The answer to Arci Caccia
With his latest statement once again the president of Archicaccia Marche he tries – failing both – to obtain the double result of selling the straw for gold and denigrating Federcaccia. If Arcicaccia Marche put the same effort into the real and non-propaganda defense of regional hunting activity that it puts into attacking us, perhaps even its members could be happy, as ours are, to have someone who protects and claims their rights. Federcaccia Marche obviously thanks the Region for having reinstated the additional day for migration, which the TAR had suspended. However, this shows that it is possible to approve new resolutions that also go against the suspensions of the TAR, obviously with new and more reasoned reasons, which is what we have always supported.
Additional days
We therefore find it sincerely exaggerated to see Arcicaccia presenting it as a sensational result to be proud of that the Region obtained "only 3 days after the request" the positive opinion on the second additional day. It is easier for us to ask ourselves why it hasn't been done before, perhaps without the need to meet "extraordinarily on Saturday", as Arci always reminds us. It seems to us rather that there are two things: either the climatic conditions, the size of the populations and the other factors that are taken into consideration in these cases have changed in three days or, more easily, as Federcaccia argued, the regional hunting calendar had been insufficiently argued before and not only on the days? Instead of opposing the request - just because it was made by us - made to the Region to appeal to the Council of State against the TAR order, Arcicaccia Marche could then try to understand the reasons a little more in depth and remember - but perhaps ignores it - the two favorable pronouncements issued by this last year in Tuscany and Sardinia. He would thus realize that there is nothing senseless in our request. Provided that Arcicaccia Marche does not want to continue to deny the evident insufficiency of the technical legal arguments in support of the calendar approved by the Region. From the series: better not to resort, as the shortcomings would be highlighted. But, further reflection, if the Marche Region does not have updated studies and data to support its decisions on hunting, who should fill this gap? Why does he refuse the collaboration offered, unlike what other Regions do, to the satisfaction of local hunters?
How did things go
Faced with this umpteenth attack by Arcicaccia Marche we can only remember the events of this and recent years:
Federcaccia has always asked for the maintenance of the dates of 157/92 in terms of closing and opening, therefore January 31st for thurds and woodcock while for Arcicaccia Marche it is right to close everything on January 10th, in total divergence from the neighboring regions and national law.
Arcicaccia Marche has approved the 2023-24 hunting calendar with self-imposed limitations in reduction compared to the TAR 2023 ruling (pre-opening for wood pigeon from 1 day, fighter hunting season, second day for quail in pre-opening) and has also approved the halving of the game bag larks compared to what the national plan establishes.
Arcicaccia Marche has in the past supported the bans on hunting the fighter and the tufted duck, but today, after the victories obtained at the TAR in recent years thanks to the Federcaccia arguments, it no longer speaks out on these two species.
We can therefore conclude that for Arcicaccia Marche it is right to hunt less, it is right to self-limit even with respect to victories at the TAR, it is ultimately right to always bend our heads again and accept penalties or impose them on ourselves because... then others cannot give them to us!
Final conclusions
Finally, as for the crude attempt to slip between the lines that the actions of Federcaccia Marche are guided by a political stance against the Council, Arcicaccia seems to forget, curiously enough, that between our two associations it is not Federcaccia who be the expression of a well-defined party. Merits and demerits, compliments or criticisms - always constructive and always well-founded - Federcaccia expresses them regardless of the political color of the Governments and Councils. And with the same frankness we do not shy away from a final reflection. There is no doubt that at a national level FdI and Lega - the same parties that lead the Marche Region - demonstrate closeness and attention to hunters and the hunting world, not to mention a different air that can nevertheless be felt among the parliamentary benches and not only of the majority. Is it possible that the restrictive and self-defeating choices regarding hunting activity should be observed, the only Region in Italy, by President Acquaroli's Council? A circumstance that we really struggle to explain to ourselves and to hunters. (Italian Hunting Federation Marche)