Update 2: BirdLife Malta, has today said that the Government’s proposed amendments to bird protection regulations have gone too far. Changes proposed through the Wild Birds Regulations Unit under parliamentary secretary Roderick Galdes will “weaken the legal framework of the Wild Birds Regulations, an act that was designed to protect our birds.”

Mark Sultana, BirdLife Malta’s CEO, said this during a press conference, called a day before the end of a public consultation process on a proposed legal notice amending the Wild Birds Regulations of 2006.

He said BirdLife Malta had already submitted its full reply to all the various amendments and is categorically calling on the WBRU, The Ministry for Sustainable Development, Environment and Climate Change and the Prime Minister not to implement the proposed changes in the Legal notice.

“Apart from various amendments, this Legal notice will allow persons to be in possession of any non-EU bird, irrespective of its protection status in its country of origin. This will encourage persons to go for hunting trips in countries such as Argentina and Ethiopia.”

“Those that organise these trips as part of their business, have a lot to benefit from this amendment, making us suspect that they actually lobbied for this change,” Mark Sultana said.

He explained that this is effectively an amnesty for those who are presently breaking the law because they are in possession of birds, such as eagles, caught in territories outside of Europe.

Mark Sultana added, “nature protection does not stop with the borders of the European Union, if this was the case, we would not have a reason to protect migrating birds wintering from Europe in Africa and Asia. Ironically, when talking about other environmental issues, such as climate change, the government looks at them from a global perspective. So we ask – why is it different with bird protection?”

“Another very dangerous change proposed is that of distinguishing between a person who was clearly witnessed shooting at a protected bird, and another being in possession of a protected bird.”

Sultana insisted that this means that anyone in possession of a protected bird will not be subject to receiving the harshest fines anymore. He said that this is also “another scandalous attempt to weaken the strength of those who are responsible in enforcing the law.”

BirdLife Malta reminded that in 2013 WBRU issued a legal notice (LN231 of 2013) changing illegal offences that would end with prosecution in court into administrative fines, while in August of this year another legal notice (LN281 of 2015) increased WBRU’s remit including enforcement and issuing of licences and permits.

BLM said that it also brought about a “free-for-all situation in taxidermy” (the stuffing of wild birds) practice, where the need for licences was removed. “It is also important to mention that in December 2014 WBRU was proposing an amnesty for those in possession of protected birds, which was not allowed to proceed following pressure by BirdLife Malta.”

Mark Sultana pointed out, “these latest proposals are just the last of a number of changes or attempted changes that WBRU have spearheaded with the sole intention of weakening the law that was specifically designed to protect our birds. With these amendments we are weakening bird protection, in the same year when half of the Maltese citizens sent a clear message to the government asking for more protection.”

“BirdLife Malta can understand, even in disagreement, that the Government has a declared policy in favour of hunting and trapping practices. But while the government is declaring a zero tolerance on illegalities it is using the WBRU to weaken the Wild Birds Regulations.”

Sultana concluded, “we call on the Prime Minister Joseph Muscat and the Minister of Environment Leo Brincat not to ignore the environmental lobby and to take up our concerns. We expect this legal notice to be scrapped for the benefit of our living heritage, the birds.”

Update – In reaction this evening the Wild Birds Regulation Unit said that the “legal amendments which are currently for public consultation ensure sustained efforts to curb illegal possession of all protected birds.”

Is said that wanted to clarify that contrary to what was stated by BLM today, the proposed amendments “do not involve any reduction in any penalty for illegal possession of any protected bird.”

“The present penalties, which are amongst the harshest in Europe, will remain in force and are not affected by the amendments,” the WBRU said.

“No distinction has been made between the shooting or attempted shooting of protected birds, and their possession. The higher penalties referred to by BirdLife Malta are those already assigned to Annex I and Annex IX species, which are not subject to any changes through this legal amendment.”

It aded that “the proposed law will not allow people to be in possession of any non-European birds since proof of legal acquisition remains a statutory requirement. The amendment retains coherent legal provisions to deter illegal acquisition, importation and sale of protected non-European birds.”

The amendment also seeks to set up a Conservation of Wild Birds Fund to be used to support activities, projects and schemes concerning conservation of wild birds and other objectives related to the implementation of Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations, the WBRU said.

“Prior to the amendments introduced in August 2015, the importation, possession, keeping, transport, sale and taxidermy of non-EU territory birds was not regulated by the Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations. The new proposal now builds upon the enforcement experience gained following amendments introduced in August, and focuses regulatory control on the importation of protected on-EU birds.”

“Therefore the killing and importation of any protected bird without proof of lawful acquisition was, and will remain illegal, subject to very harsh penalties, which were effectively increased only as recently as last August, the Unit said.

The WBRU concluded its statement by saying that the aim is to prevent and deter any illegal killing, and subsequent smuggling of such illegally acquired non-EU territory birds into Malta. Contrary to Birdlife’s claim, “the proposed amendment strengthens, and not weakens bird protection regime, since an activity that was, until recently, virtually unregulated, will be strictly controlled and enforced under the new legal regime.”

Update 2 – BirdLife Malta has today (Wednesday) reacted to the press statement issued yesterday by the Parliament Secretariat for Agriculture Fisheries and Animal rights.

BirdLife Malta said that it “insists that the amendments proposed will weaken The Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations and that while the statement issued by the Parliament Secretariat states that the legislaton will be stronger it failed to indicate how.”

BirdLife Malta, as stated before, said that it is willing to sit down and discuss with all stake holders in particular WBRU and Government to assist in making the Conservation of Wild Bird Regulations stronger.

File photograph

Permalink: BLM calls on Prime Minister to stop changes in bird protection regulations