Firm opposition
The recognized Hunting Associations Federcaccia, Enalcaccia, ANLC, ANUUMigratoristi, Italcaccia and the CNCN – National Hunting and Nature Committee, gathered in the Control Room of the hunting world, intervene in relation to the letter sent in December 2025 by Ion Codescu, acting Director of the General Directorate for the Environment of the European Commission, to the top of the Ministry of the Environment and Energy Security, with which observations were made on the bill no. 1552, currently under consideration by the Italian Parliament, amending Law No. 157 of February 11, 1992. The Steering Committee expresses surprise and firm opposition to an initiative that, in its content, timing, and method, appears to be an unjustified institutional affront to the Italian Government and Parliament. Discussion of a national law, in full compliance with the European framework, must take place within the competent institutional bodies and on the basis of sound technical assessments, not through pressure that risks improperly influencing the ongoing legislative debate.
A process that is not yet concluded
Of particular concern is not only the content of the letter, but also the method adopted. The European Commission is intervening on a bill still fully underway in the national parliamentary process, preempting assessments of a text that has not yet completed its process and is currently being discussed, examined, and possibly amended in the relevant bodies. This sets a serious precedent, especially since it is accompanied by comments that appear to be based on simplifications and partial reconstructions, often overlapping with arguments already advanced by avowedly anti-hunting circles. According to the Steering Committee, a complex issue such as wildlife management, which concerns wildlife, agriculture, biodiversity, and land security, requires institutional seriousness, knowledge of the Italian model, and a collaborative effort between institutions, the scientific community, farmers, hunters, and stakeholders. It cannot be addressed through ideological interpretations or alarmism, which only risk polluting public and parliamentary debate.
Willingness to dialogue
On the merits, the Steering Committee believes that several of the letter's comments are based on completely flawed technical assumptions: from the reference to indiscriminate hunting, to the considerations regarding ISPRA, from the interpretation of agritourism and hunting businesses, to the procedure for live decoys. The Steering Committee therefore emphasizes the need for a correct interpretation of the bill, without fueling further misinformation on a complex and sensitive issue. Wildlife management must continue to be based on planning tools, technical assessments, and institutional responsibilities. In this sense, the European Commission's letter appears more like a political act aimed at influencing national legislators than a genuine technical contribution to the debate. The Steering Committee therefore expresses its willingness to engage in dialogue with national and European institutions, so that public debate continues to be based on objective data, knowledge of the local area, and a correct interpretation of current legislation (Federcaccia, Enalcaccia, AnuuMigratoristi, Associazione Nazionale Libera Caccia, Italcaccia, CNCN (Comitato Nazionale Caccia Natura).
You May Also Like ..
