Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

Global Ecology and Conservation

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/gecco

Original research article Environmentalism in the crosshairs: Perspectives on migratory bird hunting and poaching conflicts in Italy

Benjamin Barca a, Adrien Lindon b, Meredith Root-Bernstein c,d,∗ a WCS Cambodia, 21 Street, Phnom Penh, Cambodia b ERM France, Paris, France c Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark d Institute for Ecology and Biodiversity, Santiago, Chile article info a b s t r a c t

Article history: Migratory bird hunting has a long tradition in the Mediterranean, but remains a highly con- Received 18 December 2015 troversial issue. Here we examine the Mediterranean migratory bird hunting controversies Received in revised form 24 February 2016 through the case of Italy. We interviewed key informants and carried out participant ob- Accepted 6 March 2016 servation on both legal and illegal migratory bird hunting and migratory bird protection, in Available online 31 March 2016 four key migratory bird hunting sites in Italy. In many cases, both migratory bird hunters and bird protection activists consider themselves as the stewards of nature. Environmen- Keywords: talists accuse hunters of illegal practices, while hunters believe anti-poaching activists aim Hunting Italy to threaten the existence of hunting itself. Yet surprisingly, the legality of specific hunting Mediterranean practices emerges as peripheral to the concerns of both groups. The lack of dialogue and Migratory birds increasingly polarized positions on both sides make it difficult to assure compliance with Poaching EU and national migratory bird hunting laws, and hinders finding shared solutions that Values consider differing values in a rapidly changing society. © 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).

1. Introduction

Migratory bird hunting in the Mediterranean continues to attract public domestic and foreign attention (Anonymous, 2013; BirdLife International, 2015; D’Amico, 2014; Franzen, 2014, 2013; Packham, 2014). The high energetic cost of migration and the lack of flexibility in migration routes make migratory birds especially vulnerable to hunting since they are spatially constrained and physically weak, providing a compelling public narrative for why they should be protected from hunting. Hunting is a source of mortality for migratory bird populations, although for most species the loss and degradation of breeding, staging and wintering habitats, along with climate change, are considered to be the greatest current threats (Dalby et al., 2013; Fasola et al., 2010; Jiguet et al., 2012; Menz and Arlettaz, 2011; Pöysä et al., 2013; Runge et al., 2015; Sanderson et al., 2006; Schäffer et al., 2006; Vickery et al., 2014). However, data on the level of take throughout migratory species ranges are often missing, incomplete, or have not been applied to determining population dynamics (Aebischer et al., 1999; Barbosa, 2001; Dalby et al., 2013; Duriez et al., 2005; Elmberg et al., 2006; Hahn et al., 2009; Koleček et al., 2014). Illegal hunting of migratory birds, including indiscriminate trapping and shooting practices, is an area of particular legal, ethical and conservation concern (Kirby et al., 2008; Murgui, 2014). At the EU level, the Birds Directive has required member

∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Bioscience, Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark. E-mail address: [email protected] (M. Root-Bernstein). http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.gecco.2016.03.001 2351-9894/© 2016 The Authors. Published by Elsevier B.V. This is an open access article under the CC BY license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ 4.0/). 190 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 states to protect migratory bird species since 1979 via designation of Special Protection Areas and hunting regulations (see Wils, 1994; http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/legislation/birdsdirective.htm, accessed July 2014). According to the official website (ibid), the Directive ‘‘recognises hunting as a legitimate activity and provides a comprehensive system for the management of hunting...to ensure that this practice is sustainable’’ (see also European Commission, 2008). Nonetheless, hunting is not well-integrated with conservation policy at all governance levels, often lacking strong national and regional policies and/or implementation especially in relation to conservation (FACE, 0000). Compared to North America for example, European hunting associations engage only weakly with conservation practice and science (Knevic, 2009; Tori et al., 2002). Migratory bird hunting for food and sport has ancient roots in Europe, including the Mediterranean Basin (Falzon, 2008; Mondain-Monval, 2011). Hunting techniques and hunted migratory bird species have significant regional variations due to socioeconomic, cultural and biophysical variation and the composition and seasonality of species along the migration routes. In zones such as the mountain passes in the Pyrenees and Alps (e.g., Brescia passes), Mediterranean islands (e.g., Sardinia, Malta, Cyprus), coastal wetlands (e.g., Po Delta, coastal Albania) or narrow sea straits (e.g., Gibraltar, Messina Strait), many species are channeled into migratory bottlenecks during spring and autumn migrations (Hynes, 2007). Traditional hunting techniques in the Mediterranean Basin include trapping using glue or nets, hunting with spears, arrows, other projectiles, and guns, with the use of aides such as dogs, decoys and whistles (Mondain-Monval, 2011). While some species, such as European robins in Italy, were traditionally taboo as hunting quarry, others such as song thrushes or raptors have been highly prized for eating or taxidermy respectively. Local norms and traditions regulating hunting have been superseded by legal regulation in accordance with the Birds Directive. The Birds Directive prohibits hunting of species (such as endangered species) listed in the Directive Annexes, hunting during the spring migration, and trapping techniques considered cruel and indiscriminate. We focus on Italy as a case study to understand the persistence, controversy and potential outcomes of illegal Mediterranean migratory bird hunting. We investigate migratory bird hunting, anti-hunting, poaching, and anti-poaching activities in the Italian sport hunting context. Although hunting in Italy was once strongly rooted in rural traditions, Italian hunters have decreased by more than 50% since 1980 and now represent about 1%, 2% of the Italian population with approximately 750,000 hunters (ISTAT, 2007). Following the implementation of more stringent hunting regulations over the last decades (e.g. the 698/1977 and 157/1992 Italian national laws), Italy has been accused of very high rates of migratory bird poaching, with an estimated several million birds killed illegally every year over an unspecified time period, second only to the estimation for Egypt (BirdLife International, 2015). Like all EU countries, Italy’s national legislation is consistent with the Birds Directive. Derogations (waivers applied at the national level and reported to the European Commission) make specific actions legal within specific administrative regions that would otherwise be illegal. Derogations are proposed before the beginning of the hunting season by members of regional councils; these can then be accepted and ratified by regional councils without national level approval. However recently there have been European Commission motions against certain forms of derogation, especially for traditional forms of hunting, followed by hefty fines, convincing regional councils that such ‘‘derogation games’’ are not worth the votes. Most derogations in Italy as of 2014 (see http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu), were listed as for the purposes of teaching and research, crop and aquaculture protection, and the live trapping and keeping of decoys (known as live calls or richiami vivi, mainly Turdus spp., e.g. tordo sassello (redwing), cesena (fieldfare), tordo bottaccio (song thrush), and merlo (blackbird)). Prior to 2011, a number of songbirds in various regions of Italy were also given derogations with the reported reason being ‘‘to permit, under strictly supervised conditions and on a selective basis, the hunting of protected species’’ (see http://cdr.eionet.europa.eu). Thus, we define poaching as actions that are, at the time of those actions, illegal under the Birds Directive and any regional derogations. Our focus is on sport hunters, not on organized or large-scale crime. We define sport hunting as legal hunting practices performed non-professionally with a variety of cultural and personal motivations (discussed in the Results), which may include eating the birds hunted, but does not include selling the hunted meat, which is illegal. This focus has two reasons. First, the media outreach of Mediterranean migratory bird protection NGOs and allies focuses on sport hunters as poachers (e.g. www.leavingisliving.org, BirdLife International, 2015, Franzen, 2014, 2013, Gray, 1992 and Kass and Kass, 2013) while rarely discussing organized or large-scale criminal activity, and we thus chose this framing as the scope of our research in or- der to respond to and investigate issues surrounding the dominant discourse on migratory bird poaching. Second, large-scale organized crime may have different practices and drivers and require different policing and control measures compared to other forms of poaching (Challender and MacMillan, 2014; Muth and Bowe, 1998). This would require a different research approach, both methodologically and in terms of theoretical framing, and we thus considered it outside the scope of this project. We examine the evolution of hunting and poaching practices and the movements opposing them from the point of view of contested meanings and enactments of environmental values. Environmental values refer to any valuation of the environment, e.g. emotional, rational, aesthetic, etc., but can also be used to refer to a normative set of values as espoused by conservationists (e.g. Lindon and Root-Bernstein, 2015). Here, we use the term ‘‘normative environmental values’’ when we wish to specify the normative values espoused by one group or another. In this paper we will consider how environmental values are incorporated into and give meaning to identities and motivations, drawing on the work of Bourdieu (1977, 1979). Values can be enacted in practices, that is, we do one action rather than another, or in a particular way, because we interpret it as consistent with our values. Values can also be learned, or inferred, through actions. Motivations refer to the proximate reasons for practice, which are usually positively valued by practitioners. Identity, as we will discuss it here, is a construction of personal meaning around a set of professed values, practiced actions, and motivations for continuing those practices. A B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 191 large change in any of these elements may lead to a shift in identity, either the identity perceived by the actor themselves, or the identity as perceived by others. Recently, Fischer et al.(2013b) have shown that moral arguments about hunting may provide common ground for conflict resolution between hunters and environmentalists in several European and African countries. We expand on this approach by asking whether practices, both of hunting and bird protection, play a role in the production and expression of environmental values. Practices have been linked to local environmental knowledge (LEK), forms of land management, and an environmental ethic (Ingold, 2000; Nazarea, 2006). Much of the discourse about migratory bird protection that comes from conservation organizations assumes or suggests that hunters do not value the environment, do not value conservation, and have hunting practices that are expressions of negative valuations of (e.g. contempt for, lack of respect for) the environment, animals, and conservation. This framing implies that only one set of practices (here, bird conservation practices) lead to positive valuations of the environment, birds, and their conservation. Conservation organizations’ discourses thus present a tacit hypothesis that value alignment (being pro-conservation) requires changes in practice, in this case abandoning hunting practices in favor of bird protectionist practices. In contrast, we predict that similar environmental values can be expressed via different practices. Thus we predict that both hunters and bird protectionists should have converging and strong pro-environmental values as a result of their practices, even though those practices are different. Finally, we analyze how the values underlying migratory bird hunting, poaching, anti-hunting and anti-poaching activities continue to evolve.

2. Methods

We primarily used an ethnographic approach involving key informant interviews and site visits. We supplemented this data with analysis of online articles about bird conservation and bird hunting in Italy.

2.1. Key informant interviews and site visits

Four main field sites in the Italian peninsula (Messina Strait, Ischia Island, Po Delta, Brescia Passes) were chosen because of their importance as migratory bird hunting hotspots (see Fig. 1). The selected sites also give a good picture of the main typologies of Italian bird migrations and hunting practices. The Messina Strait (38°14′N–37°39′E), between Sicily and the Calabria Peninsula, was chosen because it is an important migratory bottleneck for birds-of-prey, whose hunting is associated with notable traditions; Ischia (40°43′N–13°54′E), 33 km off the coast of Naples, is a representative example of hunting on a small island, where other non-migratory species are very rare. The Po Delta, around 44°57′N–12°27′E, on the Adriatic coast, is split between the Veneto and Emilia-Romagna regions. The Delta is one of the most important wetlands in Italy, parts of which are in protected areas, including Ramsar sites; in the areas where hunting is allowed, the Delta illustrates a distinction between publicly owned hunting grounds and large private hunting reserves, called ‘Valli’. Finally, the Brescia Passes (45°32′N–10°13′E), including Valcamonica, Val Trompia, and Val Sabbia, were selected to provide an example of a long-standing and rooted trapping tradition, being one of the last areas where live trapping is still permitted and practiced. Although some important hunting hotspots have not been explored (e.g., Sardinia, the Puglia region, Lampedusa island), we believe that the main hunting practices and realities revealed in these four case studies give a reliable representation of the evolution of the phenomenon at a national scale. Prior to departure the researchers collected information regarding the historic and traditional context of the selected locations to understand the current migratory bird hunting situation. It was also a priority to identify who were the main actors currently involved in migratory bird hunting and the conflicts surrounding this practice. Prior to arrival at a selected site interviews were arranged with one or more members from each of these stakeholder groups: hunters (both older and younger generations), local and national representatives of hunting associations (e.g., Federcaccia, Arcicaccia), local and national environmental organizations and key activists (e.g., WWF (World Wildlife Fund for Nature), LIPU (Italian League for the Protection of Birds), Legambiente), politicians and local institutions, regulatory authorities (e.g., police, forestry officers), journalists and scientific authorities (e.g., ISPRA (Superior Institute for Protection and Research on the Environment), academics). On-site, further contacts were made via snowballing in accordance with the informants’ perceptions of which other people were stakeholders in migratory bird hunting and protection. Interviews focused on personal experience with hunting or bird protection, the culture, history and politics of migratory bird hunting and poaching at the site or region, and personal views on the present and future of migratory bird hunting and poaching. Interviews were held, as much as possible, with people within nature (Davies and Dwyer, 2007), walking through and exploring the same localities where the key stakeholders had spent much of their lifetime, be it advocating, hunting, protecting or researching. The researchers were interested in seeing, as others have done (Hinchliffe, 2007), how NGO officials, environmental activists, scientists, hunters and local policy makers may all be building up affective and practical interactions with their sites of interest, and how this may be influencing their decisions and their attitudes towards these sites. By following some of the main actors during their everyday activities and practices, the team wished to receive further insight into the relationship between practice, values and the environment. We thus combined participant observation and key informant interviews. This contributed to widely differing interview times, reported below. We did not use sampling techniques designed to protect the identities of respondents engaging in illegal activities (St. John et al., 2010). This was because such techniques are designed for questionnaires with a very large sample size, not for 192 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207

Fig. 1. The route of fieldwork, with main field sites shown in red and labeled. Some interviews also took place in the indicated cities. (For interpretation of the references to color in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.) ethnographic techniques. Rather, we did not specifically ask people about their own poaching activities, but about their awareness of poaching in general. Some people nevertheless admitted to poaching after being assured that we did not work for a bird protection NGO. Our informants to our knowledge do not include any poachers engaged in large-scale criminal activity for the black market. Such a group was, moreover, outside the scope of our project. We recorded material from interviews in which approximately 45 individuals participated. A total of 30 semi-structured interview sessions were carried out. We also include material from several opportunistic interviews initiated in situ and participant-observation sessions sometimes involving groups of informants. All interviews were conducted at the four field sites, or in main offices of some of the organizations in the major Italian cities (e.g., Milan, Rome, Bologna), between 20th September 2013 and 25th October 2013. Interviews were conducted by two of us (AL and BB), in Italian, and lasted between 20 min and 2 h each. Interviews were recorded by hand during or immediately following speaking to the informants. To guarantee the anonymity of informants, we identified each individual with an arbitrary number and a general category describing their job area or relevant activity. We have placed a large number of selections from interviews in tables rather than in the text to increase the amount of data shown. We labeled each selection with the theme that it was selected to illustrate. Thematic analysis was conducted qualitatively.

2.2. Document survey

We supplemented the key informant interviews and site visits with analysis of documents that were published online between December 2012 and March 2015 (carried out by MR-B). We focused on two thematic areas: conflict between hunting and conservation due to animal rights issues, and practices of hunting and of conservation, as represented within and between groups. We focused on these areas because they emerged as particularly contentious issues in the debate about which values are environmental values (hunting values vs. animal rights values) and similarly what kinds of values B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 193 are thought to be represented by the practices attributed to each group. For example, bird protectionists made claims about the values represented by poaching, which they represented as a common practice of hunters. The articles that we included in the analysis consisted of articles published by www.lipu.it, the main bird protection NGO in Italy, of which we read all 34 stories appearing in the section ‘‘Hunting and poaching’’, all 56 stories in the section ‘‘Conservation’’, and all 22 stories in the section ‘‘Reserves and Animal Rescue Centers’’. We read all 14 issues of Natura e Società (Nature and Society), a small magazine published by the Federazione Nazionale Pro Natura, a national environmental NGO. We assume that the intended and actual readers of these articles are members of the public with an interest in conservation and environmental issues, and the main purpose of most of the articles is outreach to the public. We also read articles re-posted (taken from various news sources and press releases) by the Italian hunting magazine website www.ilcacciatore.com, specifically all 200 stories under ‘‘Environmentalists’’. The articles were mainly press releases, and thus tended to present the view either of an organization or a news agency. We assume that the intended and actual readers of the articles and stories are hunters throughout Italy. Also posted on this website, we read all 19 personal stories written by hunters under ‘‘Stories’’ and all of the 49 personal stories under a Section2 called ‘‘Stories’’. Our analysis of these written sources was identical to our treatment of interview and site visit data.

3. Results

We review and summarize the characteristics and findings specific to each field site in the Section1 and Table 1. In the following five sections, we address the hypotheses and predictions in their ensemble by considering how they are reflected contextually in cross-cutting themes from the fieldwork. In the last section we present results of the document survey.

3.1. Field sites: a range of migratory bird hunting and poaching situations

In two sites, poaching by sport hunters has been reduced by a combination of legislation and environmentalist action aimed at ensuring that laws are enforced on the ground, and at generating public opinion against poaching. In Ischia, poaching, in the form of continuing to hunt in recently banned ways, was widespread in the 1990s, especially during spring hunting. However, poaching significantly decreased as pro-environmental activism developed and anti-poaching camps were organized, with volunteers coming from other parts of Italy and abroad, supported by robust media campaigns. Raptor hunting was a common practice in the province of Reggio Calabria, visited by migrations of raptors, particularly honey buzzards, returning from Africa in the spring. As an old hunter put it ‘‘this hunt was a big event, a village party and everyone would participate’’. The practice spread during the 20th century across the strait to Sicily where it slowly became widespread and common. Hunting raptors became illegal with the Italian hunting law in 1977 (art.8 n 968) but state and regional control was practically nonexistent. Local volunteers, organized in anti-poaching camps, started demanding that something be done as the killing of these raptors continued. A campaign was set in motion, taxidermy became highly regulated and having a stuffed honey-buzzard became illegal. Changing pubic opinion and political fear of EU intervention, along with the socioeconomic factors common throughout Italy (see below), eventually led to the near total eradication of raptor hunting in Calabria. According to local perceptions, the tradition of raptor hunting was more easily extirpated on the Sicilian side not because of tighter regulations but because this tradition had been ‘‘imported’’ into the island and was not as rooted in the local history and hunting practice. Brescia has seen a more complex and politicized conflict between traditional hunting practices and bird protectionists. In this region, roccoli, towers surrounded by nets to which migratory birds are attracted, can be traced to the 15th C (Corti, 2004), contributing to a strong sense of regional tradition and identity. The rural electoral potential of hunters was exploited by regional political parties, in particular by the Northern League (Lega Nord) who claimed to be on the side of hunters, their traditions, and the regional hunting industry (gun and sport equipment manufacturing). Once in power at a local and regional level, each year these parties would table the deliberation of derogations (caccia in deroga) to allow the hunt of protected species for traditional purposes. This was strongly opposed by bird protectionist and environmentalist NGOs, which protested both through publicity campaigns and legal channels. The tactic of applying annually for caccia in deroga of protected species for traditional purposes was halted in 2010 by the EU (see Introduction). However, similar annual conflicts continue over other hunting regulations such as bag limits and hunting season dates. In the Po Delta, hunting activity is partly maintained through the existence of private hunting reserves called ‘‘valli’’. These private reserves are a source of pride for their owners who maintain the land and lagoons to attract waterfowl for the hunting season in autumn. There is a general acceptance of this private form of hunting both by local authorities, who are happy money is invested in territories that would otherwise be abandoned, and by environmentalists who recognize that the private investment in restoration and management is good for wildlife. At the same time these private hunting valli have created tensions between lower income hunters who see them as elitist, and believe they unfairly attract birds from the public hunting grounds. The cost to hunt in private reserves is undisclosed. However, landowners are legally not allowed to turn a profit from hunting, and may use the income to keep their aquaculture farms out of debt. Another aspect of the Po Delta situation is that two Regional Parks were created as rural development and planning tools in the two regions that split the Po Delta, Emilia-Romagna and Veneto, with differing effects for hunters. In the Emilia-Romagna region of the Delta, a regional law (n. 8) helped to create what a Hunting Association president calls ‘‘a right equilibrium between hunters, farmers and tourism structures that has created a value of the territory that is important for the region’’. This has been achieved by 194 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 Dimarca and Iapichino ( 1984 ), Zalles and Bildestain ( 2000 ), Giordano et al. ( 1998 ), Giordano et al. ( 2005 ) and Gray ( 1992 ). Key references Cenatiempo ( 2003 ) and WWF Italia ( 2012 ) Cencini ( 1998 ), Sorrenti et al. ( 2006 ), Labia ( 1936 ) and Verza and Bottazzo ( 2011 ) (continued on next page) Current status of hunting and poaching Strongly reduced due to economic factors (tourism) and anti-poaching spring camps. Today still some scattered poaching events and environmentalists patrolling in the island. Still strong hunting community (influence on politics and elections), but less than in the past. Now poaching events strongly reduced, but still present and hard to find because the delta is large and hard to control. Pronounced conflict between environmentalists and hunters, with almost nonexistent dialogue, although both sides want an effective and long-term restoration of the delta (for tourism, fisheries, bird population, etc.). Today sporadic and isolated raptor poaching in few localities in Calabrian side. In Sicily disappeared almost entirely (less rooted because imported?). Still daily patrols and raptors scientific census during migrations, to prevent poaching resurgence. Dead practice or would come back if patrols stopped? Special areas of conservation, as designated under the EU = Designation of SCI and SPA, and creation of two regional parks created on both side of theEmilia-Romagna Delta. the In park is real and effective and some pre-park areas have been created where hunting is allowed but controlled. In Veneto, the park resembles a paper-park and covers a narrow buffer zone along the arms ofPo. the There is a conflict withwho hunters do not benefit from theAlso park. rivalry with private hunting reserve owners who are accused of ‘stealing’ all the birds. Since the creation of parks, poaching events have arisen, especially in Veneto. Tackled by environmentalists with patrolling and campaigns. Widespread nostalgic poaching events after 1992 (especially during spring migration). Poaching progressively diminished as pro-environmentalism started off and anti-poaching camps, with national and foreign volunteers, were organized. Now mainly use automatic rifles. Environmental activists campaigns and evolution of hunting Raptor hunting became illegal in 1977 (art 8 No. 968), butarose poaching because state/regional patrols almost nonexistent. Local and foreign environmental volunteers started strong campaign to raise public attention. A conflict started, which culminated with the disposal of a bomb in the LIPUReggio office Calabria close in to 1984, which seems to underscore links with poaching and organized crime. ). Site of community importance, and SCA = trappulelle Tradition mainly diffused in the Veneto side, which hosts the majority of the Delta’s lagoons. Barrels and hides floating the water was the most typical technique. Food; restaurant business and traditional dishes (e.g., risotto alla folaga); In private valleys, less rules and controls, birds are fed, lagoons are well-maintained, while in public land there are significantly fewer birds for ‘normal’ hunters; Business of renting hunting positions, both in private and public land. techniques Honey Buzzard tradition: each hunter had to kill at leastduring one the spring migration otherwise ridiculed by the entire village. Diffused tradition, born in Calabria and later spread in Sicily. Shooting from cement hides positioned on ridges and important flyways. Hunted also for taxidermy and subsistence—honey buzzards eaten in times of need. Mainly for subsistence reasons since no other sources of protein other than fish. Strongly rooted in social relationships (e.g., ‘gifts’ to landlord or mayor etc.). Traditional trapping devices, cheap and adapted for capturing indiscriminate small bird species (e.g., ), Anas ), Wigeon Anas Coturnix ), plus other Turdus Pernis avornis ) ), and Song All types of waterfowl, including Mallard or Germano Reale ( platyrhynchos or Fischione ( penelope Mainly Quail or Quaglia Commune ( coturnix Thrush or Tordo Bottaccio ( philomenos small Passeriformes. Birds of prey (raptors), in particular the Honey Buzzard ( also called Adorno (Italian) or Ucceddu (dialect) ’), Italian League For the Protection of Birds. valli = The delta is one of the most important wetlands in Italy, although somewhat degraded. Distinction between publicly owned land and large private hunting reserves and their system of lagoons (‘ Representative example of hunting on a small island, where other non-migratory species are very rare. Migratory bottleneck for birds-of-prey; regional differences (Calabria and Sicily); Connections with organized crime (Mafia, N’drangheta); Traditions and myths about the Honey Buzzard Po Delta—on the Adriatic coast, split between Veneto and Emilia-Romagna regions Ischia—the island is located c. 30 km off the Naples coast Strait of Messina—between Sicily and the Calabrian Peninsula Site and location Reason for studying Main migratory bird spp. Hunting traditions and Habitats Directive. LIPU Table 1 An overview of migratory bird populations and hunting practice in each of the studied regions. SCI B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 195 Key references Corti ( 2004 ), Lang ( 1982 ) and Franzen ( 2014 ). system, some of Current status of hunting and poaching The derogations loophole has closed, as recently EU warnings turned into fines to the regional government, hence since 2010 no waivers were passed. The conflict continues at a national level in the parliament also with regards to live calls (live birds used as decoys) captured through the roccoli which are still in use and considered inhumane by environmental groups. Poaching events are still quite common in some areas and an illegal market for traditional culinary dishes is still present. ’), on the basis of caccia in deroga Environmental activists campaigns and evolution of hunting Since the enforcement of restrictions on the list of huntable species by law 157/1992, poaching events skyrocketed and the hunting community lobbied at a local and national level (e.g. through political parties, such as the Lega Nord, Northern League) to pass waivers (‘ ‘traditional practices’, which is permitted by the Birds Directive as long as there is evidence ofnegative no effects and alternatives have been explored. Environ-mentalists responded by patrolling and with legal actions. Most years, the court eventually ruled against the waiver but the next year a slightly different waiver would introduce a new procedure. ’ (cornmeal ’), surrounded roccoli ’) with alive baits. polenta e osei archetti techniques Strongly rooted culinary tradition around these birds, since the area lacked sources of meat due to poverty, and presence of renowned dishes such as ‘ with birds) Traditionally, the main technique consisted of trapping through special wooden structures (‘ by high nets where birds get entangled still alive. Other technique: release on the ground of many small traps (‘ ). ), Fringilla Erithacus ), Robin or Anthus ), Hawfinch or ), Meadow Pipit or Coccothraustes Fringilla montifringilla Fringillidae, passerines, e.g. Chaffinch or Fringuello ( coelebs Pispola ( pratensis Pettirosso ( rubecula Frosone commune ( coccothraustes Brambling or Peppola ( Long-standing and rooted trapping tradition, like in other subalpine valleys, and one of the last areas were live trapping is still permitted. Very strong hunting community and lobby linked to presence of weapons industry and traditional cuisine. ) continued Site and location Reason for studying Main migratory bird spp. Hunting traditions and Brescia passes—The three most important are Val-camonica, Val Trompia, and Val Sabbia Table 1 ( 196 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 creating deals between these groups that would benefit everyone, for example hunters compensate farmers for flooding agricultural lands as this favors hunting in these areas. Hunters have also been satisfied in this region by the creation of ‘‘pre-park’’ buffer areas in which local hunters can hunt. The hunters have asked park authorities to bring down the number of permits in these hunting grounds. The Veneto region of the Po Delta, by contrast, has suffered from poor management and local political frictions. The Park in that region was imposed over areas that had been private hunting grounds, angering those hunters and leading to years of political resistance to implementing Park governance. A stronger hunting tradition is also present on the Veneto side making relations more difficult with environmentalist still actively fighting what they believe is a strong poaching problem. Thus, the different poaching and hunting situations in the four researched sites illustrate that bird protectionists have found success in reducing poaching by sport hunters through monitoring compliance with the law on the ground and mobilizing public opinion, but also through participating in less-confrontational means such as regional planning tools and agreements between interested parties. In some areas, local and regional politicians have capitalized on hunting as part of a declining rural identity, and on existing conflicts between hunters and bird protectionists over the proper implementation of hunting regulations, to develop local or regional constituencies. However, EU regulations are ultimately conceded to as bird protectionists use the available national and EU legal mechanisms to resolve local power dynamics.

3.2. Areas and associations for hunting and environmental practices

In this section we consider the physical areas and social groups in which hunting and bird protection practices take place, and how these affect engagement with nature, and the acquisition of and social control over both knowledge and action. Hunters engage in hunting within ‘‘territorial hunting areas’’ (ambiti territoriali di caccia, ATC) that are organized at the province level throughout Italy. ATC, like communes, divide up the entire territory, excluding areas such as cities and agricultural fields. Most forms of hunting are only legal within an ATC. A maximum of 60% of an ATC can be dedicated for hunting, the remaining area must be hunting-free. Each ATC is managed by a combination of hunting associations, agricultural associations and local-level environmental organizations. Hunters pay an annual fee to hunt in their own ATC, and can pay extra to hunt in an ATC not in their own commune. Hunting is allowed on private property unless it is surrounded by a fence >1.2 m or a river >1.5 m deep, or it is agricultural land, making hunters the only group in Italy that can other people’s private land without asking permission. Some hunters hunt in their own land, or hunt in private areas dedicated to hunting, in which case they themselves or land managers may manage the habitat for hunting. In the Po Delta valli, for example, wetland management takes the form of controlling habitat structure, manipulating the water level, and putting out supplementary food. Hunting associations are also involved in managing land and game populations in ATCs. By contrast, bird conservationists, bird watchers, and other environmentalists, do not have access to others’ private property and carry out land management and other activities primarily in protected areas owned and managed by different state administrative levels and state institutions, or NGOs. Hunters must obtain hunting licenses from the state, by passing an exam, in order to legally hunt. Membership of hunting associations is optional, with hunting associations differing primarily by political affiliations. Hunting associations cannot revoke hunting licenses. Hunting associations are involved in representing hunters’ interests by participating in ATC management, voluntary guard training, etc., and by providing products such as hunting magazines. In order to become guards, volunteers are given special permits by the provincial competent authorities and undergo specific and regular training courses. Voluntary guards can patrol hunters and notify any irregularities to the competent police authorities, but they cannot enter private property. A court case in 2006 established the precedent to allow them to confiscate weapons and hunted animals. Anyone may become a voluntary guard. The different bird protection NGOs are generally distinguished by their focus, their specific conservation programs, and their outreach efforts to the public. An important role and goal of these NGOs is to inform and persuade the public about migratory bird conservation and other environmental issues in order to create a growing constituency. Environmental activists are of course not licensed by the state, although some may have university degrees in environmental sciences. Some are employed by environmental organizations and institutions, but many are volunteers. Bird protection NGOs often arrange for their members to be certified as voluntary guards during the hunting season. In summary, competency is legitimized and certified differently for hunters and environmentalists. The level of personal knowledge, personal engagement in habitat management, and social control over behavior in the form of licensing, certification, and organized communication to constituencies about beliefs and norms varies considerably within and between both groups.

3.3. Hunting identities

In this section we look at the role of the construction of hunting identities by hunters and bird protectionists, and how this affects environmental values. The social role hunting plays in Italian regional society has significantly changed over time. Originally, hunting was mainly a source of food, especially in times of scarcity. Hunters interviewed at all sites explained that in the past, hunting was B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 197

Table 2 Social and personal motivations for migratory bird hunting. I = Ischia, BP = Brescia Passes, PD = Po Delta, MS = Messina Strait. Informant Site Selection from interview Themes

Italian NGO rep. 2 MS Today poaching has lost all contact with people’s everyday lives, it has lost all social Community service meaning and function as it is not providing a service anymore and hunters don’t give back to the community as they did in the past, with protection and food. International NGO rep. 4 MS The increase in wild boar has caused hardship and damage to crops in large parts of Community service Italy. Hunters have been using boar hunting as an excuse to portray themselves as part of the solution by keeping the population in check. However, they are part of the problem as they take advantage of the situation to influence politicians, increase hunting seasons and become the heroes of land protection. Politician 1 BP Hunting is not for sustenance but it has an important economic role, especially Community service when one considers the 15 000 jobs in the weapons industries. Hunting assn. rep. 4 PD Hunters perform an environmental service and they pay to do it, this is not Community service understood... Italian NGO rep. 5 PD Hunters are a species that is bound to go extinct. Dying tradition Hunting assn. rep. 7 PD The hunters depict themselves as the Native Americans of the Po Delta. Dying tradition Italian State rep. 3 MS The traditional side of hunting is particularly dying out in the younger generations, Dying tradition; for example the old legends are not relevant anymore. The only thing that keeps the family activity habit going is father–son relationships. Hunting assn. rep. 2 MS Hunting is a very social phenomenon, hunters will meet in advance to talk about Family activity what and where they are going to hunt, it is a way to be with friends and family, a genuine activity.... Hunting is a family tradition, kids were first brought out hunting when they were five or six, this very slow learning process is what made a good and fair hunter. Journalist 9 I There used to be a tradition of migratory bird trapping and shooting and it was Food; taxidermy initially mostly for sustenance reasons as they provided meat for the winter months. Later people started hunting rarer birds to have them stuffed in their houses. Hunting assn. rep. 11 MS I hunt as it allows me to be immersed in nature and the enjoyment of being out with Love of nature; my father. family Hunter 3 MS I hunt because I love nature and animals and I want to protect them.... Hunting the Love of nature; Adorno was an incredible emotion, I had to hold my heart every time I went hunting passion this animal. International NGO rep. 6 BP The problem is usually not all hunters, but an extremist fringe of migratory bird Passion hunters who every year pushes for more. For this reason one cannot open the hunt of these species as you would only feed this perverse passion. Hunter 10 I Hunting is an emotion that is in you, like supporting your team. Many people that Passion; nostalgia love hunting find it hard to get that excited about anything else. The migrations bring these emotions back to you in the autumn and the spring, an emotion that is sometimes hard to fight.... I still practice occasional illegal activity because I want to feel those lost emotions and taste those old flavors. Hunting assn. rep. 7 PD A hunter has the predator instinct and the passion that accompanies it. Passion; predation Hunting assn. rep. 2 MS The important part is not the actual act of killing an animal but the ritual of going Ritual out on a hunt; anti-hunting organizations cannot understand this. Intnl. NGO rep. 7 MS If you go hunting because you love nature, why don’t you shoot your wife too? Skepticism Italian NGO rep. 5 PD Hunters tend to lie in many cases about what their intentions are and what they Skepticism actually do. widely perceived as a service for the community, in which other family members also had a role (Table 2). However, the social function occupied by hunting was gradually lost with the socioeconomic changes brought on by Italy’s post-WWII economic boom. New rural economic opportunities (e.g. tourism), and women’s reduced interest in preparing and cooking game as other foods became available, combined to reduce hunting as a way to feed the family. The identity of contemporary hunters is complex and multi-faceted. Many older hunters are primarily motivated by nostalgia for traditional practices and ways of life, while older and younger hunters may be motivated by the appeal of shooting, a love of dogs, a family hunting identity, or a love of nature (Table 2). As one informant explained, ‘‘[t]he important part is not the actual act of killing an animal but the ritual of going out on a hunt’’. Being a participant in this repeated and meaningful event is thus an aspect of the hunting identity. What is characteristic of the majority of hunters is the combination of two opposing but complementary facets: a ‘‘predator instinct’’ (istinto da predatore), this is the excitement of seeking the prey until it is found and ready to be hunted, and a strong passion (passione) for birds and nature, associated with a sense of respect towards the animals they hunt. However, as shown under the theme ‘‘skepticism’’ in Table 2, bird protectionists often doubted that these two characteristics were compatible. As one bird protectionist put it, ‘‘If you go hunting because you love nature, why don’t you shoot your wife too?’’ This particular rhetorical move of collapsing cultural, legal or ethical categories was repeated in the discussion around poaching and hunting (see next section). Some bird protectionists also rejected the attempt by hunters to position themselves as stewards of nature, seemingly because this conflicted with conservationists’ positioning. As one bird protectionist put it, ‘‘Hunters have been using boar hunting as an excuse to portray themselves as part of the solution.... However, they are part of the problem as they take advantage of the situation to...become the heroes of land protection’’ (Table 2). A more subtle argument, as illustrated under the themes ‘‘community service’’ and ‘‘dying tradition’’ 198 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207

Table 3 Changing hunting techniques and traditions and their relationship to poaching. I = Ischia, BP = Brescia Passes, PD = Po Delta, MS = Messina Strait. Informant Site Selection from interview Themes

International NGO rep. 8 PD Poaching includes use of electronic calls, number of shots in the gun, protected Electronic calls; species and number of heads and hunting inside Park limits. ...Hunters are slowly protected areas going extinct and poaching is also diminishing thanks to the actions of conservation organizations, with no help coming from the state. Hunting assn. rep. 11 MS The Young Hunters Association has been working and organizing demonstrations to Falconry bring hunting back into people’s everyday lives. They have shooting events and they also bring charismatic animals such as falcons, eagles and owls... Hunting assn. rep. 7 PD Hunting is transforming today, there is less game to hunt and less knowledge of the Knowledge; territory.... Poaching may even be a problem and I have tried to stop many people in electronic calls; the association from using electronic calls, for example. ...The private valli have private hunting created a divergence with small-scale hunters as they have maintained high-class areas types of hunting that many cannot afford. Journalist 9 I The passage from a rural island to a highly profitable tourism based economy was New laws and far too quick and many people where catapulted into a new reality. This made it regulations; new even harder for many to accept the new laws and conditions regarding hunting on economy the island. Hunting assn. rep. 8 BP Many hunters here are ignorant. They do not know hunting regulations or even their New laws and rights.... Still poachers are present but not as much as some want you to believe. regulations; What exists is mainly with the use of traps as shooting more birds than allowed is, trapping practically speaking, very difficult. International NGO rep. 7 MS A law was passed prohibiting people from having a stuffed Honey Buzzard in their New laws and possession, and in Sicily this dealt a huge blow to the hunting of this bird as people regulations did not know what to do with it, as they did not eat it on that side [of the Strait]. Hunting associations tried in some way to re-appropriate for themselves this type of hunting, arguing that an exception should be made for regulated traditional hunting. Italian NGO rep. 10 MS Today novel types of hunting are being introduced by the local weapons dealers, New traditions making use of old traditional narratives.... There has also been the rise of organized hunting tours for Tuscans and Northerners who come to hunt skylarks and common quails with electronic calls...because they are valuable in Northern Italy for culinary traditions.... The local hunters here in Sicily have started to take up some of these traditions imported from the outside. Activist 9 MS Many of these hunting traditions are tribal and made-up. Non-traditions International NGO rep. 6 BP These are not traditions, it was simply a practice linked to sustenance in these very Non-traditions poor regions. What is done today is shooting from hides with guns and the old tradition used to be all with traps... Italian NGO rep. 1 I The old men still don’t really care about management and environmentalism, they Nostalgic poaching are too old to care and are nostalgic and passionate for hunting and still openly declare themselves poachers. Hunter 1 I Poaching today doesn’t have any economic or tourist value but it is mainly done for Nostalgic poaching the sake of old traditions. Hunter 10 I With the introduction of automatic shotguns [the parsimonious use of scarce Shooter culture; cartridges] was lost and many people started shooting many more shots than electronic calls needed. This was probably the real start of poaching and the shooting culture.... Technological evolution is unavoidable.... They used to make bird calls with peach shells and today they have electronic ones that save you a lot of effort. Hunter 13 MS Today most people who say they are hunters are simply shooters, they will go out Shooter culture and shoot at anything that moves, even a butterfly if they can.

(Table 2), was that hunting motivations no longer had an opportunity to be expressed in a socially valued manner, and that this undercut the validity of hunting. Many hunters also feared that a loss of the traditional social functions of hunting was undermining its acceptance (Table 2). In summary, hunting identities for hunters were embedded in a complex cultural tradition, which was either misunderstood or treated as increasingly irrelevant by bird protectionists.

3.4. Concepts of poaching and hunting

In this section we ask how poaching and hunting are conceptualized by hunters and by bird protectionists, and how this relates to environmental values in discourse and practice. Poaching activities today are mainly an expression of traditional hunting methods that have been banned. However, traditional hunting practice has never been static, primarily due to the incorporation of new technologies and the changing social functions of hunting (see Table 3). One bird protectionist claimed, ‘‘What is done today is shooting from hides with guns and the old tradition used to be all with traps...’’ and a hunter explained, ‘‘Hunting is transforming today, there is less game to hunt and less knowledge of the territory’’ (Table 3). However, the drivers of change, whether due to anti-poaching campaigns and laws, technology, socio-economic factors, or the supposed invention of fake traditions, was not agreed on between stakeholders, and varied by region (Table 3). B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 199

The evolution of hunting practices and traditions had important effects on the relationship between hunters and their territory, and on the frontier between legality and illegality. Although poaching has been actively tackled and sometimes almost completely eradicated in many areas (e.g., Messina Strait), in other areas both hunting and poaching resisted interference (e.g., Brescia valleys) due to their role in regional identities (see above, section Field sites: a range of migratory bird hunting and poaching situations). Environmentalists were more likely than hunters to use the Italian term for poaching (bracconaggio) to refer to poaching activities. As explained by many hunters, a distinction ought to be made between hunters who occasionally infringe the law (hunter-poachers) and professional poachers who are not considered real hunters by hunters themselves (sometimes defined as ‘shooters’, sparatori). Hunter-poachers, which seem to be the most common, are the ones who occasionally step out of what is legally authorized out of nostalgia for what was once allowed or simply, using the comparison that some of them made, as an ‘Italian attitude’ of not always respecting the law, comparable to the non- payment of a bus ticket or to driving over the speed limit. Shooter-poachers, by contrast, appeared to represent a gradient on the scale of illegal activities, ranging from opportunistic or local operations to large-scale or organized crime. Hunters interviewed attributed black market-driven poaching mainly to other Mediterranean countries, but environmentalists also attributed it to organized and other crime within Italy (WWF Campania, pers. comm.). Older and more traditional hunters regarded the shooter-poachers as the enemies of traditional hunting values (see Table 3). Thus, hunters are well aware of a distinction between hunting and poaching, but make this distinction differently from the legal definition. To hunters, motivation and scale are important determinants of whether behavior is that of a hunter-poacher or shooter-poacher, even if both may include the legal concept of poaching. By contrast, we show below (Section 3.6 Broadening of the conflict to include extreme positions, and Section 3.7 Document survey) that many bird protectionists collapse the distinction between hunting and poaching by opposing both on animal rights grounds.

3.5. Practices and values of hunting and environmentalism

In this section we examine how both hunters and bird protectionists believe that their environmental values are expressed through practice. Both hunters and environmentalists describe themselves as passionately loving nature and as acting as nature stewards or managers (e.g. Table 2; Fig. 2). However, hunting and environmentalists’ practices and discourses diverge strongly (Table 4). For hunters, the killing aspect of hunting is presented as only one facet of a complex, historical, and mutually beneficial engagement with the natural landscape. Hunters feel they provide a service to the community, for example by discovering littering and pollution, poaching, and other illegal exploitation of natural areas, by controlling populations of agricultural pests, invasive species, and others, and cleaning and maintenance of natural habitats e.g. to attract migratory waterfowl. As one hunter explained, ‘‘The modern hunter has to be like the woodsman of old times—someone who finds problems, deals with them, and maintains a habitat intact’’ (Table 4). By contrast, environmentalists, both professional and volunteer, valued scientific knowledge as a guide to managing nature, and feel that migratory bird killing is both scientifically and ethically unjustified. Both groups tend to make statements questioning the validity of the others’ knowledge and engagement with nature and its conservation (Table 4). Hunters, more so than environmentalists, appear to have developed their practices locally and adaptively, passing down knowledge across generations. As one politician explained, ‘‘Environmentalists are seen...as bourgeois who come from the city dictating what they think should be done in the name of the environment and the territory, when they are the first ones not to know a thing about it!’’ (Table 4). However, some environmentalists countered this perception with claims that hunters also lack a connection to the territory: ‘‘The link between the hunter and their land should be...fundamental ...[but] many hunters [prefer] to hunt away from home’’, i.e. in an ATC other than the one in which they live (Table 4). In summary, both groups believe that their environmental engagement and knowledge practices, especially in the ideal, enact positive environmental values, while believing that the other groups’ practices in reality do not reflect those values.

3.6. Broadening of the conflict to include extreme positions

In this section we look at how hunting and bird protection values are being expressed in the discourse around hunting and poaching within Italy, and to what extent an overlap of shared environmental values permitting cooperation between these groups continues to exist. Hunter associations disaggregated considerably after 1992, when the National Law 157 regulating hunted species, hunting quotas and seasons was passed (http://www.normattiva.it/uri-res/N2Ls?urn:nir:stato:legge:1992;157, accessed December 2014). This law was seen by many hunters as an unfavorable compromise that had to be made with the Italian environmental organizations. Subsequently new hunting associations splintered off, promoting more extreme views and demands to end hunting restrictions. The conflict over hunting regulations thus moved within and between hunter associations, making attempts to create a dialogue with environmentalists more challenging (Table 5). Dialogue has been established between some hunting associations and environmental organizations, indicating the survival of a middle ground, but as one hunter told us, ‘‘The [hunting] association has attempted to align itself with some of the environmental ideas but they believe a full dialogue will be impossible as long as environmental groups are against hunting a priori’’ (Table 5). Many 200 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207

Fig. 2. Migratory bird hunters in the Po Delta represent themselves as the Native Americans of the Po Delta. This representation seems to capture both the idea of a way of life based on closeness to nature, as well as the sense of being persecuted and forced to abandon their traditions. Shown, images of Native Americans decorating the communal meeting place for local fishermen and hunters, Basson, Po Delta. © 2014, Photo MR-B

Table 4 Claims of environmentalism, nature stewardship, and knowledge of nature. I = Ischia, BP = Brescia Passes, PD = Po Delta, MS = Messina Strait. Informant Site Selection from interview Themes

Italian NGO rep. 2 MS Today the animal welfare current has taken the lead in regards to the natural Animal welfare; world.... This current, especially in an urban context, also has an effect on hunting morality activity, which is seen as horrific and degrading. Italian NGO rep. 5 PD Investment in environmental education can also [help to eradicate hunting]. Environmental education Politician 2 PD Environmentalists are seen by the people here as bourgeois who come from the city Ignorance dictating what they think should be done in the name of the environment and the territory, when they are the first ones not to know a thing about it! Hunting assn. rep. 11 MS Every hunter should be an environmentalist and every environmentalist should be a Environmentalism; hunter.... Many environmentalists create narratives in which they idolatrise nature, ignorance but they don’t really know it as well as some hunters. Hunter 6 PD Hunters are the true environmentalists and they manage the land. Environmentalism; nature management Hunting assn. rep. 7 PD The modern hunter has to be like the woodsman of old times—someone who finds Nature management problems, deals with them, and maintains a habitat intact. Hunter 12 MS Hunters today are considered amoral and against the environment, for these Morality reasons I decided to stop hunting. Hunters have an interest in protecting the environment as they have a passion for hunting. Hunting assn. rep. 4 PD Hunting is not only a sport but a relationship with the surrounding environment. Relationship with nature International NGO rep. 8 PD It is usually the hunters who denounce abuses inside the Park rather than the Relationship with environmentalists. nature International NGO rep. 4 MS The link between the hunter and their land should be a fundamental component Relationship with that would push hunters to better preserve their territory and species. This does not nature happen today with many hunters preferring to hunt away from home. Hunting assn. rep. 8 BP Many of the species chosen to be in Appendix 1 of the Bird Directive follow Non-scientific symbolic, ethic and aesthetic motivations rather than scientific ones. regulations International NGO rep. 7 MS Hunters are usually able to recognise species down to the family or genus level, but Species recognition usually are not able to tell the species apart. Hunting assn. rep. 2 MS There are three ways to recognise species, one is the period in which they are Species recognition present, the second is the flying style and the third the song, these are all things that take a long time to learn. Italian state rep. 3 MS The hunting licenses are given nowadays to anyone. There are no skills involved Species recognition; anymore, especially when it comes to species recognition.... Environmental Environmental education and continuous patrolling will eventually put a complete stop to illegal education poaching in the Reggio Calabria province. B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 201

Table 5 Broadening of the conflict between environmentalists and migratory bird hunters. I = Ischia, BP = Brescia Passes, PD = Po Delta, MS = Messina Strait. Informant Site Selection from interview Themes

International NGO rep. 6 BP Environmentalists have also had problems dealing with the animal rights fringe, but Animal rights; after 20 years fighting this fight it is hard to find anyone that is still a moderate in Radical positioning this conflict. The hunters haven’t helped either. Hunter 13 I The association has attempted to align itself with some of the environmental ideas Lack of dialogue but they believe a full dialogue will be impossible as long as environmental groups are against hunting a priori. Activist 9 MS There is no dialogue [with hunters] as it is not needed at this stage. The solution is Lack of dialogue tighter control and coordinated monitoring of illegal activities. Hunting assn. rep. 8 BP Hunting associations have had the wrong approach in dealing with the situation. Radical positioning There has been generally an unscientific approach in the hunting world that has not kept pace with other European associations and European law in general. Another problem in Italy is the disaggregation of hunting associations and their views that go from moderate to very radical. Hunting assn. rep. 4 PD With environmentalists it is also difficult because of radical behaviors as they try Radical positioning and prove who is most against hunting to win the favor of new members. Hunting assn. rep. 7 PD The problem is that the issue has been highly polarized on both sides. My worst Radical positioning enemy at the moment is not the environmentalist but the...other associations that make the wrong calls and add fire to the conflict with populist and extremist narratives. Hunting assn. rep. 2 MS Environmental associations have made use of anti-hunting narratives to build a Radical positioning political consensus.... Anti-hunting was used as the battle horse and scapegoat of green narratives in the 1980s and used to build propaganda. Hunter 10 I Environmentalists act like Rambo on the island and it is very hard to find a way to Radical positioning; create a dialogue with them. lack of dialogue informants described an increasing move towards extremes in the positions on migratory bird hunting, as illustrated under the ‘‘radical positioning’’ theme in Table 5. The environmental position against hunting can be traced to the fact that some of the main environmental organizations in Italy (e.g. WWF and LIPU) have reached out to the Italian public by embracing the animal rights narrative. The animal rights view, as expressed by some interviewed subjects, that animals should not suffer or be killed makes hunting an obvious object of eradication. In addition, the primary presence of environmentalists in rural areas is as voluntary guards monitoring hunting. Many environmentalists lack legitimacy amongst hunters because they are not considered to be members of the rural communities where they volunteer, but urban, cosmopolitan ‘‘outsiders’’ overstepping their legal and moral authority whenever possible. Hunting–poaching is sometimes a practice of individual resistance against environmentalists’ hostility to hunting. Italian hunting organizations also attempt to use science and the law to support their positions, suggesting that a middle ground is still viable. In some cases Italian hunting associations have retaliated against patrols conducted by volunteer environmentalists by suing them for un-ethical conduct and going beyond their legal competencies (e.g., confiscating game from hunters or searching their cars). The more moderate hunting associations are attempting to build partnerships with universities to monitor bird populations and prove that not hunting but other issues (e.g. land degradation, pesticides) have underpinned bird population declines. They hope the reassessment of the appendices of the Birds Directive will remove some species from Appendix 1, allowing them to be hunted (e.g., the skylark Alauda arvensis and the chaffinch Fringilla coelebs). In summary, while anti-hunting animal rights positions are perceived by hunters to prevent discourse and resolution of poaching problems, a middle ground in which hunters can work with scientists and moderate environmental NGOs still exists.

3.7. Document survey

In this section we consider the discourse around environmental values related to hunting or protecting migratory birds, in hunting and environmental online publications. We also consider how these discourses promote and represent the acquisition of environmental values and environmental practices by and of both groups. Hunting was represented negatively in articles published by Lipu and Natura e Società. We found numerous statements by conservationists opposed not only to poaching but also to all hunting. Lipu wrote ‘‘Having lost the functions of sustenance that it had in the past, hunting today is related to a dimension of hobbyism and heavy consumerism, which is very bad for nature. ‘Abandon the gun and take up binoculars’ is the message of Lipu to hunters’’. (15-7-2013 www.lipu.it). An article in Natura e Società asked rhetorically, ‘‘How can you define as a sport the killing of a little bird that weighs less than the cartridge that devastates its body? New forms of hunting have been conceded, which until the end of last year were forbidden, those with the bow (which often only wounds the animal forcing it to experience a very long agony) and falconry, the cause of removing eggs and nestlings from the nests of species that are particularly rare and precious for the natural equilibrium’’ (2, 2012). Relations between hunting associations and nearly all environmental and animal rights NGOs were characterized 202 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 by exchanges of insults, as when the representative of an animal rights NGO (LAV, Antivivisection League) stated in the press after an incident of wolf poaching, ‘‘Every year just in the Maremma 9000 hunting licences are distributed without accurate psychological controls.... We are giving lethal weapons to obviously deranged people without worrying about the consequences’’, receiving an offended response from hunters (www.ilcacciatore.com, 20-3-2014). As was clear from numerous press releases, environmental NGOs and animal rights NGOs regularly joined forces to challenge regional hunting calendars and other hunting regulations. Under the headline ‘‘Animal rights activists and environmentalists: not always an easy rapport’’, Roberto Piana, the Vice President of the League for the Abolition of Hunting (LAC), was quoted as saying ‘‘Undoubtedly there exist different positions between those who defend the natural environment and biodiversity and those who defend on the other hand the subjective rights of all living beings.... I believe nonetheless that these are differences of little account if you consider the greater and most promising points of convergence’’ (3, 2013). We also observed evidence of some alliances and areas of agreement between environmentalists/ conservationists and hunters. A hunter wrote on www.ilcacciatore.com ‘‘Obviously I have always shared in the activities of Lipu in defense of birds and their habitat; but I have never shared their commitment against hunting, especially when based not on the facts and concrete motivations but rather from the animal rights position, which often has nothing to do with the defense of birds and even less with their habitat...’’ (13-1-2015). Hunters also commented in support of a press release by Legambiente, criticizing the death of a nest of bitterns by a municipal mowing machine, stating ‘‘Legambiente in this case is completely right.... This is a battle we should do together’’ and ‘‘...whoever determines the periods when these works should be carried out is ignorant of wildlife matters...’’ (30-7-2012, www.ilcacciatore.com). In September 2014, Legambiente signed an agreement of collaboration with three major Italian hunting associations, Arci Caccia, Federcaccia, and Anuu. This agreement had four pillars, including the protection of endangered species, soil conservation, the collection and sharing of data on wildlife, and the communication of human and natural stories. This last category noted a gap between citizens’ desire to protect biodiversity and their knowledge of protected habitats, and thus aimed to ‘‘increase the knowledge and the relationship present in Italy between human narratives and natural areas, with the goal of bringing to life and reinforcing an active adoption of the patrimony of diverse communities, for an effective safeguarding of rurality and its values’’ (www.ilcacciatore.com, 18-9-2014). Narratives emerged as an important way that hunters communicated hunting practices and values. Of the 68 stories on www.ilcacciatore.com, the majority were personal anecdotes of bird hunting. Major themes of these stories included memories of the last hunt with a favorite dog, memories of hunting in adolescence with male relatives and friends, a memorable failure to kill a bird, and detailed, poetical and emotional descriptions of nature and the rhythm of a typical hunting day. In a typical example, ...Then I started to hunt on those enchanted hills that I love, leaving at one at night, arriving at the starting point at around 2:30. Having left the car, I took my backpack and gun, a few cartridges in my pocket, the dog on its leash, flashlight in my hand and so the long walk starts.... From time to time I get stuck in some impediment, a broken branch is avoided, a shrub that has fallen over is bypassed, an old trunk lying down is climbed over.... Here it’s not enough, if you don’t have passion, to have courage, legs lungs and heart that pick you up like an elevator. I advance with decision and patience, at each turning I renew my knowledge.... I go along a small path, I wander the plateau above the small trickling spring, I stoop over, I make myself small, I don’t find anything, I continue, it’s not important to find but to search, always to search, thus it is in sport and in life (Claudio Monticelli, www.ilcacciatore.com). Similar descriptions of environmental activities by conservationists or environmentalists were not as easy to find, but focused mainly on bird watching and themes of spotting rare species. One birdwatcher wrote in Natura e Società, Luciano calls me. He lets me know that last Sunday (1 December) Simone photographed a Steppe Grey Shrike Lanius meridionalis pallidirostris at the aviation grounds of Fano. Simone had found out that in that zone, a few days ago, some hunters had spotted a strange pale bird.... I go out in the car with binoculars and camera and I am soon there. Even before stopping the car in the indicated place – the zone around an abandoned cement plaza – I see the silhouette of the shrike protruding from a bramble. I turn with the sun to my back, lower the window and observe it with binoculars. (1, 2014) Though the poetic or emotional side of bird watching was rarely expressed in the narratives we encountered, an activity described in very emotional terms was anti-poaching volunteering (see Gray, 1992 and Kass and Kass, 2013). One volunteer stated Anti-poaching is a strong emotion, it is active participation in favor of nature. I remember my first camp, in 1998, on the Strait of Messina, on the Calabrese side. The emotion of seeing the first falcons from Africa. An aerial stream of falcons that formed a wedge in the Strait. My heart beat a thousand times a minute. Then, a few seconds later, from the citrus groves above us, the shots started. And falcons came down, like it was raining. Terrible. Those moments changed me’’ (8-11-2013, www.lipu.it). Emotion was also frequently present in Lipu’s articles in the form of ‘‘alarm’’ over ‘‘urgent threats’’ and dire situations, which fell mainly in three categories: reports of the deaths of individual charismatic birds such as storks, the declining conservation status of a bird species, or the threat of closure of a wildlife rescue center. However, these appeals to emotion were rarely directly associated with encouragement of specific conservation practices. Lipu did recommend its members B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 203 to take up a variety of actions, which included signing petitions, using hashtags, volunteering to clean natural areas, participating in bird watching for citizen science projects or as a pastime, installing nestboxes in gardens, and walking or biking along interpretive paths in protected areas. Similar activities were mentioned in Natura e Società. Such activities were listed but rarely described. Slightly more descriptive accounts of conservation science were sometimes provided as environmental education, e.g. ‘‘The birds were captured generally with harmless vertical nets, then ringed and released after having recorded information on their biometric details and their physiological state’’ (5-3-2014, www.lipu.it). In general, the linkage of practices with values via narrative was rare in conservation NGOs’ and environmentalists’ writings that we surveyed.

4. Discussion

Both legal and illegal hunting of migratory birds is strongly motivated as both a personal enthusiasm (passione) and a culturally meaningful practice among Italian hunters. This emotional engagement is both with the social practices surrounding hunting and with the practices associated with being in nature and knowing the hunted bird species (compare Fischer et al., 2013a). The majority of interviewed hunters believe that hunting practices are a form of environmentalism and contribute to environmental stewardship. In the biocultural or socio-ecological systems perspectives, traditional human practices of resource use are considered components of natural and potentially sustainable systems (Berkes et al., 2000; Fischer et al., 2013a; Peloquin and Berkes, 2009). The hunting practices and associated local ecological knowledge (LEK) of migratory and non-migratory bird hunters in North America, Asia and Africa are widely recognized as contributing to conservation (Muiruri and Maundu, 2010; Peloquin and Berkes, 2009; Purnama and Indrawan, 2010). Following Ingold (2000), migratory bird hunting could be described as a way of dwelling. The ‘‘dwelling perspective’’, according to Ingold, is ‘‘a perspective which situates the practitioner, right from the start, in the context of an active engagement with the constituents of his or her surroundings’’ (p. 5). Ingold goes on to explain that this perspective is different from the view that culture is constructed separately from nature and manipulated through cognitive representations, instead considering all features of the world as things with which one interacts and creatively negotiates a way of life in situ. Under this view, people ‘‘do not see themselves as mindful subjects having to contend with an alien world of physical objects...apprehending the world is not a matter of construction but engagement, not of building but of dwelling, not making a view of the world but of taking up a view in it’’ (p. 42). The dwelling perspective is typical of many indigenous ontologies, and underlies not only their practices but their worldviews and values (Ingold, 2000). We see the intimate and passionate experience built up over time about bird species and environments, through physical negotiation of terrain, dog and bird behavior in situ, and ongoing social negotiation of practice, as elements consistent with a dwelling perspective on hunting by Italian migratory bird hunters. Many Italian conservation organizations do not support a biocultural or dwelling view of hunting, arguing that it is neither traditional nor a form of environmental stewardship. We consider these two claims in detail in the following paragraphs. The issue of whether a practice is traditional is not straightforward. Traditional forms of dwelling are embedded in community relations and often include practices of adaptation to environmental variability and social learning (Berkes et al., 2000; Gómez-Baggethun et al., 2010; Pahl-Wostl and Hare, 2004; Xu et al., 2009). Thus traditional practices may be combined with scientific knowledge and otherwise adjusted to novel circumstances (Berkes et al., 2000; Chazdon et al., 2009; Cundill et al., 2011). The frequent claim that new technologies (such as guns) and new motives (non-subsistence, politically active hunters, as seen in the Messina Strait and the Brescia passes) invalidate the traditional nature of hunting practices is echoed in conflicts over indigenous hunting rights (Reo and Whyte, 2012; Smith and Marsh, 1990). Reo and Whyte(2012) argue that continuity of a hunting ethic is the key characteristic of traditional hunting (see also Fischer et al., 2013b). We would identify the hunting ethic as the values related to dwelling practices of hunting. Both hunters and hunting opponents are aware of a loss of traditional dwelling practiced by migratory bird hunters, and both groups blame the reduction in the quality of hunting practice on the decline in hunting popularity. The attack on hunting is one factor contributing to the erosion of hunting-as-dwelling via losses of skill, LEK, and the hunting identity (Ingold, 2000). Other factors include socioeconomic changes in Italian society affecting cooking and eating practices, as well as access to firearms and technologies such as electronic bird calls used as lures (cf. ‘‘skill’’ vs. ‘‘technology’’, Ingold, 2000). These changes, well exemplified by the Ischia case study, appear to have emphasized the sporting side of hunting to the detriment of the development of hunters as ‘‘field naturalists’’ (FACE, 0000). Economic and governance structures that exclude hunters as land-users, as seen in the Veneto side of the Po Delta, also contribute to a decline in opportunities for hunting. Thus the most fundamental problem for migratory bird hunting and conservation in Italy may be the apparent rise of the non-traditional shooter-poachers and the decline of traditional hunters. For hunters, shooter-poachers may be a problem when their practices provide fuel for anti-hunting campaigns that threaten the existence of legal hunting. For conservationists, shooter-poachers are a problem because, lacking a hunting ethic, this group tends to poach more than traditional hunters, potentially threatening bird populations. Many Italian conservation and environmental organizations believe that hunting is not compatible with an environmentalist disposition or stewardship actions. They do not accept the validity of hunters’ LEK, for example criticizing them for, supposedly, not using the species name when identifying birds. The common claim that environmental education can eradicate hunting is also a claim that hunters lack proper knowledge about the environment. Hunters, for their part, 204 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207

Table 6 Mission statements of environmental NGOs discussed in the text. Mission statements are taken from the main websites. NGO Mission statement

Lipu ‘‘...conservation of nature, protection of biodiversity, and the promotion of ecological culture in Italy...[We manage 30 reserves where] people can visit [nature], know it, and fall in love with it.’’ Legambiente ‘‘We defend the extraordinary environmental and cultural variety in our country. We denounce any abuse and harm to ecosystems and the indiscriminate use of resources.... We propose new lifestyles to live in harmony with the surrounding environment...we promote the values of volunteering, solidarity and peace.’’ Pro Natura ‘‘...dedication to raising awareness of the social and political implications involved in the defense of nature with respect to its various components: geology, landscape, flora and fauna...to link environmental understanding and scientific integrity in confronting ecological problems.’’ WWF Italia ‘‘...to construct a future in which humanity can live in harmony with nature.’’ attack environmentalists for their perceived lack of a valid relationship to and knowledge of the environments they want to protect, describing them as sentimental outsiders. Do hunters hold pro-conservation environmental values? Environmental values can emerge from dwelling and memories of dwelling in nature (Nazarea, 2006). Environmental values may be thought of as any evaluations regarding nature (e.g. Lindon and Root-Bernstein, 2015) or, as in this context, as a normative set of attitudes and preferences. To ascertain the normative environmental values in the Italian conservation context, we consulted the goals of the main Italian environmental NGOs that we have discussed in this paper (Table 6). Themes of these statements include promotion of ecological knowledge, protection of a diversity of habitats and species, and cultural, social and political engagement. Most hunters report returning repeatedly to the same areas, which they explore on foot, often off trails, in pursuit of hidden, mobile and seasonal bird species with specific habitat preferences and requirements. Hunters also see themselves as representatives of a fading rural society. Thus, we conclude that hunting practices have many of the features common to the normative values of Italian conservation and environmental organizations. However, an environmentalist disposition does not guarantee that local knowledge reflects scientific studies or larger scale trends. Further, Italian migratory bird hunters also fail to share other values of Italian environmentalism, e.g. living in harmony with nature or protection of biodiversity, since it is the case that ‘‘harmony’’ and ‘‘protection’’ are interpreted by those environmentalists to exclude all lethal interactions. The tacit or explicit anti-hunting as well as anti-poaching stance is a feature of the extreme positions characterizing the Italian migratory bird hunting issue, even if a middle ground more typical of other European hunting contexts (e.g. Spain, Croatia, Scotland, Norway; Fischer et al., 2013b) persists. Poaching per se appears to be an almost peripheral issue for both hunters and bird protectionists in Italy. Italy provides an example of an arena where environmental NGOs have increasingly adopted campaign frames and working alliances with animal rights positions to appeal to the public (Genovesi and Bertolino, 2001), a trend also observed in Malta (Campbell and Veríssimo, 2015; Veríssimo and Campbell, 2015). Use of animal rights language can be seen clearly in the Mediterranean bird anti-poaching campaign ‘‘Leaving is Living’’, recently financed by the EU through its LIFE programme and run by LIPU, SEO/BirdLife and the Hellenic Ornithological Society (www.leavingisliving.org, accessed June 2014). For example, the text refers to the birds’ ‘‘right to migrate’’ rather than their behavioral drive to migrate, or their biological need to do so. Thus, the migratory bird hunting issue in Italy might be seen as test case illustrating a larger cultural struggle about conservation inclusiveness and how modern societies manage nature (Beckoff and Ramp, 2014; Fischer et al., 2013a; Simmons, 2009; Tallis et al., 2014). We make no argument about the significance of poaching as a factor contributing to declines in Mediterranean migratory bird populations. We do not have data on the actual number of migratory birds killed by different kinds of poachers. Rather, we find that while Italian hunters believe that different kinds of migratory bird poachers have different motivations and values, bird protection NGOs lump all hunters with all poachers, despite sharing core environmental values with traditional hunters. This may be surprising because in other contexts, hunters’ cooperation has been critical to controlling large-scale poaching and black markets (Challender and MacMillan, 2014). The strategy of adopting animal rights positions to gain public support draws on the assumption that values are primarily a matter of moral discourse. However, the anthropological perspective we use leads us to caution that establishing a discourse of anti-hunting values in the public is not the same as creating a commitment to the environment. This anthropological literature suggests, and we present as a hypothesis for future testing, that commitment develops through dwelling. Here, we would describe as indices of commitment the expressions of passion and dedication by both bird protectionists and hunters. It was certainly our impression that the most passionate and dedicated individuals, be it hunters or environmentalists, were those whose practice was most integrated with particular places over long periods of time, allowing them to dwell in those environments and with certain bird species. Hunting is increasingly under attack around the world, as illustrated by recent controversies over the importance of emotional and ethical arguments for individual animals’ welfare in assessing trophy hunting and its place in conservation (Nelson et al., 2016). How these arguments will play out for different NGOs, conservation programs and local situations is likely to depend on many contingent factors. For the Italian migratory bird hunting situation, we discuss two possible long term scenarios. We think that these scenarios may differ from current situations in some other Mediterranean counties (e.g. Malta, Campbell and Veríssimo, 2015) due to factors such as a weak nationalist sentiment in Italy around which to build a political pro-hunting movement, and the lack of interest of major national political parties in what is deemed to be a marginal regional and rural issue. Rather, hunting is associated with regional identities linked to languages (dialetti), foods, rural traditions and landscapes. B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 205

In our first scenario, migratory bird hunting, and perhaps all hunting, is eradicated due to new laws, regulations, societal attitude shifts and declining enculturation into a traditional hunting ethic, opening hunting up to increased attacks. Such a societal attitude shift is also likely to make it increasingly difficult for Italian conservation managers to justify culling of invasive species and species lacking natural predators, such as deer (already problematic: Genovesi and Bertolino, 2001; personal communication M. Bottazzo 2013). This could eventually lead to difficult-to-control ecological problems (Pysek and Richardson, 2010; Ripple and Beschta, 2006; Sahasrabudhe and Motter, 2011). In this scenario, a reduction in hunting and its replacement by bird watching lead us to anticipate a loss of dwelling in nature, with an associated decline in LEK and citizens’ motivation to engage with conservation, especially of habitats and landscapes. In the second scenario, bird protection organizations concentrate strictly on banning cruel and non-selective hunting practices and on anti-poaching activities, in accordance with the definition of poaching and recognition of legal hunting found in the Birds Directive, which potentially represents a compromise between the ‘‘hunter-poacher’’ concept and the animal rights position. As in Ischia, Reggio-Calabria and Brescia, conservationists have had success in reducing non- selective hunting, hunting of protected species, and poaching, suggesting that upholding the Birds Directive is an achievable compromise. There are also examples where they have prevented conflicts with hunters by working together (e.g. the Emilia-Romagna part of the Po Delta). Working together to protect birds could be strengthened by opening a dialogue with hunters to harmonize hunting laws and local norms (Fischer et al., 2013a), identifying and promoting conservation-friendly hunting practices, and taking appropriate policing action against organized poaching and black markets. The initiative of Legambiente and the main hunting associations to cooperate and especially to communicate stories of human relationships to nature in the traditional rural context should be supported by hunters and conservationists alike. This can be a source to transmit LEK, practice and motivation for pro-conservation values. Gifting hunted migratory bird meat to the community for local festivals, cooperatives or as charity might reduce local black market incentives and could socially reintegrate hunters by creating an opportunity to once again provide a community service. Mixed-generation hunting parties could be encouraged in order to enculturate the next generation with a traditional hunting ethic (see also FACE, 0000 and Tori et al., 2002). Finally, open-minded conservationists could engage hunters in actions to protect migratory birds’ over-wintering and staging habitats outside Italy, complementing their activities within Italy, giving a pro-conservation impression to society and having a clear positive impact on migratory bird conservation (Runge et al., 2015; Sanderson et al., 2006). The risk of continued small-scale poaching might be counterbalanced by an active and motivated conservation constituency in rural and natural areas (Challender and MacMillan, 2014; Pilgrim et al., 2007; Tori et al., 2002). Concrete local examples of collaborative conservation—hunting projects could help to establish this scenario as a viable future (European Commission, 2013 and FACE, 0000; L. Carnacina, pers. comm.).

Acknowledgments

Many thanks to Paul Jepson for his encouragement and helpful comments on a draft. Fieldwork was funded through private donations, some anonymous, via Indiegogo, for which we are grateful. Special thanks go to Franco Bove for his contribution. AL and BB thank all informants and everyone who generously provided their time and help during fieldwork. MR-B is funded by Danish National Research Foundation Niels Bohr professorship project Aarhus University Research on the Anthropocene (AURA).

References

Aebischer, N.J., Potts, G.R., Rehfisch, M., 1999. Using ringing data to study the effect of hunting on bird populations. Ring. Migr. 19 (S1), 67–81. Anonymous, 2013. Endangered: Sharp rise in migrant bird hunting in Egypt. Spiegel Online Internation, 5 August. http://www.spiegel.de/international/world/steep-rise-in-migrant-bird-hunting-in-egypt-a-914874.html (accessed 14.08.14). Barbosa, A., 2001. Hunting impact on waders in Spain: effects of species protection measures. Biodivers. Conserv. 10, 1703–1709. Beckoff, M., Ramp, D., 2014. Compassion in conservation: Don’t be cruel to be kind. New Sci. 2974, 26–27. Berkes, F., Colding, J., Folke, C., 2000. Rediscovery of traditional ecological knowledge as adaptive management. Ecol. Appl. 10, 1251–1262. BirdLife International, 2015. The Killing. Downloaded from http://www.birdlife.org/illegal-killing. Bourdieu, P., 1977. Outline of a Theory of Practice. Cambridge University Press, UK. Bourdieu, P., 1979. Distinction. Harvard University Press, USA. Campbell, B., Veríssimo, D., 2015. Black stork down: Military discourses in bird conservation in Malta. Hum. Ecol. 43, 79–92. Cenatiempo, C., 2003. Cunicole e lapilli. Ischia, conigli e dintorni. Imagaenaria. Cencini, C., 1998. Physical processes and human activities in the Evolution of the Po Delta, Italy. J. Coast. Res. 14 (3), 774–793. Challender, D.W.S., MacMillan, D.C., 2014. Poaching is more than an enforcement problem. Conserv. Lett. 7 (5), 484–494. Chazdon, R.L., Harvey, C.A., Komar, O., Griffith, D.M., Ferguson, B.G., Martínez-Ramos, M., Morales, H., Nigh, R., Soto-Pinto, L., van Breugel, M., Philpott, S.M., 2009. Beyond reserves: A research agenda for conserving biodiversity in human-modified tropical landscapes. Biotropica 41 (2), 142–153. Corti, G., 2004. I Roccoli dell’Alta Val Trompia, I Luoghi, gli Uomini, le Tecniche dell’Uccellagione, Vol. 2. Comunità Montana di Valle Trompia. Cundill, G., Cumming, G.S., Biggs, D., Fabricius, C., 2011. Soft systems thinking and social learning for adaptive management. Conserv. Biol. 26, 13–20. Dalby, L., Söderquist, P., Christensen, T.K., Clausen, P., Einarsson, Á., Elmberg, J., Fox, A.D., Holmqvist, N., Langendoen, T., Lehikoinen, A., Lindström, Å., 2013. The status of the Nordic populations of the Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos) in a changing world. Ornis Fenn. 90 (1), 2–15. D’Amico, M., 2014. Caccia, la lunga battaglia contro le esche vive. La Repubblica, 5 July. http://www.repubblica.it/ambiente/2014/07/05/news/ (accessed 14.08.2014). Davies, G., Dwyer, C., 2007. Qualitative methods: are you enchanted or are you alienated? Prog. Hum. Geogr. 31, 257–266. Dimarca, A., Iapichino, C., 1984. La migrazione dei falconiformi sullo Stretto di Messina. LIPU. Duriez, O., Eraud, C., Barbraud, C., Ferrand, Y., 2005. Factors affecting population dynamics of Eurasian woodcocks wintering in France: assessing the efficiency of a hunting-free reserve. Biol. Conserv. 122, 89–97. 206 B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207

Elmberg, J., Nummi, P., Pöysä, H., Sjöberg, K., Gunnarsson, G., Clausen, P., Guillemain, M., Rodrigues, D., Väänänen, V.-M., 2006. The scientific basis for new and sustainable management of migratory European ducks. Wildl. Biol. 12, 121–127. European Commission, 2008. Guide on hunting under the Birds Directive. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/wildbirds/action_plans/ guidance_en.htm (accessed December 2014). European Commission, 2013. Sustainable hunting and Natura 2000. http://ec.europa.eu/environment/nature/conservation/wildbirds/hunting/index_en. htm (accessed December 2014). FACE (Federation of Associations for Hunting and Conservation of the EU) no date, 0000. The biodiversity manifesto, 13 August 2014. http://www.face.eu/nature-conservation/biodiversity%20. Falzon, M.-A., 2008. Flights of passion: Hunting, ecology and politics in Malta and the Mediterranean. Anthropol. Today 24 (1), 15–20. Fasola, M., Rubolini, D., Merli, E., Boncompagni, E., Bressan, U., 2010. Long-term trends of heron and egret populations in Italy, and the effects of climate, human-induced mortality, and habitat on population dynamics. Popul. Ecol. 52 (1), 59–72. Fischer, A., Sandstrom, C., Delibes-Mateos, M., Arroyo, B., Tadie, D., Randall, D., Hailu, F., Lowassa, A., Msuha, M., Kerezi, V., Reljic, S., Linnell, J., Majic, A., 2013a. On the multifunctionality of hunting—an institutional analysis of eight cases from Europe and Africa. J. Environ. Plann. Manage. 56 (4), 531–552. Fischer, A., Kerezi, V., Arroyo, B., Mateos-Delibes, M., Tadie, D., Lowassa, A., Krange, O., Skogen, K., 2013b. (De)legitimising hunting—discourses over the morality of hunting in Europe and eastern Africa. Land Use Pol. 32, 261–270. Franzen, J., 2013. Last song for migrating birds. National Geographic, July, (http://ngm.nationalgeographic.com/2013/07/songbird-migration/franzen-text (accessed 14.08.14)). Franzen, J., 2014. La mia battaglia perché l’Italia fermi la barbarie contro gli uccelli. La Repubblica, 5 July, 14 August 2014. Accessed from http://ricerca.repubblica.it/repubblica/archivio/repubblica. Genovesi, P., Bertolino, S., 2001. Human dimension aspects in invasive alien species issues: the case of the failure of the grey squirrel eradication project in Italy. In: McNeely, Jeffrey A. (Ed.), The Great Reshuffling: Human Dimensions of Invasive Alien Species. IUCN, pp. 113–119. Giordano, A., Ricciardi, D., Chiofalo, G., 2005. A 2005 update of continuing efforts to protect migrating raptors and storks across the Straits of Messina (Italy). Int. Hawkwatcher 10, 11–15. Giordano, A., Ricciardi, D., Candiano, G., Celesti, S., Irrera, A., 1998. Anti poaching on the Straits of Messina: results after 15 years of activities. In: Atti della Conferenza Internazionale dei Rapaci dell’Olartico—Badajoz, Extremadura–Spagna, 17–22 Aprile 1995. pp. 623–630. Gómez-Baggethun, E., Mingorría, S., Reyes-García, V., Calvet, L., Montes, C., 2010. Conserv. Biol. 24 (3), 721–729. Gray, N., 1992. Defenders of the Wild: Anna and the honey buzzards. Yorkshire Television. 50 mins. Hahn, S., Bauer, S., Liechti, F., 2009. The natural link between Europe and Africa—2.1 billion birds on migration. Oikos 118, 624–626. Hinchliffe, S., 2007. Geographies of Nature: Societies, Environments, Ecologies. SAGE, London. Hynes, S. (Ed.), 2007. The Atlas of Bird Migration: Tracing the Great Journeys of the World’s Birds. Marshall Editions, Struik Publishers, South Africa. Ingold, T., 2000. The Perception of the Environment: Essays in Livelihood, Dwelling and Skill. Routledge, London. ISTAT, Istituto Nazionale di Statistica. 2007. Annuario Statistico. Roma, Italy. Jiguet, F., Godet, L., Devictor, V., 2012. Hunting and the fate of French breeding waterbirds. Bird Stud. 59 (4), 474–482. Kass, D., Kass, R., 2013. Emptying the skies. 1 h 17 min. Available at http://www.aljazeera.com/programmes/witness/2014/11/emptying-skies-201411681814511798.html. Kirby, J.S., Stattersfield, A.J., Butchart, S.H.M., Evans, M.I., Grimmett, R.F.A., Jones, V.R., O’Sullivan, J., Tucker, G.M., Newton, I., 2008. Key conservation issues for migratory land- and waterbird species on the world’s major flyways. Bird Conserv. Int. 18, S49–S73. Knevic, I., 2009. Hunting and environmentalism: Conflict or misperceptions. Hum. Dimens. Wildl.: Int. J. 14 (1), 12–20. Koleček, J., Schleuning, M., Burfield, I.J., Báldi, A., Böhning-Gaese, K., Devictor, V., Fernández-García, J.M., Hořák, D., Van Turnhout, C.A., Hnatyna, O., Reif, J., 2014. Birds protected by national legislation show improved population trends in Eastern Europe. Biol. Conserv. 172, 109–116. Labia, G.C., 1936. La caccia in ‘valle’ nel Polesine, Rovigo, Istituto Veneto di Arti Grafiche. Lang, J.T., 1982. The European Community directive on bird conservation. Biol. Conserv. 22, 11–25. Lindon, A., Root-Bernstein, M., 2015. Pheonix flagships: Conservation values and guanaco reintroduction in an anthropogenic landscape. Ambio 44, 458–471. Menz, M.H.M., Arlettaz, R., 2011. The precipitous decline of the ortolan bunting Emberiza hortulana: time to build on scientific evidence to inform conservation management. Oryx 46 (1), 122–129. Mondain-Monval, J.-Y., 2011. Hunting in Mediterranean wetlands and its cultural aspects. In: Papayannis, T., Pritchard, D.E. (Eds.), Culture and Wetlands in the Mediterranean: an Evolving Story. Med-INA, Athens, pp. 198–210. Muiruri, M.N., Maundu, P., 2010. Birds, people and conservation in Kenya. In: Tidemann, S., Gosler, A.G. (Eds.), Ethno-ornithology: Birds, Indigenous Peoples, Culture and Society. Earthscan, London, pp. 279–289. Murgui, E., 2014. When governments support poaching: a review of the illegal trapping of thrushes Turdus spp. in the parany of Comunidad Valenciana, Spain. Bird Conserv. Int. 24 (2), 127–137. Muth, R.M., Bowe Jr., J.F., 1998. Illegal harvest of renewable natural resources in North America: Toward a typology of the motivations for poaching. Soc. Nat. Resour. 11 (1), 9–24. Nazarea, V.D., 2006. Local knowledge and memory in biodiversity conservation. Annu. Rev. Anthropol. 35, 317–335. Nelson, M.P., Bruskotter, J.T., Vucetich, J.A., Chapron, G., 2016. Emotions and the ethics of consequence in conservation decisions: Lessons from Cecil the Lion. Conserv. Lett. online first. Packham, C., 2014. Chris Packham: Why I’m fighting to stop the slaughter of Malta’s wild birds. The Observer, Sunday 4 May 2014, p. 30. Pahl-Wostl, C., Hare, M., 2004. Processes of social learning in integrated resource management. J. Comm. Appl. Soc. Psychol. 14, 193–206. Peloquin, C., Berkes, F., 2009. Local knowledge, subsistence harvests, and social–ecological complexity in James Bay. Hum. Ecol. 37 (5), 533–545. Pilgrim, S., Smith, D., Pretty, J., 2007. Cross-regional assessment of the factors affecting ecoliteracy: Implications for policy and practice. Ecol. Appl. 17 (6), 1742–1751. Pöysä, H., Rintala, J., Lehikoinen, A., Väisänen, R.A., 2013. The importance of hunting pressure, habitat preference and life history for population trends of breeding waterbirds in Finland. Eur. J. Wildl. Res. 59 (2), 245–256. Purnama, S., Indrawan, M., 2010. Entrapment of wetland birds: Local customs and methods of hunting in Krangkeng, Indramayu, Central Java. In: Tidemann, S., Gosler, A.G. (Eds.), Ethno-ornithology: Birds, Indigenous Peoples, Culture and Society. Earthscan, London, pp. 67–72. Pysek, P., Richardson, D.M., 2010. Invasive species, environmental change and management, and health. Annu. Rev. Environ. Resour. 35, 25–55. Reo, N.J., Whyte, K.P., 2012. Hunting and morality as elements of traditional ecological knowledge. Hum. Ecol. 40, 15–27. Ripple, W.J., Beschta, R.L., 2006. Cougar decline, trophic cascades, and catastrophic regime shift in Zion National Park. Biol. Conserv. 133, 397–408. Runge, C.A., Watson, J.E.M., Butchart, S.H.M., Hanson, J.O., Possingham, H.P., Fuller, R.A., 2015. Protected areas and global conservation of migratory birds. Science 350 (6265), 1255–1258. Sahasrabudhe, S., Motter, A.E., 2011. Rescuing ecosystems from extinction cascades through compensatory perturbations. Nat. Commun. 2, 170. Sanderson, F.J., Donald, P.F., Pain, D.J., Burfield, I.J., van Bommel, F.P.J., 2006. Long-term population declines in Afro-Palearctic migrant birds. Biol. Conserv. 131, 93–105. Schäffer, N., Walther, B.A., Gutteridge, K., Rahbek, C., 2006. The African migration and wintering grounds of the Aquatic Warbler Acrocephalus paludicola. Bird Conserv. Int. 16, 33–56. Simmons, A., 2009. Animals, predators, the right to life, and the duty to save lives. Ethics Environ. 14 (1), 1085–6633. Smith, A., Marsh, H., 1990. Management of traditional hunting of dugongs [Dugong dugon (Müller, 1776)] in the northern Great Barrier Reef, Australia. Environ. Manage. 14 (1), 47–55. Sorrenti, M., Carnacina, L., Radice, D., Costato, A., 2006. Duck harvest in the Po Delta, Italy. In: Boere, G.C., Galdbraith, C.A., Stroud, D.A. (Eds.), Water-birds Around the World. The Stationary Office, Edinburgh, UK, pp. 864–865. B. Barca et al. / Global Ecology and Conservation 6 (2016) 189–207 207

St. John, F.A.V., Edwards-Jones, G., Gibbons, J.M., Jones, J.P.G., 2010. Testing novel methods for assessing rule breaking in conservation. Biol. Conserv. 143, 1025–1030. Tallis, H., et al., 2014. A call for inclusive conservation. Nature 515, 27–28. Tori, G.M., McLeod, S., McKnight, K., Moorman, T., Reid, F.A., 2002. Wetland conservation and ducks unlimited: Real world approaches to multispecies management. Int. J. Waterbird Biol. 25 (SP2), 115–121. Veríssimo, D., Campbell, B., 2015. Understanding stakeholder conflict between conservation and hunting in Malta. Biol. Conserv. online first. Verza, E., Bottazzo, M., 2011. Le anatre selvatiche del Delta, Monitoraggi e ricerche sugli Anatidi nel Delta del Po (Veneto). Regione del Veneto, Veneto Agricoltura. Vickery, J.A., Ewing, S.R., Smith, K.W., Pain, D.J., Bairlein, F., Skorpilová,ˆ J., Gregory, R.D., 2014. The decline of Afro-Palaearctic migrants and an assessment of potential causes. Ibis 156, 1–22. Wils, W.P.J., 1994. The Birds Directive 15 years later: A survey of the case law and comparison with the Habitats Directive. J. Environ. Law 6, 219–242. WWF Italia, 2012. Guardie...& ladri di natura, Viaggio nell’altra Italia che difende i beni comuni. Report sull’attività delle guardie volontarie del WWF, Dossier Guardie WWF, Novembre 2012, pp. 81–88. Xu, J., Lebel, L., Sturgeon, J., 2009. Functional links between biodiversity, livelihoods, and culture in a Hani swidden landscape in Southwest China. Ecol. Soc. 14 (2), 20. Zalles, J.I., Bildestain, K., 2000. Raptor Watch, a Global Directory of Raptor Migration Sites. In: Birdlife Conservation Series, vol. 9.