The CIA-Italian Farmers Association, one of the largest (in terms of number of members) European agricultural organizations, has set up a day in Fabriano to which it has given a title as ambitious as it is important "The country we want".
Fabriano's day was dedicated to Central Italy and had a theme: “Reliving the Apennines”; the works were divided into thematic tables attended by national and local representatives of bodies and institutions, as well as technicians and experts in activities who interact with the territory.
The writers Hunting Associations of the Marche have been invited, as well as the territorial areas of hunting. For this we thank CIA-Agricoltori.
As mentioned, the works were divided into thematic tables, our table concerned “Wildlife management systems - from protection to wildlife management”.
Well, that day, the participation in the work and the related information were enlightening.
They were illuminating because they gave us the opportunity to get to know and discuss the CIA-Farmers Guidelines for the modification of L.157 / 92.
These Guidelines have been distributed to us, have been discussed but have not been shared by us, at least in most of them. We explain the reasons here, for points as divided and listed by the CIA.
1) Replace the concept of "protection" with that of "management". This point is in agreement as the concept of "protection" as a pre-eminent element in law 157/92 was the child of Italy post-referendum anti-hunt and of a wildlife and environmental situation totally different from the current one. In all the developed countries of the world, the territory and ecosystems are managed with knowledge and science. The concept of mere "protection" is sterile and counterproductive as it is technically wrong.
2) Reconstitute the technical faunal committee at the Presidency of the Council of Ministers.
This proposal can be accepted as it would involve having a permanent joint working table at the Presidency of the Council of Ministers; accepted yes but with three related conditions: first that ISPRA is again brought under the Presidency of the Council of Ministers (as it was) and then transferred by the Ministry of the Environment; the second that this National Faunal Technical Committee does not in fact affect the autonomy of the Regions on the subject, which is guaranteed by the Law, the third that all the recognized National Hunting Associations are part of it.
3) Distinguish wildlife management activities from hunting activities.
This point finds us in absolute, total disagreement. For some time, hunting in Italy has no longer been just a playful-recreational activity. The hunters have been trained and are constantly being trained; For about 25 years there have been in Italy the Territorial Areas of Hunting, Institutes where Farmers, Hunters, Representatives of Local Authorities and Environmentalists live and work together; some areas are real excellences in the field of land management for wildlife and environmental purposes. All this without conflicts between the various components but with harmony and collaboration.
It should be remembered here that before the well-known sentence of the Constitutional Court of June 2017 on article 19 of law n.157 / 92, hunters, under the directives of the Territorial Hunting Areas, actively participated in the management with many important activities in the territory such as ; censuses, opportunistic species control, ungulate control, agricultural crop protection systems, fauna acclimatization systems, capture operations, etc.
After that ruling of the Council and, pending the amendment of Article 19 of Law 157/92, hunters can no longer perform their rebalancing work in wildlife management, resulting in almost total inaction with very serious damage to biodiversity, the latter term. much heralded in words but made impossible in fact.
4) Wildlife control activities cannot be delegated to hunting.
Also on this point we are in absolute disagreement with what is claimed by CIA-Agricoltori in the Guidelines in question. In fact, only hunters have the knowledge, experience, passion, the desire to do, even at the cost of sacrificing time and money, in order to achieve the best wildlife balance in the area because they know well that the imbalance affects biodiversity and therefore also the presence of huntable species.
Moreover, even to non-experts, the total failure of the control carried out (so to speak) over the years by the Provincial Police Agents is clearly evident; this for many reasons ranging from the fact that these actions were not felt by the majority of them as a “mission”, to the lack of time for the many functions they hold. To propose it again appears absurd and counterproductive.
5) Farmers' self-protection must be strengthened.
So says CIA-Agricoltori but we disagree. We do not agree because the Marche Region, with its own specific regulations, has long since allowed this self-protection of farmers against wild boar, nutria, pigeon; well the result was almost nil.
It is regrettable and surprising that CIA-Agricoltori, who should know this situation well, is proposing it again as a panacea.
6) Full compensation for damage.
Also on this point we cannot agree, neither on who is obliged to it, nor on how much. All possible damage prevention measures should be put in place as a first measure.
In the event of damage, however, the State (or the Region by proxy), since wild animals are all part of the unavailable patrimony of the State, not therefore the hunters (who already pay a salty concession to benefit from a very limited portion of that unavailable patrimony of the State) must provide for the compensation (and not the full relief) of the farmer who has suffered the damage. The reason for what has been said is quickly explained: farmers, like all citizens of every nation in the world, live and work in a context and since that context is not a sterile glass case but it is the environment that surrounds everyone, in that context. environment there are also elements and living beings that can cause damage to crops and to any agricultural activity, including livestock: from hail, strong wind, frost, extreme weather conditions, wild boars, wolves and so on.
It is easy to understand how any social context, however well organized (other than hunters) will never be able to bear the burden of full compensation for damage caused by nature in the broadest sense, can at best mitigate the damage suffered by compensating a part of it.
7) Traceability of the hunting chain.
We can only agree with this proposal also because we believe that wildlife can be a great food resource both for genuineness and for the organoleptic characteristics of the meat. We will have to go increasingly towards a sustainable use of fauna resources, use based on scientific data calibrated on the territory, having regard to the human activities that take place on that or that other territory (one thing is the mountain, one thing is the hill, marginal lands are one thing, those exploited with intensive agriculture are one thing, and so on).
Traceability yes therefore but concrete use of this great and useful resource; in short, it is good that the rules come but that they are preparatory or contextual to concrete actions, not that only the rules remain, as happens too often in Italy.
This summarized above is our position on the seven guidelines of CIA-Italian Farmers for the amendment of law n.157 / 92.
To conclude, however, we want to stigmatize above all one point, this: it will never be possible or acceptable to our world “Distinguish the activities of wildlife management from those of hunting”. From this CIA proposal we now seem to understand what seemed incomprehensible to us, namely that governments change but no one, since 2017, has added, and passed in Parliament, two simple words to article 19 of law n.157 / 92 in in order to involve hunters in management activities.
Don't they make this very simple change to the law because they don't want hunters to manage but other subjects? Absurd for us but from what the CIA writes it seems to be so.
A last but fundamental consideration: we will never agree and we will fight with all our strength, should it happen, to make social hunting disappear in Italy, the true heritage of our country.
We will never accept hunting only for a fee, commercial hunting, hunting exclusively for the rich or wealthy, hunting organized by landowners on their own funds.
The very high division of Italian land ownership motivates our position, if needed. It is no coincidence that Article 842 of the Civil Code is in force in Italy.
In any case, our heartfelt thanks go to CIA-Agricoltori for the initiative.