The resolution of discord
On September 23, a statement appeared on the CISO Facebook page, incorrectly presented as being shared by the "Italian ornithological scientific community represented by the Conference participants." It contained expressions of opposition to the recently approved Montagna Bill and the bill amending Law 157/92 currently under discussion in Parliament. It should be noted that this document, called the "Final Resolution," was not only not voted on in any way by those present at the Lecce Ornithology Conference, but was not even discussed in dedicated sessions during the proceedings. Instead, it was presented on Friday, September 12, at 4:00 PM, at the end of the Conference, without any prior discussion. It is clear that this procedure is far removed from the democratic and participatory methods that should characterize every act of a modern state and the various bodies—social, scientific, and otherwise—that comprise it.
Animal rights ideology
The contents of the "resolution" are technically unfounded and informed by an animalist ideology that should have no place in scientific contexts. For example, we find that the draft law, now a fully-fledged law after its publication in the Official Journal, Montagna, and the draft law on Law 157/92 "seriously threaten the conservation of ornithological biodiversity in Italy and undermine decades of scientific and conservation efforts." This is a surprising statement considering that hunting on mountain passes, as regulated by the Italian regions with various restricted areas, has taken place for decades without compromising the conservation of the hunted species, particularly thrushes. The drafters of the "resolution" appear not to have even carefully read the ISPRA report requested by the Lombardy Regional Administrative Court, in which the institute states not at all that hunting should be banned on 475 mountain passes, but rather on 19, while studies on another 15 should be conducted within 24 months. Further investigations should have been carried out on the remaining "potential border crossings affected by migration routes." It's clear what distortions the CISO inserted into the document called "resolution."
Mountain passes
Even more absurd are the arguments regarding some of the passerine species cited, not one of which is classified as endangered by the IUCN, and several are deemed stable or increasing. Also curious is the CISO's argument that hunting should be banned in 475 sites presumed to be mountain passes, when by their own admission the species are in decline due to problems in their breeding grounds. This is as if heart patients should undergo appendectomy. It should be remembered that the establishment of hunting bans at mountain passes is not included in any European directive, while this directive provides for SPAs, which the law has indeed established must be established. Regarding the draft law amending Law 157/92, the CISO cites potential catastrophes for bird conservation, which are completely unfounded and premature, given that the text is still far from being approved and the debate on its contents is pending before Parliament. Furthermore, the connection to the Nature Restoration Law, which is due to come into force after September 2026 and has nothing to do with hunting laws, is incomprehensible.
Mindless sharing
The erroneous assertions in the CISO "resolution" are so numerous that it is impossible to refute them individually in a press release. However, it is disappointing and disconcerting to note that professional ornithologists share the positions of anti-hunting associations, such as LAC, LAV, and ENPA, based on ideological rather than scientific assumptions. We believe this behavior undermines the scientific value of the positions taken by the CISO and call for a review as soon as possible (Office of Wildlife and Agro-Environmental Studies and Research, Italian Hunting Federation).
You May Also Like ..
