BirdLife Malta has filed a robust denial to claims made by the Federation for Hunting and Conservation – Malta (FKNK), alleging that BirdLife was not cooperating with foreign bird ringers. BirdLife Malta, in a statement issued on Tuesday responding to allegations made elsewhere about its treatment of overseas researchers, insisted it has never refused scientists wishing to conduct non-funded research here.
The BirdLife Malta Ringing Scheme is part of the EURING network which gathers results that are known for their professionalism and big participation. The organisation emphasised its record of “successful cooperation” with foreign ringers and local authorities, including the Wild Birds Regulation Unit (WBRU).
BirdLife Malta clarified recent claims involving a request by a Mr. Declan Coney for 600 bird rings. According to the organisation, the request triggered its standard verification process, designed to ensure the authenticity and qualifications of applicants. However, Mr. Coney reportedly failed to respond to the final email in this process. “Contrary to FKNK’s insinuations, BirdLife Malta never reached a point to approve or reject Mr. Coney’s request,” the statement read.
Some of the information that emerged this week in relation between a Mr. Declan Coney and BirdLife Malta and a request for 600 bird rings required clarification from BirdLife Malta itself. The request prompted the organisation to follow its “standard verification process” aimed at verifying authenticity and qualifications of applicants. But Mr Coney then allegedly did not reply to the last email in that regard. The statement read: “BirdLife Malta never reached a point to approve or reject Mr. Coney’s request, contrary to insinuations by FKNK.”
Mark Sultana, BirdLife Malta’s chief executive criticised FKNK for what he described as an “amateur approach to science.” He reiterated the importance of keeping standards high: “Before we release any ring with BirdLife Malta details on it, the person and project involved need to be reputable and scientifically valid. According to FKNK, it had simply taken advantage of this process in order to hide the fact that finch trapping derogation remains illegal for the time being.
This controversy emerges against the background of long-standing discord regarding Malta’s finch trapping derogation, which has been declared illegal on two occasions by the European Court of Justice (ECJ). BirdLife Malta has also claimed that the government is hiding behind pseudo-scientific arguments to keep finch trapping and captivity alive.
Sultana said: “What this derogation is all about is a shoddy cover for illegal trapping that the government has been working towards.” He stated that BirdLife Malta will not become complicit in what it sees as a breach of EU law.
BirdLife Malta calls on the European Commission to respond quickly and strongly to counter this derogation, pledging continued efforts to safeguard birds and unmask what it describes as “scam” intended to camouflage illegal practice.
It has also raised concerns regarding Malta’s attempts to protect birds, which are often used as targets for hunting, something BirdLife Malta says it will never allow.
Newsroom
Leave a Reply