Attacks on hunting are now the order of the day: too many animals, animals in danger of extinction, damage even in protected areas, accidents on the roads. A "sick" society not seeing its faults he unloads on the hunter everything he can based on hunting ignorance. So good people who seriously contribute to wildlife and environmental control and to public funds - regional and state - always contributing with important economic substances to activities that have nothing to do with hunting, are constantly denigrated so much so as to sharply decrease and thus aggravate the problems. We are continually called into question by recently informed managers of some agricultural association, regarding facts that in no way can be traced back to our responsibility. This is the turn of this Bartolini, whom we know more for his absence than for his presence at all the consultations and all the technical tables on hunting and boars, where he always sent a delegate.
Perhaps for this reason important steps have been lost, such as the period of opening to the wild boar species which, as for any wild animal, is strictly limited to three months by national law. Therefore there is no will of the hunters not to hunt in January, but simply the need to anticipate the start of the hunt in October to avoid - as happened this year - that the levy is significantly reduced due to the snow, in addition to the blocking of the teams due to the lockdown. Who wanted the withdrawal delay last year? Obviously the association of Bartolini, who is therefore much more responsible than the famous accident of the poor girlthan any hunter.
His own association would like to delay this year as well, under pretexts such as alleged transhumance of herds of wild boars from region to region in January, when anyone who really knows hunting knows that wild boars in January have almost disappeared in huntable territory, as is clearly demonstrated. that it is the impenetrable and protected areas that form a solid basis for the irradiation of the suide in spring. Evidently Mr. Bartolini neglects that hunters are those thanks to whom the boar has a limit to its strong expansion. Moreover, the president of the CIA is perhaps also unaware that in the area where the crime happened one of the vice presidents, who makes up the ATC management committee, he is his trusted delegate. So what game do we play? To really face the problem or to ride it to find every way to unload all kinds of responsibility on the hunt?
Is there a right need to be able to work and to have repaid the damage actually due to huntable species, or is there a desire to exploit the onerous taxes that every hunter already pays to the last penny? The principle that hunting is what causes the presence of wild boars is like that that rain causes drought (to which today some exaggerated theorists of climate change manage to arrive). As it should be emphasized that to date we understand that every rule and law is made by the state, by the region or by the ATC with very little influence of the hunters, given that they are in the minority in all decision-making contexts, including those bodies which, despite being the real technicians of the wildlife presence, little can do against the intervention of institutions, agricultural associations and environmental associations that often they agree on anti-hunt lines.
It should be emphasized, however, that the dialogue lost with some agricultural associations in Umbria certainly does not depend on us but on the fact that for some years now, despite having in hand the reins of hunting with the presidencies of two out of three ATCs, we have suffered less influence. at a regional level and things are not going in the right direction at all. Fortunately, hunters have always often also been farmers and they maintain strong ties to this world. It turns out that practically the ATC managed by farmers not only divert most of the money paid by hunters towards the damage of wild boars, but in two out of three cases they are also those who undertake continuous deleterious proposals for the control of wild boars and even more serious for the restocking of other less problematic species. Financial statements that should be better verified not so much from the point of view of accounting correctness, which we do not want to question, but certainly from the point of view of consistency with the objectives and purposes of that territorial hunting area which should be primarily a priority improvement of hunting and its relationship with the rest of the territorial actors.
The three largest hunting associations have asked for the postponement of the final balance and they agree in totally rejecting the budget of ATC PG1, guilty of heavily hitting a large part of the wild boar hunting districts by charging astronomical figures despite having banned hunting by law for weeks due to the Covid-19 regulations. This together with having practically zeroed the resources towards the ZRC, with harmful consequences on restocking and in view of upcoming rules that will prohibit the import of quality animals. So what future does restocking have? Unfortunately, we regret that despite having similar intentions, hunting associations such as Arch Hunting and hunting and environmental associations which, on paper, should be with hunters like EPS, evidently satisfied by the fatal blow inflicted on the boar hunt alone, which will inevitably be reflected in the whole hunt.