As disclosed by the Hunting Federation, in recent days it appeared in the space dedicated to the mail of newspaper readers "Libero" and "La Prealpina" - and probably also on others, since the letter in question seems to have been sent as a press release - a written by signature Massimo Puricelli, which you can read in the attachment. Taking a cue from the recent conference organized by Federcaccia of Milan, Monza Brianza during which the possibilities of creating jobs related to hunting were highlighted, Puricelli has advanced a strong criticism of hunting as a whole. Federcaccia and with her the other AVVVs of the Control Room and the CNCN responded in a timely and precise manner, requesting similar space from the aforementioned newspapers.
Correctly "La Prealpina" published this morning our arguments, which we report below:
Dear Director, we have read what Mr. Puricelli wrote to the newspaper you directed and published in the letter space. What he writes is obviously his legitimate opinion and as such we do not want to, we believe it would be possible to make him change it. The question of the data that he reports in support of what he writes is different, starting from the fact that the majority of Italians would be opposed to hunting. The Ipsos research to which he refers and which reports 79% of the opposers dates back to 2010 it is in fact refuted by another survey, carried out in 2013 among a representative sample of 18-80 year old Italians, equal to about 46,1 million adults, which instead indicates a significant increase in the favor of our compatriots regarding hunting if legal and that is regulated, limited, responsible and sustainable.
The consensus indicated by that research stands at 56% of adults and the elderly, thus marking a very different situation from the one he illustrated. Even the considerations put forward regarding the value of hunting can be questioned, but always through facts and not personal opinions. Mr. Puricelli evidently is unaware that recent studies of the University of Urbino indicate in over half a percentage point of GDP only the part of the direct productive economy that revolves around wildlife management activities, a sector that creates jobs and employment. In addition to this, hunting involves thousands and thousands of women and men engaged in the countryside, in the direct management of the government of the fauna, in the control of protected areas, in the surveillance anti-poaching.
A constant and attentive presence on the territory that no police force or other forms of volunteering can even remotely think of equaling. Finally, as regards the accident data, 12 deaths were confirmed during the 2018-19 season (from 1 September 2018 to 30 January 2019), with a decrease of 33% compared to the previous one. For greater clarity, the fatal accidents involving hunters were 10 (83% of the total), while those involving non-hunters were 2 (17% of the total). During the same period, 50 people were injured, with a decrease of 17% compared to 2017-18. The injuries of the last season involved for 74% of the cases hunters (37 injured) e for the remaining 26% of non-hunters cases (13 injured).
Even a single death while hunting remains unacceptable, we are the first to say it, but perhaps it is good to remember that any human activity, even the apparently safest one, carries a percentage of risk that can be lowered, but not completely eliminated. On one thing we can agree with Puricelli: hunting is not a sport. Hunting is an ancient activity that is practiced for passion, not for sport. It means tradition, culture, social activity, productive of the environment, of life, of wildlife. It is the protection of the territory, the landscape and agricultural crops, a manifestation of a true and lived rurality, not “glossy” and glamorous. It is aggregation, friendship, love for the environment and nature and many other things. We are sorry that Mr. Puricelli is unable to understand all this and prefers to deny it and ask, not understanding it, that it be forbidden, a typical exponent of a fundamentalist culture, which should now be overcome also because it has shown that it is incapable of producing useful results.