On hunters’ PR and paranoia and the abolition of hunting
Submitted by Animal Rights Malta’s Blog
Today’s The Times editorial, entitled “Hunters’ PR and paranoia” deals with the hunting situation in Malta. I shall reproduce selected quotes from the editorial, which clearly show that the Maltese public has had enough of hunters, and that the government would do well to heed the European Union’s warnings and abolish spring hunting with immediate effect.
The Times editorial says: “The secretary of the Federation for Hunting and ‘Conservation’, Lino Farrugia, has warned members the federation would revoke any hunter’s membership if such a member is convicted of illegal hunting. This followed another crass instance of a young hunter allegedly caught red-handed shooting at a strictly protected bird of prey from the middle of a major road one Sunday afternoon - despite being warned by an off-duty environment inspector not to shoot the bird.
Mr Farrugia had last month drew an extraordinary comparison between the European Union’s warning to Israel about imposing ‘collective punishment’ against Palestinians in the Gaza Strip by reducing their fuel supplies and Malta’s treatment of hunters. He felt that Malta should also have been warned by the EU on what he called the ‘collective punishment of hunters’ when the spring season was brought to an abrupt end by the government - following persistent violations of hunting regulations (see my own comment on this in “Collective punishment and spring hunting“).
The two statements, coming within three weeks of each other, demonstrate both a remarkable paranoia on the part of the federation to the way their ’sport’ is viewed in Malta and in the EU as well as a belated attempt to retrieve some of the PR ground they lost over the years - most notably over the last 12 months.
Alas, hunters have to learn to live with their paranoia. Their low public relations image, both domestically and internationally, would appear to be thoroughly justified, especially given certain statements made, including by federation spokesmen, and the irresponsible attitude of some (actually all - they all murder birds) hunters. The federation has at times been seen to be acting in a high-handed manner. And hunters - not all, granted - have behaved arrogantly and often illegally, leading the public to doubt the oft-touted argument that these are ‘isolated, irresponsible actions’ by a few disaffected individuals…
Finally, it would help the hunters’ cause if they were to accept that, as part of the EU, Malta is bound by the Commission’s directives on spring hunting and to work with the government to implement the new arrangements…”.
Of course, the only moral and responsible thing for the government to do would be to abolish all hunting, since all hunting violates the right of sentient animals to live. To be credible in its claims of support for “animal welfare”, what the government would need to do is not present itself with petitions collected by other people, but instead to stop persisting in it’s hard-headed insistence on retaining spring hunting when the majority of the Maltese people and EU regulations would want or require that spring hunting be abolished, to name one example. Of course, having animal “welfare” laws and bans on hunting does not make a government an animal rights respecting government.
Animal rights demand no less than the total abolition of practices that use non-human animals as human property. But alas, not only does the government not go this far (which in a way is to be expected - speceisist politicians cannot make a non-speciesist government), but the government fails even to live up to it’s own claims that it supports animal welfare measures. Aren’t birds animals?
Visit 1800blogger to see all of our industry leading blogs.
Are you an activist or just an animal lover? Register on Animal Rights Blog now and get published within minutes. Before posting, it is recommended that you review our posting guidelines.
