Paolo Antognoni, number one of the Regional Federcaccia of the Marche, he replied to Arch Hunting on the controversy over the next hunting calendar. Here is what we read in the note: "We let a few days pass before replying to the statement from Arcicaccia Marche not because he had left us - as perhaps they hoped - speechless, but simply because given the absolute lack of content it did not require replying. Since the controversy does not seem to subside, perhaps because someone - not us - continues to foment it on the territory, we are forced to add some arguments.
The first: that calendar that they define "the best in Italy" with denigrating intent, Federcaccia Marche, and not only, truly believes it a concrete example of what can be achieved while respecting scientific dictates and the indispensable principle of the sustainability of the levy. A Calendar that, let everyone be clear, Federcaccia Marche has supported in every location, unlike, sorry to underline it, than what Arcicaccia did, which has been careful not to constitute itself in its defense. Scientific data, in some cases proposed by Federcaccia through its own Technical Offices, are already present on last year's hunting calendar and have never been contradicted by anyone having won all the appeals, demonstrating the credibility of the Marche Region and Federcaccia with the institutions.
Not the hunting calendar, but the Regional Hunting Wildlife Plan it was the cause of the problems related to Sic and Zps well known to the Marche hunters that Arcicaccia seeks - we say “seeks” because we prefer to think of a pretext rather than not understanding the difference - to attribute to it. Among other things, we can not but find at least curious the Arcicaccia's aversion to the regional hunting calendar, this being the same one who, together with Federcaccia, had signed up for the 2016-2017 season (and which, not surprisingly, had also passed the Marche Regional Administrative Court exam in March 2017). We reiterate that we do not understand and absolutely do not share the calendar proposal presented by Arcicaccia for next season. Far from being "socially and politically balanced" - as he likes to define it with much complacency and few meanings - it even goes against some indications of ISPRA and is unreasonably renunciation.
For example, the proposed reduction to 15 head of woodcock per year instead of the 20 that ISPRA proposes in its opinions is completely inexplicable. The irony of the season full of fighters is also debatable, which does nothing but highlight Arcicaccia's desire to give up some huntable species, evidently not considered interesting, according to the classic losing attitude already seen in other locations. We are really curious at this point to see which ones "Officially validated scientific knowledge and data" Arcicaccia has the basis of his proposal. However, it is not in my nature, much less in that of the Federation that I represent, to refuse an outstretched hand. If Arcicaccia - or others - want to share the commitment for the next hunting calendar, they are welcome. But if they are moved by ideas of playing downward with the rights of the Marche hunters, perhaps to ensure a quiet summer, they also avoid the trip. And wait and say thank you, because we don't think we've done them a favor by letting the hunters know how things stand. Provided that the president Arcicaccia did not intend to do it for the hunting season satisfactory that he could enjoy despite… the proposals of his Association ”.