With a letter sent to the Regional Councilor for Agricultural Forestry Policies, the Sicilian Hunting Associations, Federcaccia, Sicilian Federation of Hunting, Arci Caccia, Italcaccia and ASCN, formally requested a hearing in order to speak on the new 2013-2014 Hunting Calendar. "
Subject: request to be heard
Honorable Councilor,
we have informally learned, from the officials of the Wildlife-Hunting Service and from the local Departments, that the limitation of hunting mobility, contained in art. 5 of Annex A of the 2013/2014 Hunting Calendar, was adopted as a precaution to avoid unfavorable judicial rulings based on an alleged defect of unconstitutionality of art. 22 of LR 33/1997. The justification leaves us somewhat perplexed for a series of reasons that we pass on to resign.
A) The reason informally communicated by the officials remained essentially unexpressed in the Calendar, where the limitation was instead adopted in purported compliance with the opinion of ISPRA , which, however, on this point, specifically recommends "the need to limit mobility...in the case of ATCs that include the small islands around Sicily; here, at migration peaks, particularly high concentrations of hunters can occur, with possible negative consequences." It is obvious that ISPRA did not pay sufficient attention to the proposed regulation, which could already be considered satisfactory for the Institute's needs, by excluding from the outset the ATCs consisting of the archipelagos of the smaller islands from the selection of areas for hunting migratory game. It is also true that ISPRA's attention also directly affected the choice to allow wide mobility for hunters, but the justified acknowledgement of such a doubt could have led to solutions very different from the drastic exclusion of all mobility for migratory birds.
B) If we were to believe the reports of the competent officials, we would have to believe that, perhaps for the first time in history, an Administration has suspended the application of a law because it foresaw its repeal by the Constitutional Court. However, such unusual caution would seem frankly excessive, considering first of all that the law in question – art. 22, paragraph 5, letter a) of Regional Law 33/1997 – was reformulated precisely following a ruling of unconstitutionality (Constitutional Court Sentence 4/2000) that affected the original legislation on "migratory mobility," under which all hunters were granted indiscriminate access to all ATCs in Sicily for the purpose of hunting migratory game, starting November 1st of each year. Of course, it would not be the first time that the Legislature has replaced a provision declared unconstitutional with another equally flawed one, but in this case it should be noted that the "new" formulation of Article 22, paragraph 5, letter a) has twice passed the scrutiny of the State Commissioner unscathed (who must have paid particular attention to it, given its genesis) and has never again been the subject of questions of constitutionality by the Sicilian Administrative Judge, who has had the opportunity to do so.
Already in the judicial appeal of the CV 2009/2010, the environmental associations had foreshadowed a defect in the constitutionality of art. 22, paragraph 5 letter a), albeit formulating the complaint in absolutely inconductive terms and with reference to an alleged contrast with a provision of the Framework Law (Article 18, paragraph 6, L. 157/1992) which is completely impertinent; the question was therefore considered to be manifestly unfounded. On the occasion of the last appeal (CV 2012/2013) the appellants have instead more pertinently assumed a contrast between the aforementioned art. 22 letter a) and the principle affirmed by art. 14 L. 157/1992 (balanced distribution of hunters in the exercise of hunting). We are still awaiting the sentence that will define the relative judgment, but at present it is not even possible to imagine that the administrative judge can positively resolve on the relevance and validity of the question.
C) Ultimately, and at present, no provision has assessed the relevance and validity of the doubts about the constitutionality raised by environmental associations. Nor can a harsh prognostic assessment be made in this regard , given that the law in question does not permit indiscriminate access by all Sicilian hunters to the entire regional territory. Instead, it leaves it to the Councilor's prudent assessment whether to permit, year by year, limited mobility for migratory hunters, both territorially (a maximum of four areas) and temporally (a variable number of days between twenty and thirty). The law, in and of itself, therefore, does not appear to undermine the principles of the Framework Law, and a review of its legitimacy could, in our opinion, at this point focus solely on the Councilor's exercise of discretion and therefore, ultimately, on the administrative act in court. In this regard, we must point out that other Italian regions, while not claiming exclusive legislative jurisdiction over hunting, have adopted a far more liberal system of mobility for migratory hunters than ours. For example, Tuscany, starting October 1st, allows hunting mobility to all residents of any of the areas upon "purchase" of five-day packages for each ATC, specifying that hunting migratory game from a hide, as well as wild boar driven hunts, does not affect stocking density. It is also clear that Article 5 of the Italian Constitution clearly states that hunting is permitted only in the case of migratory game from a hide. Article 14 of Law 157/1992—which also allows for individual administrative acts (resolutions of the ATC management committees) to derogate from hunting density indices—intends to pursue the optimal management of sedentary wildlife, whereas it is obvious that wildlife population census operations, at the local or individual ATC level, cannot effectively address migratory wildlife. It is therefore reasonable to assume that the rigor with which the 92 Legislator intended to pursue certain objectives (the hunter's connection to the territory and the optimal management of wildlife resources) is mitigated with regard to migratory game, given the unpredictability of bird populations and the consequent impossibility of planning a homogeneous harvest using tools (hunting density indices) that are otherwise effective for rationalizing the harvest of sedentary game.
D) The caution shown in adopting the incredible restriction set forth in Article 5 of Annex A of the CV (which effectively eliminated hunting mobility for migratory game) therefore appears completely unjustified , especially when compared with other critical issues with the adopted regulation, which instead present a much higher and more current likelihood of censure. More generally, we have not understood the reason why the Hunting Calendar was issued so hastily, especially while awaiting approval of the Plan, and with such content, without consulting the hunting associations on this point. The entire affair leaves us perplexed, and the numerous doubts crowding our minds, as well as those of our members and those working in the sector, must be dispelled immediately. In these hours, most people are realizing the devastating impact of the already hated Article 5, which jeopardizes the very survival of the Sicilian hunting tradition; We believe that the Administration can equally predict the equally devastating effects that the regulation will have on the regional economy and on the Treasury itself.
By virtue of the above, we ask you for an urgent meeting in order to obtain the requested clarifications and identify the most suitable solutions to the critical issues of the current hunting regulations.
Sure of your kind and prompt reply, we take this opportunity to send you our best regards.
Francesco Mistretta – Sicilian Federation of Hunting
Giuseppe La Russa - Italian Federation of Hunting - cons. Sicilian reg
Francesco D'Elia – Arcicaccia-Sicilian federative committee
Alessandro Mirabile – Italcaccia-Sicily regional commissioner
Domenico Portale-ASCN
"
(June 25, 2013)
You May Also Like ..
