- Email: [email protected]
Bird-netting in Italy, 1974
CONSERVATION AROUND THE WORLD
BIRD-NETTING IN ITALY, 1974
must not be used. In the same article a new regulation was also introduced: the localities chosen for birdnetting must be reported to and approved by a Ministerial Commission, representing various groups and interests. Within six months of its appointment the Commission is charged with drawing up a list of localities where bird-netting can be undertaken. Even though deadlines are always considered approximate in Italy, the Commission was not yet formed by January 1974. The substantial limitations were evidently intended to reduce bird-netting drastically, although not immediately. This hope was also based on the fact that the 1967 Act included many new hunting regulations and controls, e.g. prohibiting the sale of dead game birds of a size smaller than the thrush, except for starlings, larks and sparrows. The legislator's hopes remained unfulfilled, and, up to recently, the bird-netting business was still flourishing, supposedly for scientific purposes and for capturing and selling live birds. In fact, in December 1973 the situation was as follows:
Bird-netting in Italy has been a subject of controversy for a long time and is of great concern to naturalists, both Italian and foreign. Whereas in the past the population density of migratory birds was only slightly affected by netting and hunting, in recent years these activities, and the destruction caused by pesticides and other pollutants, have reduced their numbers and some species have almost disappeared. This account describes the bird-netting situation during the last five decades; earlier data are fragmentary and vary from region to region, so that it is now extremely difficult to ascertain when the capture of migratory birds was organized and developed as a business with a real source of profit. Within the past fifty years, there have been several Acts (Legge o Decreto) concerned with the regulation of bird-netting. In the course of time, as the number of bird-netters increased and birds decreased (other factors also being responsible), naturalists and other members of the public in many countries began to protest against this state of affairs. The law, except for some modifications (a) the Ministerial Commission had not been of little value, remained unchanged, but national and appointed and therefore neither the national list of international pressure reached such a peak that finally localities (where bird-netting could be undertaken) the Italian Parliament passed a law (Act No. 799, nor the Ministerial regulations had been prepared; 2 August 1967) forbidding the issue of new birdnetting licences, but allowing those already holding (b) bird-netters were (and are) continuing their one to continue their activities until 31 March 1969. activity, hoping that the preparation of the list would From 1967 to the end of 1969 the pressure on the be greatly delayed and less restrictive than required government from the bird-netting faction was very by domestic and international public opinion; high, so that shortly after the last licence had expired, another Act was passed (Act No. 17, 28 January 1970), (c) trade with live birds as lures for shooting other reinstating bird-netting. However, many restrictions birds crossing the country during the migratory season were introduced within the same article: Bird-netting has prospered; is permitted for scientific purposes (banding) under the control of the National Wildlife Institute (Laboratorio (d) conflicts between people applying for birddi Zoologia Applicato alla Caccia) and for capturing netting licences and the authority issuing them have birds to be sold alive in cages. The article explicitly often been brought to court: in some cases the judge forbids bird-netting for any other purposes and the has decided that the law was effective even without killing of the captured birds. Those dying accidentally the Commission's list of localities, and in others the in the nets have to be reported to the Laboratorio and opposite; 312 Biological Conservation, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1974~-~ Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1974--Printed in Great Britain
Conservation Around the Worm (e) open trade of small dead birds, shot or netted, no longer exists, many of the small birds served in restaurants being either 'legal' sparrows and larks, or imported frozen birds from nearby Mediterranean countries. Finally, the remarkable discrepancies between opposing views of judges have been settled by a decision (26 February 1973) of a section of a higher court (Corte di Cassazione), which decided that until the Commission has been appointed and prepared its list of localities, the Act No. 17 of 1970 is invalid. Since then and with varying degrees of delay, many 'Procuratori della Repubblica' have notified the Provincial Hunting Committees of this decision and suggested that from 31 December 1973 no bird-netting licences should be issued and that existing ones should be revoked. Hopes that things are moving in the right direction are now greater among naturalists, conservationists and scientists. We may think that little has been achieved so far to curtail bird-netting and hunting and that the list of localities may prove to be very long. Some slow progress has, however, been made, notably prohibiting the killing of specimens after capture, the sale of dead birds below a certain size, and the limitation of the bird-netting and hunting to three or four days a week. Protectionists consider these measures very weak and of little effectiveness, whereas bird-netters and related groups--hunters strictly dependent on the live-bird supply, gun and ammunition makers and retailers--are very upset because of the decrease in 'sport' and business. I think, however, that slowly, but with increasing determination, officials are moving towards greater restrictions and limitations in the award of licences, and are therefore moving in the right direction. One might even wonder whether the Ministry had any intention of appointing the Commission. Without its prepared list and with the latest opinion of the high court, bird-netting should gradually fade away. To some disappointed protectionists eagerly asking for more effective and drastic action, my answer is to say-continue the fight with even greater enthusiasm and remember that 'Rome was not built in a day'. In a subsequent article we will report on the work of the Commission (if appointed) concerned with the preparation of the list. A review of the number of banded birds and of recovered rings before and during these recent events will also be reported.
ARISTEO RENZONI
Universita di Siena, Via delle Cerchia 3, Siena, ltaly.
313
PROBLEMS OF WILDLIFE AND TOURIST MANAGEMENT IN THE SWISS NATIONAL PARK
The aims of the Swiss National Park are the following: 'The Swiss National Park is an alpine sanctuary protected from all human influence and interference not serving its purpose and in which the entire fauna and flora are allowed to develop unhindered. The National Park also serves scientific research.' It was first created in 1914 and, since then, these aims have been maintained. The general concensus still prevails today that our Park must remain a nature reserve in spite of its biological evolution and its increasing attraction to tourists which have both been very pronounced during the last ten to fifteen years. Also, the National Park concept has gained in importance and attractiveness as more and more people appreciate nature and especially undisturbed areas. Although our National Park is one of the oldest in Europe, it cannot be envisaged as an area of primeval forest in which the natural balance is still largely unchanged having remained for hundreds of years practically untouched by human interference. In spite of the many scenic riches of Switzerland, it was already too late to find an area of primeval nature which could be preserved for ever. Earlier, man had already exploited this area and in consequence, as everywhere else, modified it considerably. As the name implies, mines, foundries and chalkovens already existed in the region of the Ofenberg several hundred years ago and the inhabitants satisfied their huge demands for wood by cutting down the neighbouring forests. Entire forests were also sold to the Tyrol to provide fuel for the large brine-pits at Hall. This commerce finally led to considerable forest areas being entirely cut down in this region, and it is only at a more recent date that a secondary forest growth became established in this area. The oldest trees in these extensive forests of mountain pine (Pinus mugo), many of which are already dying, hardly exceed 150 years. They will probably be replaced within the next half-century by the former climax forest consisting of Swiss stone-pine (Pinus cembra) and larch (Larix). In other parts of the Park, one may still find very old trees, usually isolated, of Swiss stone-pine and larch as well as a few well preserved remains of the primeval mixed forest. In several favourable regions, man had formerly cleared the forest and thus usable pastures remain to this day which even after 40 to 50 years of protection still show distinct signs of former usage, particularly where the characteristic vegetation of cattle resting-places has been preserved,
BIRD-NETTING IN ITALY, 1974
must not be used. In the same article a new regulation was also introduced: the localities chosen for birdnetting must be reported to and approved by a Ministerial Commission, representing various groups and interests. Within six months of its appointment the Commission is charged with drawing up a list of localities where bird-netting can be undertaken. Even though deadlines are always considered approximate in Italy, the Commission was not yet formed by January 1974. The substantial limitations were evidently intended to reduce bird-netting drastically, although not immediately. This hope was also based on the fact that the 1967 Act included many new hunting regulations and controls, e.g. prohibiting the sale of dead game birds of a size smaller than the thrush, except for starlings, larks and sparrows. The legislator's hopes remained unfulfilled, and, up to recently, the bird-netting business was still flourishing, supposedly for scientific purposes and for capturing and selling live birds. In fact, in December 1973 the situation was as follows:
Bird-netting in Italy has been a subject of controversy for a long time and is of great concern to naturalists, both Italian and foreign. Whereas in the past the population density of migratory birds was only slightly affected by netting and hunting, in recent years these activities, and the destruction caused by pesticides and other pollutants, have reduced their numbers and some species have almost disappeared. This account describes the bird-netting situation during the last five decades; earlier data are fragmentary and vary from region to region, so that it is now extremely difficult to ascertain when the capture of migratory birds was organized and developed as a business with a real source of profit. Within the past fifty years, there have been several Acts (Legge o Decreto) concerned with the regulation of bird-netting. In the course of time, as the number of bird-netters increased and birds decreased (other factors also being responsible), naturalists and other members of the public in many countries began to protest against this state of affairs. The law, except for some modifications (a) the Ministerial Commission had not been of little value, remained unchanged, but national and appointed and therefore neither the national list of international pressure reached such a peak that finally localities (where bird-netting could be undertaken) the Italian Parliament passed a law (Act No. 799, nor the Ministerial regulations had been prepared; 2 August 1967) forbidding the issue of new birdnetting licences, but allowing those already holding (b) bird-netters were (and are) continuing their one to continue their activities until 31 March 1969. activity, hoping that the preparation of the list would From 1967 to the end of 1969 the pressure on the be greatly delayed and less restrictive than required government from the bird-netting faction was very by domestic and international public opinion; high, so that shortly after the last licence had expired, another Act was passed (Act No. 17, 28 January 1970), (c) trade with live birds as lures for shooting other reinstating bird-netting. However, many restrictions birds crossing the country during the migratory season were introduced within the same article: Bird-netting has prospered; is permitted for scientific purposes (banding) under the control of the National Wildlife Institute (Laboratorio (d) conflicts between people applying for birddi Zoologia Applicato alla Caccia) and for capturing netting licences and the authority issuing them have birds to be sold alive in cages. The article explicitly often been brought to court: in some cases the judge forbids bird-netting for any other purposes and the has decided that the law was effective even without killing of the captured birds. Those dying accidentally the Commission's list of localities, and in others the in the nets have to be reported to the Laboratorio and opposite; 312 Biological Conservation, Vol. 6, No. 4, October 1974~-~ Applied Science Publishers Ltd, England, 1974--Printed in Great Britain
Conservation Around the Worm (e) open trade of small dead birds, shot or netted, no longer exists, many of the small birds served in restaurants being either 'legal' sparrows and larks, or imported frozen birds from nearby Mediterranean countries. Finally, the remarkable discrepancies between opposing views of judges have been settled by a decision (26 February 1973) of a section of a higher court (Corte di Cassazione), which decided that until the Commission has been appointed and prepared its list of localities, the Act No. 17 of 1970 is invalid. Since then and with varying degrees of delay, many 'Procuratori della Repubblica' have notified the Provincial Hunting Committees of this decision and suggested that from 31 December 1973 no bird-netting licences should be issued and that existing ones should be revoked. Hopes that things are moving in the right direction are now greater among naturalists, conservationists and scientists. We may think that little has been achieved so far to curtail bird-netting and hunting and that the list of localities may prove to be very long. Some slow progress has, however, been made, notably prohibiting the killing of specimens after capture, the sale of dead birds below a certain size, and the limitation of the bird-netting and hunting to three or four days a week. Protectionists consider these measures very weak and of little effectiveness, whereas bird-netters and related groups--hunters strictly dependent on the live-bird supply, gun and ammunition makers and retailers--are very upset because of the decrease in 'sport' and business. I think, however, that slowly, but with increasing determination, officials are moving towards greater restrictions and limitations in the award of licences, and are therefore moving in the right direction. One might even wonder whether the Ministry had any intention of appointing the Commission. Without its prepared list and with the latest opinion of the high court, bird-netting should gradually fade away. To some disappointed protectionists eagerly asking for more effective and drastic action, my answer is to say-continue the fight with even greater enthusiasm and remember that 'Rome was not built in a day'. In a subsequent article we will report on the work of the Commission (if appointed) concerned with the preparation of the list. A review of the number of banded birds and of recovered rings before and during these recent events will also be reported.
ARISTEO RENZONI
Universita di Siena, Via delle Cerchia 3, Siena, ltaly.
313
PROBLEMS OF WILDLIFE AND TOURIST MANAGEMENT IN THE SWISS NATIONAL PARK
The aims of the Swiss National Park are the following: 'The Swiss National Park is an alpine sanctuary protected from all human influence and interference not serving its purpose and in which the entire fauna and flora are allowed to develop unhindered. The National Park also serves scientific research.' It was first created in 1914 and, since then, these aims have been maintained. The general concensus still prevails today that our Park must remain a nature reserve in spite of its biological evolution and its increasing attraction to tourists which have both been very pronounced during the last ten to fifteen years. Also, the National Park concept has gained in importance and attractiveness as more and more people appreciate nature and especially undisturbed areas. Although our National Park is one of the oldest in Europe, it cannot be envisaged as an area of primeval forest in which the natural balance is still largely unchanged having remained for hundreds of years practically untouched by human interference. In spite of the many scenic riches of Switzerland, it was already too late to find an area of primeval nature which could be preserved for ever. Earlier, man had already exploited this area and in consequence, as everywhere else, modified it considerably. As the name implies, mines, foundries and chalkovens already existed in the region of the Ofenberg several hundred years ago and the inhabitants satisfied their huge demands for wood by cutting down the neighbouring forests. Entire forests were also sold to the Tyrol to provide fuel for the large brine-pits at Hall. This commerce finally led to considerable forest areas being entirely cut down in this region, and it is only at a more recent date that a secondary forest growth became established in this area. The oldest trees in these extensive forests of mountain pine (Pinus mugo), many of which are already dying, hardly exceed 150 years. They will probably be replaced within the next half-century by the former climax forest consisting of Swiss stone-pine (Pinus cembra) and larch (Larix). In other parts of the Park, one may still find very old trees, usually isolated, of Swiss stone-pine and larch as well as a few well preserved remains of the primeval mixed forest. In several favourable regions, man had formerly cleared the forest and thus usable pastures remain to this day which even after 40 to 50 years of protection still show distinct signs of former usage, particularly where the characteristic vegetation of cattle resting-places has been preserved,