Frank Zunino, on the Facebook page of Italian Wilderness Association opens a reflection on the “vainglory” of the Venatory Associationism (and not only….) after the failed referendum attempt. Without making a bundle of all herbs, analyzing delays, responsibilities, etc… is honest and cannot be postponed. Collaborate, broaden the associative purposes with other environmental and social purposes, place oneself in the field of the third sector and work for these purposes concretely, to give a role to hunting and hunters and not live anyone only with the worry of safeguarding their own interests as a parish must be a priority. How to unhinge old, self-referential, ad personam dynamics to become environmental militants who find themselves together? Of course, another referendum that would have led to the abolition of hunting has recently failed miserably, and the hunting world has rejoiced. But was it true glory? If instead of a single and not powerful animal rights association that had made it its standard-bearer, all the animal rights and anti-hunting associations of Italy had joined, would it have ended like this? Here, this is a question that hunters must ask and keep in mind, because risk is always around the corner. And the recent fact that to "solve" the problem of the excess of wild boars present in Italy, the government, instead of relying on hunting organizations, has preferred to listen to those animal rights, which prefer the bullet rifle (except to combat swine fever ) that with syringes and captures (for sterilization or ... compassionate deaths) is another negative sign.
So, instead of dancing on our laurels it would be good for the hunting world to get started and start - finally! - not to embellish themselves with environmentalism, but to truly engage in this enterprise before the situation worsens. And, basking in the fact that: no, they will never stop hunting because the arms and manufacturing industries would go into crisis; or: no, and who would then solve the problem of too many wild boars and deer, not to mention other invasive species? Naive! Today's example of the government practically siding with animal rights activists should say a lot, but will hunters and their organizations ever understand this? Or do they believe that it will be enough to play with words, how good politicians are, to solve every problem? In practice, always playing on the ambiguous and mystifications, such as, creating fake environmental associations or letting oneself pass, always exploiting the vehicles of the media, as "sentinels of the territory" (which are never seen on the territory, except when they go to hunting or training dogs: never engaged in battles in defense of environments and territories!), if ever in clean-up operations (which are then carried out only casually, such as WWF work camps that are successful only in summer and during holidays : even for them, holidays more than commitment!), or "firefighters" against forest fires - and this is perhaps the only concrete case of sincere help and use in defense of the environment, given that the rusticity of hunters has not citizen animal rights activists. NO, and we never tire of repeating it: hunters must become environmentalists themselves and must demonstrate this by engaging in the defense of environments, territories, fauna and flora and landscapes; which would then be the defense of their world of life, without which they would no longer be able to hunt. Unfortunately, however, in Italy this never or almost never happens, while it happens in England, France, the USA, Canada, Africa.
Hunters have only one way to save themselves, and that is to show citizens that they don't go hunting (who are the ones who count in the polls, and, therefore, the ones that politicians keep an eye on when it comes to elections! ) that it is also thanks to them that certain places have been preserved and, thus, made available to them for outdoor activities that are not just hunting. In America the severe constraints of the Wilderness Areas that all social categories of nature and outdoor life lovers enjoy, in many, if not almost all cases, have been placed thanks to the consent and participation of hunters and their organizations. The now historic example holds true that, at the head of the coalition that decades ago fought to save from the development of roads, forestry and mining what is the largest wild area in the States (Frank Church-River of No Return Wilderness Area, in the State Idaho) was not placed an environmentalist, but the President of the strongest hunting association in the USA!
Instead, what happens to us? It happens that the first opponents to many proposals of our municipal Wilderness Areas have often been the hunters! Then ready to scream the day that maybe a park will be set up in the same area!
It happens that hunting organizations instead of supporting and helping to keep the only environmental association that has ALWAYS declared itself not against hunting, boycott it or abandon it to itself. Or, worse, even a formal social and financial support agreement is signed with it, and when it is not possible to "drag" it to one's side (or rather with the risk of watering down its super-partes environmentalist aspect in order to make it an ally of the own power, perhaps with more political aims than hunting and environmentalist), and in fact the formal commitment taken is disowned.
Here, this is how the hunting forces are brought to fight a continuous war of resistance and conflict, always on the defensive, with the sword of Damocles of a referendum on the head every day!
And it is also in this way that dignity and honor are lost. (...)
To conclude, with the start of the new year, this press release wants once again to be the umpteenth appeal to the hunting world for support that is almost a medal of merit for the hunting world; because there is no obligation of the Italian Wilderness Association to defend hunting, and if it does so, as it has always done since its historical roots, both American (Aldo Leopold and his Ethics of the Earth) and Italian (Franco Zunino and his initial Idea of Wilderness Documents), it is only because hunting has always been an integral part of this philosophy that Henry David Thoreau has its holistic roots: "I definitely prefer to do wild activities, such as hunting, fishing, building a shed, sewing leather clothing and collect wood, wherever you are, rather than going to a butcher, a farmer, a carpenter, or working in a factory, or buying wood at the market. "
"... when a few friends anxiously asked me if he should let his boys go hunting, I said yes - remembering that hunting was one of the best parts of my education." "... the hunter is the greatest friend of the animals he hunts, not excluding Human Society."
Post Scriptum
The list is circulating on the web of what the 2021 major animal welfare and anti-hunting associations collected in 5 with the 13xMille (from a minimum of 112.184,40 euros to a maximum of 1.611.568,22), and maybe the hunters also get angry , as if this were public money. NO! It is the money of free citizens, who freely and democratically donate them to support the ideal they believe in, which is the defense of animals and the fight against hunting. And there is no question of how they will be spent: they will send them freely and democratically as they received them as a donation! And they will spend it to carry out their ideals which, it is repeated, are the defense of animals and the fight against hunting. They are the hunters who should wake up and get busy showing people that they too are capable of defending the environment and fauna; but not by urging hunters to donate their 5xMille to their hunting organizations (money then spent anyway to support the hunt!) to shoot, to make game bag and nothing do of TRUE conservation of Nature. So why should the people who donate so many solids to the aforementioned animal welfare and anti-hunting associations not do it? They, the aforementioned associations, really do something useful in the eyes of donors, the people and civil society in general which is largely made up of people who do not go hunting. What do hunters do to convince these same people that they too are capable of defending Nature, instead of thinking only of practicing the art of hunting? This is the question that should be asked, and not to cry out in scandal for those, it is repeated, free and democratic donations; do not appeal for hunters to donate their 5xMille to hunting organizations! This is not how the hunt will be saved. If anything, their organizations will be saved, which is like giving money to political parties! But then, let's say it all: you just want to do politics and not save hunting, much less safeguard the environment; that safeguard which is the only presentable face to non-hunter public opinion!
The choices of the past “We have never underestimated swine fever”. This was stated by the Minister of Agriculture, Francesco Lollobrigida, on the sidelines of the inauguration of Cibus in Parma. “Many mistakes have been made in the past – he said – we have the vector ...
See more