The tight timeframe for voting on the Commission's proposal for the restriction on the use of lead, scheduled for September 3, do not allow us to produce a video with subtitles in Italian, however we summarize below the contents of the FACE video, available in English at the link https://youtu.be/f-pNA1BNVgk, which makes it clear because it is not acceptable to limit the use of lead as the Commission has prepared it. The following are the main problems that the Commission proposal determines and which are exposed in the video by the FACE Secretary General Dr. David Scallan
1. Definition of wetland
The Commission used the definition of a wetland from the Ramsar Convention, and stated in a parliamentary question that even a small puddle formed by rain in a normally dry area is a wetland, and that therefore the hunter in this area he must use non-lead shot even if he is hunting non-aquatic species. This forced definition and interpretation makes both the controls of the hunting guards and the behavior of the hunter unmanageable. As many as 23 EU states have already banned the use of lead in wetlands, but no one has used the definition of the Ramsar Convention, precisely because it is unmanageable for both hunters and control agents. The solution is not to use the Ramsar definition, but to precisely define the wetlands that really exist on the territory.
2. Inclusion of peat bogs
The Ramsar definition also includes the inclusion of peat bogs, i.e. areas that are normally dry but in particular conditions of precipitation can form temporarily flooded areas. The peatlands are very extensive areas in northern Europe, but also in Italy areas that are normally dry and frequented for hunting sedentary land fauna can partially flood due to rains, consequently making the use of ammunition with or without unmanageable. lead during a hunting trip over diversified territories. The solution in this case is to eliminate the “buffer strips” and limit the use of non-lead shot only inside wetlands.
3. Legal problem of presumption of fault
The presumption of innocence is a cardinal principle of the whole European legal order, while in this case the Commission has introduced a principle of presumption of guilt, prohibiting the possession (rather than the use) of ammunition containing lead even in the case of exercise of different forms of hunting throughout the day and crossing of wetlands during hunting trips in dry areas. This principle of presumption of guilt is unacceptable, precisely because during the same day a hunter can go hunting aquatic in a wetland with non-lead ammunition, and subsequently go for land game with ammunition containing lead. Also in this case the proposal can be easily amended, solving this problem in harmony with the principle of presumption of innocence.
The FACE arguments are even stronger if we consider that ECHA, the European Chemicals Agency has explicitly pointed out that the Ramsar definition of wetlands presents serious problems of application and control of the provisions on cartridges containing lead, it has not the “buffer” zones have never been proposed, nor the possession of cartridges containing lead in areas where it cannot be used. It is clear that the European Commission is forcing the provisions, with the aim of limiting the hunting activity more and more. FACE and Federcaccia have been working for some time to modify these parts, making the use of non-toxic ammunition in wet areas more applicable, facilitating control activities and avoiding further restrictions on hunting and hunters.