The vote in the Commission
In the absence of the extension of Game plan for hunting, whose data in any case dates back to 2018, there would be repercussions not only on the currently valid hunting calendar but also on the approved control plans and which will have to be approved. This is what emerged today in the Economic Policies Commission where the vote on the Wildlife Hunting Plan was scheduled, or rather, on its two-year extension. But let's start from the beginning. The first Wildlife Hunting Plan was approved way back in 2018 and even then, although futuristic because no Region had yet adopted it, it was already very limiting and restrictive for hunting activity.
An outdated plan
“Since then, five years have passed and the Emilia – Romagna Region has not been able to update the Plan and the scientific data within it, despite the problems arising from African Swine Fever, clearly unknown in 2018, even pretending not to have any problems either as regards the fossorial species, despite the clear post-flood evidence" attacks the Northern League Councilor. “So today we were called to vote on a mere extension, but I reiterate that it was necessary to redo a new plan based on greater technical-scientific elements. Even the European Union has softened on the "Habitats Directive" but here in the Emilia-Romagna Region we are still forced to submit to a non-binding opinion from Ispra and the indecisions of a multi-coloured council, which is anything but compact.
What could be done
We are witnessing continuous appeals from environmentalist associations but, in any case, the Council prefers to extend by two years a Plan that was already outdated at the time of the first vote in 2018. The question comes naturally: does the Region want to save the hunting activity or, rather, do you want to save appearances by thus extending the adoption of the new Plan until after the 2025 regional elections? A legitimate question given that we find ourselves with a council and a political majority held up by the green and environmentalist parties." 5 years is a very long time to realize one's shortcomings and mistakes – underlines Councilor Pompignoli. “It would have been appropriate to involve the Hunting Associations and the Scientific Institutes but, once again, we take note of yet another missed opportunity – thunders Councilor Pompignoli – who concludes by emphasizing the fact that the League's vote would not have been against only and exclusively to avoid blocking hunting activity. (Lega Romagna Press Office)