Following the filing of the reasons by the TAR on the appeal presented to hunting calendar 2021-2022, animal environmental associations in the Marche region they commented on how they usually do, that is, claiming victory as they had obtained who knows what result and using it to try to influence the region for next season's hunting choices. In fact, let's start by saying that in the sentence they were rejected most of the grounds for appeal presented, or the general opening date of the hunt; additional hunting days for stalking migratory species in the months of October and November; exceeding the maximum time frame.
Furthermore, the sentence, acknowledging the arguments presented by the Hunting Federation, has established a principle favorable to the hunting world, clarifying that the opinion of Ispra cannot replace the merit of decisions which, on the basis of the constitutional division of competences, are the exclusive responsibility of the Regions. Ispra's opinion must be limited to providing information of a technical nature that the Regions can justifiably disregard. Any other interpretation of the role of the Institute would give rise to an evident alteration of the constitutionally assigned competences, which is not admissible in a state of law.
It is worth underlining the fact that the only reason why the Tar Marche accepted the appeal sui limits of the lark game bag it is the one that the Region, without providing justification, has failed to transmit the data relating to the slaughter after the approval of the National Management Plan. A technical aspect linked to the failure to acquire and transmit data which undoubtedly constitutes a problem that afflicts ours like other Regions, but which it is undoubtedly surmountable. The motivation that led the TAR to accept the grounds for appeal relating to the withdrawal in derogation of the transfer is more complex and needs to be investigated. If the rule is acceptable that the transfer is not included among the usable species for recall purposes, much less understandable are the further findings regarding the not allowed use of live calls belonging to other huntable species.
In fact, according to the Tar Marche, the hunter with a fixed posting who practices the hunting notwithstanding the starling it should not be able to devote itself to any other species, even if permitted, using live calls of this species for the purpose (for example wood pigeons), which is not reflected in any law. It should be emphasized that in no passage of the sentence is there an express prohibition on the use of non-live warnings (rides, molds, etc.) hunting notwithstanding the transfer. As regards the turtle dove we must note that it was not understood that the European Commission had not asked for any Management Plan, but to adopt the measures to reduce the levy by 50% compared to the average of the 2013-2018 period, and the Marche Region had developed all the necessary actions to comply with this indication, including the verification of the regional levy after the two pre-opening days.
For the lapwing, a species for which, incredibly, a draft of the national management plan has not yet been prepared, only the agreement AEWA extension allows the hunting of the species in column A4, as part of a sampling plan that provides for the minimum measures envisaged for the species that can be regularly hunted, and which the Marche Region had implemented, limiting the seasonal game bag. In this regard, we suggest to the Marche Region to prepare immediately and in time for the drafting of the hunting calendar 2022/23 a regional management plan for the lapwing that allows a limited number of stalking hunters a sustainable harvest. As you can see, a very different picture from that told by the Marches' animal environmental associations, which certainly will not prevent the Region from drawing a hunting calendar for the next season satisfying for the Marche hunters. (FIDC BRANDS)