Scott's question
In the session of 16 June, the Honorable Arturo Scotto presented a question to the Minister of the Environment and Energy Security and to the Minister of Agriculture, of food sovereignty and of forests to get answers to some questions which, in fact, are already extremely clear and well known to those who deal - even if only marginally - with problems related to environmental protection, the safeguarding of agricultural production, the defense of biodiversity and compliance with the rules dictated by international scientific bodies.
The autonomy of ISPRA
Of the two, one: either the honorable Scotto has simply become the spokesperson for the abolitionist battles carried on by the well-known six sisters of Italian "animal-environmentalism", without verifying their reliability and correctness, or he forgets (or ignores ) the enormous mass of clearly anti-hunting and totally unmotivated measures that have been taken over the course of almost thirty years by a whole series of executives in which the environmentalist and anti-hunting component was not only declared but represented an extremely powerful lobby. To affirm that ISPRA currently constitutes, and has constituted for decades, an autonomous body of scientific consultancy for the State, with an internationally recognized and appreciated scientific authority means denying the evidence of the facts.
Judgments of recent years
On the other hand, if in recent years there have been dozens of judgments that have endorsed the work of the regions (also on indications from the hunting world) diverging from ISPRA's opinions, it must mean something. Even the most profane know perfectly well that the Institute (moreover burdened by tasks of much greater gravity than that covered by the hunting calendars) does not enjoy particular international consideration. Indeed, the scientific authority of the Institute was strongly questioned in the NADEG Committee where the Member States almost unanimously agreed on a modification of the KC on the hunting opening and closing dates. It goes without saying that one of the very rare voices in disagreement on this line was precisely that of ISPRA. This absolute minority position led to the creation of a "Restricted Sub-Committee" to try to standardize these dates as much as possible at European level. Finally, it must be remembered that, precisely at the NADEG headquarters, ISPRA used a bibliography that did not comply with the requests of the Committee itself but made use of useful documentation to support its theses, always unfavorable to Italian hunters.
Appeals to the Regional Administrative Court
As regards, then, the regretted re-establishment of the national faunal-hunting technical committee, suspended in 2012 and never renewed, it appears all the more singular that the honorable Scotto fears an insufficient representation of the animalist and abolitionist world to which the law magnanimously allows to present rivers of "photocopy" appeals to the various TARs, completely free of charge. Appeals which, the Honorable Member should remember, have ended up canceling legal certainty by reducing – often in a way that is as heavy as it is unjustified – the hunting periods and species for which ordinary citizens had paid in advance into the state coffers and of the regions substantial taxes. The Italian hunters hope that the ministers called into question by this clearly partisan, as well as superficial, question will be able to respond by continuing to claim their competence and autonomy on the matter, clearing the field - once and for all - of the drifts of the mold ideological that do not benefit the environment, nor the world of agricultural production, nor animal welfare, nor the protection of biodiversity (source: ANLC).