Hunting in Malta as seen by the European Commission | Mark Mifsud Bonnici

As a child, I started accompanying my father out hunting at the age of 10, years before I got my hunting licence at 21. Now that I hunt, it served to instil in me a respect for nature, a way of life many nowadays find abhorrent.

At that time in the late 1970's, though regulations did exist, enforcement was only a word in the dictionary.

Hunting was always considered an enjoyable traditional pastime, good for your health and a way of procuring a delicious meal for the family and still is to this day. All birds were back then shot to be eaten and nothing went to waste.

With time, education and even more so following EU accession, regulations coupled with pressure from those opposed to hunting resulted in enforcement being taken seriously. Nowadays, shooting protected birds, which was common practice in the past, carries heavy fines and even imprisonment and has practically been eliminated.

Indeed, times have changed and so have hunters. Spring hunting, Malta's most popular hunting season, has also transformed from a year-long season with no restrictions on what to shoot and when into 21 mornings under a derogation. From a limitless number of turtle dove, quail and any of the 32 legally shot species we now struggle for an exemption that allows us to shoot for a quota of 1,500 turtle doves and 2,400 quails.

From no enforcement, we now have seven officers for every 1,000 hunters, which by far surpasses enforcement in any other EU state. The whole issue has become a farce to the extent that government ironically calls on the army to assist in enforcement thereby creating the wrong perception of a national disaster.

The hunting sector accepts this pathetic situation to hunt in spring for lack of any other satisfactory solution, a situation which even the European Court of Justice confirmed in its verdict in the 2009 ruling on spring hunting.

What stands in the way of my enjoyment and that of thousands of others is an organisation, Birdlife Malta, which despite its ornithological purpose strives to abolish spring hunting and hunting in general. Once we joined the EU and under its current radical leadership Birdlife believes it has a right to dictate what is right or wrong and finds a wall of support in the European Commission.

Hunters are accused of occupying the countryside when most of it is private property or leased out to them. Spring hunting was deceitfully termed as illegal when in fact EU Directives permit it and an ECJ ruling, in the case of Malta, endorsed it. Birdlife instigated an abrogative referendum to abolish spring hunting and lost it. It criticises government, the Opposition and law enforcement when in reality all are doing their job admirably. Now, Birdlife is repeatedly trying to stop spring hunting through court action just before the start of every season. These attempts have all been thrown out by the courts.

What is also abused is the European Commission, which has no investigative powers and relies on stakeholder and government reports to form an opinion. Added to this we have an accommodating sector of the media that uses any report of hunting illegalities, true or false, as its bible in support of the anti-hunting crusade.

All this leads to EU action and fuels scorn against hunters from an uninformed gullible public that succumbs to damaging propaganda against hunting.

I certainly cannot deny that a few illegalities still exist, though nothing in comparison to years gone by or that evidenced in other EU states.

Any perpetrators should and are being brought to justice. However, the situation in the field is far from what some portray as an international disaster.

One thing is for sure and clearly evident; we hunters have accepted change and would be more at peace if the few renegades are weeded out. Unfortunately, those wanting to see the extermination of a lifestyle that is found everywhere in the world see no room for compromise and arrogantly warp facts, exaggerate them and interpret European directives to suit their ideals.

I've come to the conclusion that hunting in Malta has no chance of seeing justice done considering the European Commission relies on, acts and uses the words of extremists and an accommodating media as a means to stigmatise a substantial sector of Maltese society. Malta does have a miniscule share of the world's hunting illegalities which all concerned are doing their utmost to eradicate. However, this certainly does less harm to our international reputation than those extremists who brandish Malta as a hell for birds simply because they abhor hunting and at all costs want to have things their way.

This certainly was not my perception or that of the hunting sector of the EU, which we believed was fair and abhorred extremism.