Yet another heated dispute has erupted between the Federation for Hunting and Conservation – Malta (FKNK) and BirdLife Malta (BLM) over the controversial finch trapping derogation.

The disagreement centres around the government’s Citizen Science Finch Research Programme and BirdLife Malta’s refusal to provide scientific rings for finches, a move FKNK has criticised as “obstructionist”.

FKNK has praised the government’s efforts to balance conservation with socio-cultural traditions, emphasising the success of the programme, which has reportedly collected valuable data on finches over the past five years.

FKNK CEO Lino Farrugia commended Minister Clint Camilleri for his political will and criticized BLM for refusing to cooperate with international ringer Declan Coney, who was contracted to assist the programme.

“BLM’s refusal to provide rings is not only disappointing but may also breach their obligations as the EURING representative for Malta,” said Farrugia.

He accused BirdLife Malta of arrogance and obstruction, pointing out that trappers following strict guidelines had contributed significantly more finch data than BLM’s long-running bird-ringing scheme.

BirdLife Malta, however, has rejected these claims, calling FKNK’s efforts to involve them a “greenwashing” attempt to legitimise finch trapping, which the European Court of Justice (ECJ) has ruled illegal multiple times.

BirdLife CEO Mark Sultana stated that their organisation never outright rejected collaborating with Mr. Coney but required further verification before providing 600 scientific rings. According to Sultana, Coney failed to respond to their final inquiry.

“FKNK’s amateur approach to science makes them incapable of understanding the credibility and professionalism required for such operations,” Sultana said.

“This derogation is a smokescreen to justify illegal trapping activities, and BirdLife Malta will not be an accomplice to this scam.”

FKNK argues that the finch research programme is a legitimate scientific initiative, highlighting its compliance with stringent rules.

Meanwhile, BirdLife Malta contends that the programme is merely a facade for illegal trapping activities, renewing their call for the European Commission to intervene.

What do you make of this development?