NEWS | Wednesday, 07 January 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Raphael Vassallo
On 31 December, the four-year transitional period for the trapping of seven species of wild songbirds finally came to an end, and the European Wild Birds Directive – which specifically prohibits hunting in spring, and trapping at all times of the year – now has to be implemented in full.
Among the immediate consequences is the sudden release of vast tracts of land which has for decades been “out of bounds” to the general public, with would-be ramblers traditionally warned away by the letters “RTO” (‘Riservato’).
And yet, with the obvious exception of a small minority of land-owning trappers, it is debatable whether the occupants had legal title to all this land in the first place.
A spokesperson for the Government Property Division within the Finance Ministry explained that, contrary to popular perception, government land has never been rented out specifically for trapping.
“The Government Property Division (GPD) has never leased out land for the purpose of trapping,” a ministry official told MaltaToday. “Agricultural leases (qbiela) are intended for agricultural use. An infringement to this condition results in the termination of the lease and hence the loss of all resulting rights.”
Sounds straightforward enough; until one places this observation in the context of a parliamentary question which quantified the number of registered trappers as 4,616 back in 2007.
As only a small minority of these trappers would make use of their own land – and especially in view of the favoured location of trapping sites, many of which are clearly visible on public land such as the area around Mnajdra and Hagar Qim – the implications of the above statement are inescapable.
Most of Malta’s visible trapping sites are actually illegal: either in breach of their lease conditions as agricultural land, or because they have been illegally sub-let to third parties.
How much land?
Be that as it may, all this land will now have to be vacated by trappers. Scattered in various localities across Malta and Gozo, the trapping “runs” – as the areas are generally known – tend to be small in themselves, but taken together, the area of land they cover is substantial.
Legal notice 79 of 2006 specifies that the maximum size of trapping net cannot exceed 13.75m by 2.75m. For practical reasons, the trapping site has to be slightly larger than the size of net used... and to this, one must also add additional space to accommodate trapping-related paraphernalia, such as the traditional hide (dura) used by trappers to monitor their nets.
Based on these figures, a typical single-run trapping site (most trappers use multiple runs) is estimated to be approximately 14 by 3 metres.
Multiplied by the number of registered hunters – and taking into consideration that not all would be active this year – and the minimum estimate of total land surface area used for trapping is just under 175,000 square metres: roughly the size of 30 football pitches. As many trappers tend by and large to concurrently use at least two runs, the real area is probably much larger.
This in turn suggests that the end of trapping – although arguably less controversial than hunting, with all its added noise pollution and public safety issues – will nonetheless have much further-reaching implications for the quality of life of Malta as a whole.
But much depends on what use government will decide to make of all this land. Questions sent to GPD regarding plans for the re-utilisation of this land remained unanswered by the time we went to print.

Environmental impact
Certainly, much of the land in question will have to be rehabilitated, having been “disturbed” through its use for trapping. Vegetation is usually burnt to make way for nets; while in the case of garigue, the stony surface is sometimes levelled, resulting in the loss of natural topographical features such as rock pools, which are essential to biodiversity.
According to BirdLife Malta, these practices have had a severe impact on Malta’s natural environment.
“Vegetation in trapping sites is killed off to make space for nets by burning and spraying with toxic herbicides,” BirdLife’s Geoffrey Saliba explained. “This practice impoverishes biodiversity in a whole area, as valuable habitat is destroyed. As a result trapping sites would need to be restored if they are to re-grow the vegetation which has been destroyed. Trapping hides on public land should be removed, and the natural habitat should be rehabilitated.”
Echoing the GPD’s observations, BirdLife also argues in favour of rehabilitating land after decades of illegal occupation.
“Trapping sites have also been illegally built on agricultural land, in violation of the land lease which specifically prohibits trapping action under that lease. These hides should also be removed so the land can be used as stipulated in the lease.”
Repeated efforts to contact the FKNK on its public listed number this week proved futile.

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below.
Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.