Arci Caccia responds to the accusations made against him by the President of Federcaccia Toscana, Moreno Periccioli, in an interview in recent days.
There is something wrong and it is useful to unravel the thread of the skein. As it is explained, in fact, that with the Federcaccia-Face Italia "traction" hunting world - associations numerically majority and inspired, as they claim, by the culture of healthy pragmatism - the results collected by hunters in recent years are very similar to a heap of rubble ?
How can we explain the fact that the Arci Caccia is pointed out as the main cause of the Italian hunting crisis despite being, as its detractors say, a minority association (for some even considered on the verge of extinction) and despite to slogans considered worn and obsolete?
Answering these questions would be tantamount to restoring logic, common sense and intellectual honesty.
It is therefore necessary to proceed in order and respond, point by point, to the President of Federcaccia Toscana, Moreno Periccioli, who in an interview declares that he does not understand the position expressed by Arci Caccia with a recent document, starting with the title, which is considered an incurable contradiction. Oxymorons, as you should know, are rhetorical figures that have the merit, by juxtaposing terms of opposite meaning (deafening silence, parallel convergences, extraordinary normality), of making immediate the profound meaning of an elaborate, otherwise elusive concept. The same applies to "autonomous to rebuild unity", the title of our document, which does not mean that to achieve what is most important to us, that is the unity of the hunting world, it is necessary to start from the clarity of the positions, without which there would be endless misunderstandings.
To this end and in line with our way of being and acting, which has always been the same, from the Alps to Sicily via Rome, and which our recent Congress has only confirmed, we list a series of points to abandon the I bring mists into which someone, probably more experienced than us, artificially tries to push us:
1) having fueled the goal of the most times and of the most species, offering it to hunters with the noble dress of sacrosanct compliance with European directives, was the pick for obtaining the greatest temporal restriction of the Venatori Calendars, the most difficult legal disputes and the most painful social discredit of hunting that the country remembers. The "traction" hunting world Federcaccia-Face Italia has failed to explain to hunters that the adaptation to the directives would have also entailed an inevitable parallel restriction, not only the eventual and ephemeral achievement of a decade in February for some fauna species not in top of the expectations of hunters. That same associative "traction" did not make fans aware that a battle entirely centered on the "tables" of the Key Concept, flying over the cultural impact that these would have had in society, would have reopened a political dispute of vast proportions, whose negative effects , first of all, they would have spilled over into the hunting world (a fact that promptly occurred). The pronouncements of the TARs that block hunting calendars by shortening hunting times are not slogans, but, unfortunately, concrete and negative facts for hunters.
This is why Arci Caccia has always supported the centrality of the compromise of 31 January established by the current national legislation. With respect to this conduct, what has Federcaccia Toscana done to dissuade its national association? What were the concrete actions to defeat this policy? The Arci Caccia, it should be known, does not experience this striking contradiction between a national association that thinks and does things in contrast with the regional one; others live this gap, and attempting to equate the difficulties of Federcaccia Toscana with their national team with those, of the same type, that we would experience from Florence against our Roman leaders, is an operation destined to fail miserably because, for as far as we are concerned, the fact does not exist.
2) In the face of an unprecedented defeat, our Association, together with the most responsible categories and a policy attentive to the theme of hunting as a compatible and popular activity (not slogan), has contributed to establishing the Table of the State-Regions Conference so that this institutional instrument repaired the errors of a policy (the one referred to in the first point) that had produced nothing but the explosion of disputes and the reopening of a private perspective of Italian hunting. How is it possible to insinuate, as the President of Federcaccia Toscana does, that our Association would have spent itself on reducing hunting times? These critical remarks are completely unfounded, highly instrumental and devoid of any logic; it is as if a listless and superficial student who is rejected at the end of the school year would also enter into controversy with the teaching staff who organized the remedial course for the summer to pass the repair exams.
3) The Arci Caccia Toscana promoted the meeting of the Hotel Baglioni in Florence at a time when it was essential to try to stem a series of events, Community law in the lead, which would have risked, as in the case mentioned, it happened punctually, to have negative repercussions for the hunting world. On that occasion we seemed to speak the same language: the concerns about the general situation were the same and the heartfelt appeal to stop and start again from the confrontation between the parties (all the parties) to face the real problems of hunting, of the conservation of fauna and land management were proof of this. The reform of 157 was not a taboo for us then, and it is not today, indeed, if anything, it is a necessity. But on what political and cultural bases do we address the issue of legislative modification? Do we want a hunt that is understood and integrated into society, which knows how to start again from management and which is an opportunity for everyone, or do we prefer conventioned areas (for a fee) for the happiness of a few wealthy ones? Direct facts that deserve a clear and unambiguous answer. Also because only a work of consultation and comparison, starting the hunting world from an advanced cultural base, will be able to deliver results capable of giving future to our passion. And speaking of legislative reforms we also mean the application of Community Directives, including the exceptions which, in the absence of the aforementioned concerted framework, are increasingly the subject of appeals, suspensions and legal contentions which, according to our subdued opinion, certainly does not need. The prius therefore was to stop, to cancel the bills filed in the Senate starting with that of the sen. Orsi (who we remember being a member and a manager of Federcaccia whose pen was "armed" by the same Association), verify on the basis of the report on the state of application of the law 157 the limits and positivity of the application of the legislation and restart the comparison on different bases with all stakeholders. Sharing and consultation, therefore.
4) The discussion on the Regional Hunting Wildlife Plan cannot be reduced to a simple list of points, perhaps even important ones, but which, deprived of the support of a cultural setting that indicates the high objectives to be achieved, risk remaining numbers on paper. Even the Wildlife Plan, despite being a technical tool, needs a cultural substrate on which to develop. If you do not indicate precisely the way to follow it is completely useless to say that somewhere in the desert there is an oasis!
The recent reform of the Regional Law is a clear example of this: the technical contents alone have not automatically produced a different culture and a more advanced approach. The priority of this phase is exactly this; if we had participated in the meetings with the other AA.VVs for the definition of the Regional Wildlife Plan we would have denied this need, which we consider fundamental.
5) The Region, for its part, must intelligently interpret this need and be the leader of a renewed cultural ferment on which, in past years, we had built the “Tuscany” model. Once the cultural and political model of reference has been precisely identified, it is embodied with the various measures. Politics has the noble task, not so much and not only to govern the contingent, but to prevent and direct the future. We believe that the Region has the task of becoming the leader of a "collective intellectual" who gives life to a substrate of rock on which to build our house and not build it on the sand at the mercy of storms and cataclysms. Moreover, the desert that has been produced in recent years requires an additional impetus without which the hunting world is likely to be definitively sucked into the quicksand of demagoguery and fearfulness.
We are driven by a great passion and we have a great desire, a desire that, speaking with common hunters, regardless of their belonging, seems to be shared. From those who work in public wildlife structures, to the ungulate management districts, to the stalking for migration, the requests that come to us give us courage. The seed of the hunting culture made up of management, collaboration, dialogue with society that was sown many years ago is always ready to sprout again.
So here we are once again ready to start again, to resume the dialogue, in a clear and frank way, with all those who wish to discuss with us on the principles mentioned above. Of course, it becomes difficult to work for the common interest when dealing with attitudes of lese majesty, the claims of numbers that in themselves mean nothing except in terms of corporation (it is in society that you need to be a majority) , with the hatred and prejudices against people and with the breezy call for lawyers to take to the field.
However, we are used to not being discouraged and we continue to wait confidently ...
November 23, 2011
Source: Arci Caccia