the one who made the case for the derogation while we were in the process of joining the EU, has been consistent.
In the press conference, he gave a lesson of how a democracy works, irrespective of his personal views on the issue.
Joseph Muscat had worked against joining the EU but now is in favour of keeping the derogation in force. It has something to do with the change in wind direction and pleasing everybody.
The breeding of species in spring is a natural cycle and man cannot beat nature. Mathematically it works like this Case (a) 2 birds mats = 6 birds. Harvest (shoot / hunt ) 3 birds after they grow = 3 birds left. Case (b) 2 birds on their way to breed, shoot 1 balance =1. The year after balance will be 0.
Although the effect of Malta’s derogation is relatively small, it has served as a means of shooting protected birds in spring. Police presence is there, but manly ineffective, due to the imbalance between law breakers and officers available.
Given the right conditions, I will hunt game birds and meanwhile, I still love my dog.
From the above, I conclude that spring hunting is unsustainable.
Your conclusion?
You’re mistaken, Il mice. Joseph Muscat and Simon Busuttil are unfortunately equally consistent on this issue.
And I take the opportunity to shoot down the argument that if we voted for EU accession, we voted for spring hunting.
Well, here’s the thing: with or without EU membership we would still have spring hunting. So what choice did we have?
Actually, many of those who voted Yes in the EU referendum imagined that the EU would pressure our government to abolish spring hunting. We were mistaken.
But of course I would still have voted Yes to EU membership for lots of other important reasons.
Politicians from both sides acclaim the fact that the country has a derogation on spring hunting.
What was the response from the hunters for the derogation. The country had abuse, threats and arrogance from the hunters and more. Be rest assured that these things will escalate if the hunters win the referendum. It is a shame that the politicians didn’t see these signs.
those against spring hunting may consider to watch this:
http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=2498
and this:
http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=194
I think this is the best source of information and make those against hunting because of their population and breeding make consider to come up with a better reasoning why SH should be ban. till no, there is no single argument that holds
Disgusting. The referendum question should be whether anyone should be allowed to have a gun licence at all not whether they can go wild in spring.
[Daphne – The referendum is about spring hunting. The petition for the referendum was about spring hunting. It is not about gun licences because it can’t be about gun licences. Please stick to the point and let’s not have this discussion go off at a tangent because I am afraid that this is exactly what is going to be made to happen – deliberately – in the referendum campaign itself.]
Thank you for putting it so bluntly.
This is no longer about a safeguarding a derogation. That derogation was only negotiated in order to ensure that the referendum on EU membership was not blocked by mob of hunters – the price to pay for EU membership.
Joseph Muscat has given Malta the opportunity to kill that shameful derogation, so let’s go for it.
I’m afraid a “yes” result will also lead the mob of hunters to believe they are omnipotent, and I’m afraid to think what that could lead to.
This is the very first time ever that we get to tell both the prime minister and the Opposition leader that we are NOT always there to be carried away by their camouflaged directional stand.
Also, should the NO vote win, that does not pose any harm to either side.
So, die-hard supporters, this time it’s different. Let’s not miss out on this opportunity but rise to the occasion, and teach them both a much-needed and well-deserved lesson.
Daphne, as if Muscat and Busuttil care about the disappearing turtle dove! They only care about being in power and ruling the country.
I think this referendum is also going to serve as a tool to give our politicians a shake that the protection of biodiversity and our country’s natural heritage should be a priority for our country and a message that the people also regard these issues as important.
The last thing this referendum is about is the turtle dove and quail.
It’s about punishing a lobby and a section of the population that we’ve been relentlessly conditioned to despise, not that they’ve done themselves any favours on the PR front.
It’s about flagging Alternattiva Demokratika’s waning existence, not that it will translate to any significant inroads at the polls.
It’s about stroking Saviour Balzan’s rabid ego, much as that other misfit Pullicino Orlando’s in the divorce referendum.
Add to that the other pseudo environmentalists like Astrid and Co.
It’s about an attractive causa bellum for the English-language newspapers which use it to fill their pages as if there wasn’t any other relevant news.
[Daphne – Casus belli, not causa bellum. And because the instinctive translation of that is ‘beautiful cause’ or ‘beautiful house’, we’ll have to explain that it’s Latin incorporated into English for the thing or event which provokes, or is used to justify, a war.]
If you want to know why the turtle dove population in the UK is dwindling, then you would find that it coincided with the establishment of the ubiquitous collared dove, which displaced it, much as the grey squirrel displaced the red.
It would coincide with the hedgerows being ploughed down to form mega fields.
It would coincide with the EU’s decision to reverse the policy where farmers were paid to leave 10% of their land fallow.
The land chosen by the farmers was naturally the least arable, normally swamps, hedgerows and moors. Now they are being paid to maximise arable land.
It would coincide with the introduction of organic farming, especially organic cattle husbandry where meadows are mowed relentlessly.
Shooting takes its toll too, but if anyone really believes that the odd 20,000 birds shot here have any significance compared with the four million shot by the rest of Europe then you’d believe that the Maltese population is in danger of extermination by abortions carried out in the UK.
The argument that this should not take place in spring is countered by the fact that in the UK one can shoot various birds such as wood pigeon, collared dove, Canada goose and others even when they are on the nest.
And before anyone counters that these are pests, that’s just crap. They’re a big business and farmers sow game crops to specifically attract these birds. I find this shooting in summer abhorrent.
Most of the population voting have never seen a quail except on their plate at some tacky Mgarr restaurant on one of their idea of daring outings. They wouldn’t recognise a quail in the wild if it rained down on them in biblical proportions.
No I don’t think that the turtle dove is in anyone’s mind. Thanks for allowing my anorak rant moment.
[Daphne – As it happens, I just love your penultimate paragraph. “One of their idea of daring outings.” Perfect description. Going off to the wilds of Mgarr and Bidnija to eat strange birds and animals like rabbit and quail with the savages on Pyrex plates. Live dangerously and so on.]
Everybody reads what they want in the referendum: motivations, consequences, implications, political agendas, etc. That is all subjective, however.
The only thing we know for certain is that we’ll be voting to stop the killing of quail and turtle doves in spring.
Then, if we want to go beyond the birds, the only sure significance of the referendum is that it challenges the hegemony of hunters.
They portray themselves as a beleaguered minority but the real minority here are the environmentalists. Hunters are actually a powerful and single-minded lobby group, arguably the most influential one after that of real estate developers.
‘..Hunters are actually a powerful and single-minded lobby group, arguably the most influential one after that of real estate developers…’
Hear hear.