Spring delays, the swallows too, but punctual to remind us that we are approaching one new hunting season, preceded by the drafting of the hunting calendars, arrives the LIPU. Also this year, in fact, the anti-hunt animal welfare organization has drawn up its list of species in difficulty - obviously only those that can be hunted, the others at this moment are not of much interest. not giving visibility - and has already begun to engage in psychological terrorism in the Regions by “inviting them” under penalty of threatening, as usual, not so veiled, of appeals and complaints to take at face value what they have stated.
At LIPU, ideas obviously change very quickly from one year to the next and so the species object of the requests range from 19 to 5, from 1 to 21 with much more rapid jumps in the demographics of the populations, even in the absence of new data. This time I am in fact 21 and precisely: lark; Sardinian partridge; rock partridge; red partridge; codon; pochard; brunette; fighter; quail; coot; snipe; ptarmigan; black grouse; partridge; garganey; wild turtledove; redwing; Cesena; song thrush; lapwing and woodcock. Requests for action, ranging from the suspension to the exclusion from huntable species to, moreover for a few, a very strong reduction of the sampling time span are based as usual on the SPEC classification, now considered unofficial by multiple TAR rulings and never considered by the European Union as a tool for assessing the state of wild bird populations, as well as on rambling arguments concerning pre-nuptial migration, among other things just as the editing process is in progress Key concepts.
By playing according to the rules, that is, within a system that makes the correctness of institutional relations and objective truth its foundations, Federcaccia and its researchers have long ago provided data and tools to many Regions to refute the usual anti-hunt campaign and I am available to deepen where required, both in the PFVR and in calendars. On the scientific level we are ready to calmly and serenely deal with the LIPU and with any other association, organism and organization. However, LIPU must be acknowledged a remarkable consistency, given that none of his requests have ever been received by the Regions in all these years. What can only worry, however, is the risk that someone will succumb to the temptation to play dirty.
And since instead of making a secular choice free from prejudices the Minister of the Environment has clearly marked ideologically on various occasions, even appointing as its secretary the one who until a few hours ago was the president of the aforementioned association, we fear that once again, as in the past, a ministerial "help" may arrive to put pressure on the Regions. We, unlike the LIPU, do not make threats. But rest assured - hunters and animal rights activists - that we will not let our guard down and if necessary, as already done with the predecessor of the current minister, we will not have problems either to turn to the TAR.