ANUU Migrationists, the truth about the Law Decree and live calls by responding to the controversy in the pre-alpine territories of Lombardy and neighboring.
Controversies flare up in the pre-alpine areas of Lombardy and neighboring areas. Stone of the scandal - obviously alleged - the attitude of the ANUU National Migrationists who, according to the rumors of the usual well-informed (so to speak), would have "bartered" no one knows exactly what with the changes to art. 4 of Law 157/92, as currently provided for by Law Decree no. 91 so-called "Protected environment". It is therefore necessary to dissolve the off-season mists that seem to stagnate in the minds of some, not only for the honor of the truth but above all to claim the role of absolute technical and legal competence of the Association on issues concerning migratory and, in particular, precisely on the catches of Passerines which, without the ANUU Migratoristi, in Italy would have been banned for many years with all due respect to all those who feel they are experts in the subject only because they write on the web forums or just because year involved in these events.
So, no strategy lessons from improvisers! Who was there knows very well (and who was not there learns it) that at 12.00 on 10 June last, hunting from the hut was at risk: every premise of the vote on the community in the Chamber was a harbinger of heavy consequences for the catches, activities fundamental for i sheds. If anything, it was precisely the last minute interview with the Minister by the hunting associations belonging to FACE Italia (Federcaccia, ANUU Migratoristi, ANLC and Enalcaccia) plus Arci Caccia, which allowed for a rethinking, with the results of the vote that everyone remembers .
Then, the surprise move of the decree law: which, as we know, has the force of law but must also be converted within 60 days of its publication, under penalty of forfeiture. The decree is therefore working, among others, on the problem of breeding calls, which must be clearly distinguished from all the others, because it would be ridiculous to equate them with presicci as limits of possession and use. It is also necessary to think that the authorizing deeds of the catches in Lombardy had already been approved for years (first by the Council with a law and then by the Council with a resolution) making explicit reference to the exceptions referred to in art. 9 of the “Birds” directive, ie pursuant to art. 19 bis of law 157/92. If anything, it was the other Regions that did not make this reference explicit, but de facto adhering to the principle of the derogation.
All the rest are rumors more or less instrumental: just go and reread which Association has worked so intensely in Europe and has always been constituted ad opposendum - for example - together with the Lombardy Region against the abrogation appeals of the catches in the last fifteen years to understand who works to guarantee a future for our traditional or, better still, regional hunts and instead those who do it only to nibble consents and members from a pool that, among other things, is now at the limit of self-healing capabilities.
It is not difficult to verify it, it is enough just to want to do it: and only those who have enough intellectual honesty to try it want it.
ANUU Migrators
(3 July 2014)