Bird trapping is a controversial practice in Malta that involves using nets or limesticks to capture wild birds for food or profit. While trapping songbirds and larger birds is generally prohibited across the European Union, Malta maintains derogations that allow certain forms of trapping to continue legally. This has led to clashes between conservationists who want to protect migratory bird populations and trappers who view the practice as part of their culture and livelihood. Determining the legality of bird trapping in Malta requires an examination of national laws, European regulations, and the complex political debates surrounding this issue.
Overview of bird trapping in Malta
Bird trapping has long been a traditional practice in Malta, with roots dating back centuries. Given the island nation’s position along major migratory flyways, it is estimated that around 200 species of birds pass through Malta each spring and fall. Small passerine songbirds like finches and thrushes are the most commonly targeted species, along with larger birds like quail, turtle doves, and golden plovers. The peak trapping seasons occur in spring and autumn when birds are migrating between Europe and Africa.
There are two primary trapping methods used in Malta:
- Mist nets – These fine nylon nets are hung between poles and are invisible to birds in flight. Birds fly into the nets and become entangled.
- Limesticks – These are small branches covered in an adhesive lime mixture. Birds that perch on the branches get stuck.
Trapped birds may be sold locally for food, but there is also evidence of larger scale commercial trapping to supply restaurants. Trappers assert this is an old cultural tradition, while critics argue it leads to substantial declines in vulnerable songbird populations.
National laws related to bird trapping in Malta
Bird trapping regulations in Malta are governed by the following national legislation:
- Conservation of Wild Birds Regulations (2006) – Provides protections for native wild birds and outlines penalties for illegal trapping or killing of protected species.
- Framework for Allowing a Derogation Opening a Spring Hunting Season for Turtle Dove and Quail Regulations (2015) – Lays out strict limits on allowable hunting and trapping periods for turtle doves and quail.
- Finch Trapping Regulations (2017) – Specifies which finch species can be legally trapped, trapping locations, seasons, and reporting requirements.
Overall, while Malta’s regulations do prohibit the hunting and trapping of many wild bird species, they provide carve-outs that allow trapping of specifically designated “pest” species believed to damage crops. The Framework Regulations also open spring hunting seasons for turtle dove and quail. The derogations for finches and spring hunting are still controversial but remain government policy.
Relevant EU regulations
At the European Union level, bird trapping policy is shaped by the following directives:
- Birds Directive (2009/147/EC) – Calls for member states to conserve all naturally occurring wild bird species by restricting hunting and capture. Provides a common framework across the EU.
- Eco-Crimes Directive (2008/99/EC) – Defines illegal killing/trading of wild birds as a criminal offense and requires effective penalties.
Malta’s trapping derogations put it outside the full scope of the Birds Directive’s general ban on trapping wild songbirds for profit. But the EU does pressure Malta to tighten regulations and reduce trapping/hunting levels to support broader conservation goals. There remains disagreement whether certain aspects of Malta’s trapping allowances align with EU directives.
Debates around bird trapping in Malta
The polarized positions in the bird trapping debate include:
Pro-trapping view:
- Trapping is a traditionalMaltese cultural practice that should be respected.
- Trapping helps control crop pests like finches that damage orchards and vineyards.
- Limited trapping is sustainable and does not threaten overall bird populations.
Anti-trapping view:
- Indiscriminate mist nets and limesticks kill or injure threatened and protected species.
- Widespread commercial trapping for restaurants fuels black market wildlife trade.
- Studies show steep declines in migratory songbirds linked to Maltese trapping practices.
While positions remain polarized, there have been efforts to promote compromise and reduce trapping levels. But significant change has been gradual given the cultural roots of trapping in Malta.
Is compliance and enforcement effective?
Critics argue that Malta’s regulations around allowable trapping are poorly enforced, enabling illegal trapping to persist. Challenges include:
- Remote locations make detecting illegal nets/limesticks difficult.
- Fines and penalties are too low to deter illegal trapping.
- Corruption has undermined enforcement efforts against poachers.
To improve compliance, recommendations include:
- Increasing penalties for violations.
- Independent monitoring of trapping/hunting levels.
- More rangers to patrol vulnerable habitats.
- Public awareness campaigns to shift cultural attitudes.
Stronger enforcement remains contentious since many Maltese view tighter restrictions as an attack on their traditions. But improving compliance is vital to ensuring trapping practices adhere to national and EU regulations.
What species are most affected?
Research indicates that following species migrating through Malta suffer the highest mortality from trapping:
Species | Population Trend | Protection Status |
European Turtle Dove | Declining | Vulnerable |
Common Quail | Declining | Least Concern |
Common Chaffinch | Declining | Least Concern |
Eurasian Blackcap | Declining | Least Concern |
Song Thrush | Declining | Least Concern |
The European Turtle Dove and Song Thrush have shownparticularly steep population declines linked to Maltese trapping. This highlights the need to limit capture of already vulnerable species.
What are the economic considerations?
Proponents of bird trapping argue it provides important supplemental income for rural Maltese trappers. A 2013 study estimated:
- Up to 5,800 trappers active in Malta.
- Annual economic value of €15.5 million.
- 56% of trappers rely on trapping to supplement main income.
However, the profitability of commercial trapping has raised questions whether it fuels an unsustainable underground trade given that larger scale trapping is illegal. From a conservation perspective, short-term economic gains from trapping may not outweigh long-term ecosystem damage from declining bird populations. But an outright trapping ban would have real economic effects on local communities.
What are the positions of advocacy groups?
The two main advocacy groups staked out clear positions:
BirdLife Malta
– Supports complete ban on spring hunting and mist net trapping of finches.
– Believes current regulations enable excessive trapping beyond legal limits.
– Claims trapping contributes to falling migratory bird populations.
FKNK (Federation for Hunting and Conservation)
– Rejects accusations that hunting and trapping threaten bird populations.
– Supports regulations allowing spring hunting and finch trapping.
– Argues for trapping as a traditional activity with economic benefits.
These groups have remained entrenched on opposing sides of the debate for many years. Achieving progress requires building consensus between their divergent viewpoints.
Conclusion
In summary, while Malta has national regulations that allow limited forms of bird trapping to continue, there is ongoing controversy regarding the practice. Lax enforcement, illegal commercial activity, and population declines of targeted species all raise concerns about the sustainability of Maltese trapping. But cultural tradition and economic factors make implementing tighter restrictions politically challenging. Achieving an effective policy balance that satisfies conservationists, humanitarians, trappers, and European institutions remains an evolving, unresolved issue.