On 11 May they will begin in Milan in Regional Council work on the 2021 simplification law, a legislative instrument that should, in the intentions of the law, simplify the Lombard laws. It is an annual event that becomes an opportunity for numerous councilors to try to simplify and clarify the passages of many laws. In the VIII Commission, in preparation for the work of the council chamber, the amendments presented by numerous regional councilors of majority and minority to the hunting law, 26/93.
There are about forty amendments, some acceptable, others less, some useful, others absolutely to be avoided, but to evaluate their legality and constitutionality they will be examined by the appropriate Regional Commission. We do not think we need to go into the specifics of what has been presented, we believe it is more useful to examine those that will be dismissed by the Commission; the arguments are the most disparate, ranging from distances from cycle paths to more severe penalties for those who practice woodcock and snipe post, to the question of rings on the sale of the meat of ungulates coming from the control operations carried out by the Provincial Police to much more.
The amendments are many, perhaps too many but it is the prerogative of each councilor to bring their own proposals, some of which, such as those presented by the Northern League councilor Floriano Massardi and by the councilor Barbara Mazzali of FdI were discussed and shared with the Hunting Associations, others came directly to the Commission, especially those presented by the minority forces. Certainly, however, we are obliged to make some considerations. Some amendments are important and shareable and seriously try if not to simplify at least to improve our Regional Law 26/93: we think of the proposal to establish an important administrative sanction for those who collect woodcock and snipe at the post office, a sanction that provides for the withdrawal of the card for one year if in relapse. This is a request from a large part of the hunting world.
Other amendments instead respond to the desire to give clarifications and solutions to a whole series of interpretations and circulars of both the provincial UTRs and the police forces involved in the controls. It makes sense to make a change in the law to clarify that those who hunt the hare must not be assimilated to hunting in collective form with wild boar and therefore must not have high visibility headgear and jacket but only a high visibility garment? In a normal situation, a circular from the head of the Milan hunting office would be sufficient to clarify the incorrect interpretation that last year led to a couple of reports being raised to the alleged offenders. There would be others similar examples, but we repeat, we prefer to comment on the amendments that will actually go to the Regional Council.
We certainly expect the issue of live call rings to be addressed: having acknowledged that three quarters of the seals have dimensions outside the tolerances indicated by the FOI, as the study promoted by Federcaccia Brescia has shown, we make a single request: that a solution be found, we don't care which one, but that it be found, because the rings have been supplied to thousands of hunters who have put them in dozens of thousands of live calls. The media stirred up by the usual animal welfare associations have embroidered everything and more on our request which seems to us simply a duty for those who have received an incorrect seal and risk being sanctioned for the negligence of others.