The new hunting bill doesn't exist yet, but it's already causing alarm
Environment — di Simone Santi
The new hunting bill doesn't exist yet, but it's already causing alarm
The new hunting bill doesn't exist yet, but it's already causing alarm
The new hunting bill doesn't exist yet, but it's already causing alarm
- Going by the first drafts, a radical rewrite of the law on the protection of wildlife is in the offing.
- Hunting could go from an activity to be regulated to a "tool useful to biodiversity".
- Expanded hunting areas — beaches included — more live decoys, and night-time hours: associations warn of risks to biodiversity and public safety.
It has no official text yet, but drafts have been circulating for weeks, and that has been enough to prompt a petition calling for it to be stopped: the hunting bill — which would dramatically loosen the rules governing hunting activity in Italy and has already been dubbed Ammazza Natura (Nature Killer) by many associations — is probably a record of sorts. Why is it causing so much alarm? Because even the details that have leaked are troubling: the bill pushed by Agriculture Minister Francesco Lollobrigida promises to radically rewrite Law 157 of 1992 on the protection of wildlife and hunting activity, shaping up as a full-blown deregulation of hunting.
What the possible hunting bill provides for
L'Italia NON è una Repubblica fondata sulla caccia🇮🇹
In occasione del 2 giugno facciamo un promemoria al governo e al Ministro Lollobrigida affinché fermino il DdL "Ammazza-Natura" che rischia di regalare la natura ai cacciatori a scapito di tutti noi👇
wwf.it/pandanews/anim…
In occasione del 2 giugno facciamo un promemoria al governo e al Ministro Lollobrigida affinché fermino il DdL "Ammazza-Natura" che rischia di regalare la natura ai cacciatori a scapito di tutti noi👇
wwf.it/pandanews/anim…
At the root of the measure, associations argue, lies a dangerous paradigm shift: hunting is no longer treated as an activity to be regulated in order to limit damage to nature, but is instead presented as a tool useful to biodiversity. A narrative that the leading environmental and animal-welfare associations contest as scientifically unfounded, if not self-serving: no independent, recognised study supports the idea that hunting activity, in the manner and scale proposed, could benefit natural equilibria. After all, "hunting associations have long been trying to turn the argument to their advantage, claiming that their activity helps the environment and supports the maintenance and management of habitats such as woodland," explains Alessandro Fazzi, institutional relations consultant for Humane World for Animals Italia: in practice, what is contained in the bill is nothing more than a literal transposition of hunters' demands.
Getting down to specifics, among the measures considered most alarming is the extension of hunting areas to include zones previously off-limits, such as regional parks and public state land, "and therefore potentially beaches too, which are indeed public state property — an activity sometimes permitted today on coastlines with varying minimum distances from the water's edge, depending on the region," Fazzi points out, highlighting a troubling possibility. The bill would also cap the percentage of territory that can be classified as "protected" — in stark contrast with the European Green Deal objectives and the Biodiversity Strategy, which set 30 per cent as the minimum extent of protected areas, whereas the bill would treat that figure as a maximum.
According to the proposal, the number of species that can be used as live decoys — animals kept captive to lure others to be killed — would rise from 7 to 36, at least according to Enpa: with a limit of 10 decoys per hunter, this would in effect authorise the keeping of 360 individuals per person. Small prisoners, stripped of their freedom and used as instruments of death. The hunting bill would also allow hunting beyond sunset and even the organisation of dog trials — with the use of firearms — in the dead of night and out of season. The use of firearms at night, in the absence of adequate checks, associations argue, poses a threat not only to wildlife but also to public safety.
There is another point that risks being particularly dangerous: the hunting bill, Fazzi underlines, "provides for the recognition of hunting licences for foreign nationals without any training on Italian regulations, with very serious risks: If I am a Slovenian hunter, or from another country where bear hunting is permitted, who will tell me that in Italy this form of hunting is strictly forbidden? Not to mention the very real risk of a rise in hunting tourism fuelling the barbaric practice of trophy hunting, with hunters aiming to take home the bodies of animals, or parts of them, as if they were souvenirs."
Among the most troubling new provisions is the reopening of bird-trapping and roccoli — practices involving the capture of migratory birds that have been banned for decades and sanctioned by the European Union. Furthermore, permanent hunting hides could be built without any limit, concreting over land and natural habitats. And then there is the crowning absurdity — fines for anyone who defends the environment: anyone who tries to document, report or simply disturb a hunter could be fined up to 900 euros: a punitive measure that discourages civic monitoring and further weakens the already fragile system of environmental oversight, made even less effective by the reduction of checks and the use of self-certification.
The letter from 44 associations to the ministers
Against this draft hunting bill, as noted, the animal-welfare and environmental world has already mobilised — as has the scientific and economic community — to the point that no fewer than 44 associations (including Humane World for Animals Europe, Lav, but also, for instance, the association of wildlife photographers, the Cave Canem foundation, and Doctors for the Environment…) have asked the Ministers for the Environment and Agriculture, Gilberto Pichetto Fratin and Francesco Lollobrigida, to meet with them so as to be directly informed of the Government's intentions.
Given the current leaked information, they explain, the proposed changes "would further reduce protections for wildlife, increasing the number of huntable species and authorising the mass use of live decoys. They would also legalise hunting in state-owned areas such as beaches and forests, even at night and during the breeding season, jeopardising protected areas and spaces available for low-impact activities such as ecotourism and quality agriculture — important drivers of the sustainable development of communities throughout the country. The proposed changes would, on the contrary, facilitate practices such as hunting tourism and trophy hunting."
Decine di associazioni hanno scritto ai ministri dell'Agricoltura e dell'Ambiente chiedendo di essere ricevute per avere informazioni dirette sulle intenzioni del Governo sul #ddlcaccia
helpconsumatori.it/diritti/beness… via @helpconsumatori
helpconsumatori.it/diritti/beness… via @helpconsumatori
Trophy hunting, specifically, which "not only hinders conservation efforts, but also raises ethical and animal welfare concerns, in the face of minimal or no economic benefits for the sector. Shooting animals for sport, simply to obtain a trophy, is moreover ethically unjustifiable, disregards their intrinsic value and reduces them to mere commodities. This measure, in essence, does not intervene to mitigate or improve this situation, but risks being a further serious boost to this practice, including with regard to the export of trophies from animals hunted in our country".