Hunting calendars
The president of the UNA Foundation Maurizio Zipponi and of AB – Agrivenatoria Biodiversitalia Niccolò Sacchetti address the sector on the topic ofamendment to the Budget Law which is currently taking centre stage amidst environmentalist controversy. Below is the text: “It is with deep regret that I note the discomposed reaction of some Associations regarding the proposal to insert certain corrections to the discipline containing the approval of hunting calendars contained in the budget bill, in the imminence of the vote in the Chamber. At the basis of the dispute, we find the will of the legislator to find a solution to the clash, wall against wall that, every year, at the opening of the hunting season, is reproduced in the indication of the times and the list of wild fauna species to be regulated differently in the individual Regions.
Bad faith actions
In fact, there is evidence - and more frequently in recent years - of the proposition of frivolous litigation by individuals who act in bad faith in court, that is, contesting regional decisions with the sole purpose of obtaining a precautionary measure to suspend hunting. It does not matter that, over time, with the continuation of the trial and entering the merit phase, it is shown that no plausible reason can be claimed. The procedural conduct only serves to give rise to controversy and tension and to prevent the start of the hunting season, preferring gratuitous slander to the constructiveness of the debate. This increases the suspicions of the good faith of a certain world that, with regard to the amendment to the budget law, is crying scandal today, even invoking the question of the legitimacy of hunting in the revised draft of the Constitution, recently declared inadmissible by the administrative judges. Article 9, third paragraph, assigns to the legislator the definition of the ways and forms through which to regulate the protection of wild fauna, in the balance with other interests and values destined to find expression, at the Union level, with regard to the cultural traditions of the Member States. Therefore, we believe that it is unacceptable to appeal to the unconstitutionality of some rules to attack a sector and a category of citizens, when it is clear that the problem is of substance in the relationship and comparison between the political groups in Parliament.
Withdrawal times
But this is not the issue that is dividing. On the eve of the vote on the budget law, it is a question of setting up a serious discussion on the homogeneity of scientific data that support, on the level of biogeographic regions, the choice of times for harvesting species based on migratory movements and considering how harvesting is the basis of a complex bio-regulation activity, as the fight against swine fever has highlighted, requiring the collaboration of hunters in containment plans. All conditions that, among other things, require the expression of an opinion, for the purposes of approving the calendars, also of the specific Committee established at the Ministry of Agriculture, Food Sovereignty and Forests, set up according to a broader institutional logic as it involves multiple administrative interests - central and peripheral - and participated not only by environmentalists but also by farmers. We hope that we can soon get out of the ideological head-on clash and that we can reopen a serious debate between the environmentalist, agricultural, hunting and scientific worlds, as was wisely done by the fathers and mothers of law 157/92. Let us therefore avoid ideological battles: the environmental issue is too important and demands to walk together on a serious and responsible path". (Source: UNA Foundation)
You May Also Like ..
