Milan stops chaffinch hunting in Lombardy

In summer 2025, the right-wing populist government of Lombardy had decided to allow recreational hunting of chaffinch (Fringilla coelebs) and starling (Sturnus vulgaris) under a so-called 'Deroga'.

Between 1 October and 30 November, 97’637 chaffinches and 36’552 starlings were to be legally shot, officially for 'damage prevention' and to maintain an allegedly deeply rooted hunting tradition.

In fact, this was a campaign gift to the hobby hunting lobby: In one of Europe's most important migration corridors, the decision would have amounted to a free pass for shooting migratory songbirds. Conservation organizations immediately warned of a regression to times when millions of migratory birds were killed in northern Italy during passage.

NGOs take legal action and prevail

A broad coalition of Italian nature and animal protection organizations took legal action against the regional decision, including LIPU, LAV, ENPA, LAC, LNDC and WWF Italy, supported by the Committee Against Bird Slaughter. They argued that Lombardy's finch and starling hunting violated European bird protection directives in multiple ways.

The NGOs criticized in particular: The affected species are protected throughout Europe and may not be hunted in principle. The region could not conclusively demonstrate that there are no other satisfactory solutions besides shooting (e.g., non-lethal measures to protect crops). And the shooting quotas are not scientifically justified and irresponsible from a species conservation perspective.

Initially, emergency decisions by the supreme administrative court (Consiglio di Stato) stopped the hobby hunting, before the administrative court in Milan now ruled on the merits and completely overturned the derogation.

Exceptions must not become the rule

Core of the decision: Exceptions to the bird protection directive are designed as narrowly interpretable instruments and must not be misused as general steering tools of hunting policy. The judges emphasize that every derogation must be detailed, scientifically substantiated, and designed as a true 'ultima ratio'.

Thus the court puts a stop to a practice that has become routine in several Italian regions: Year after year, new exceptional permits are issued, often with nearly identical text modules, instead of taking the protective logic of the directive seriously. The message from Milan reads: What is intended as an exception may not permanently serve as a loophole.

Tradition is no substitute for law

The court's handling of the tradition argument has particular symbolic effect. Regional politicians repeatedly try to romanticize hobby hunting of songbirds and migratory birds as 'cultural heritage'. In the Lombardy derogation proceedings, this rhetoric played a central role and has now failed spectacularly.

The administrative court makes clear: Historical or cultural customs are not a license to undermine European nature conservation law. What matters are scientific data, species conservation goals, and proof that there are no milder, non-lethal means. Whether a practice was widespread in the past says nothing about whether it is legally or ecologically defensible today.

For the hobby hunting lobby, this is a severe setback. For migratory bird protection it is an important signal: Hunting traditions will no longer be accepted as politically convenient pseudo-justifications when it comes to protected species.

Significance for the Alpine route and beyond

Lombardy is a hotspot of Europe-wide bird migration. Millions of birds must survive both bottlenecks and hunting pressure when crossing the Alps. When finches and other songbirds are released for large-scale hunting in such a key region, this has effects on populations far beyond Italy.

The Milan ruling therefore strengthens not only regional species protection, but also international migratory bird protection. It shows: National and regional unilateral actions at the expense of migratory species can be legally challenged and won in light of EU law. This increases pressure on other regions to reconsider their own derogation practices and design them in accordance with the law.

Lessons for Switzerland

This decision is also relevant for Switzerland. Chaffinches and other migratory birds know no borders. They are protected in one country and targeted by the recreational hunting lobby in the next. When courts in a central Alpine country like Italy clarify that 'tradition' is not a legal basis for hobby hunting of protected migratory birds, this increases the pressure on neighboring states to align their regulations with scientifically-based species protection.

For hunting-critical voices advocating for wildlife protection, the Milan ruling provides a strong argument: migratory birds are not playthings of daily politics, and certainly not of regional governments' electoral campaign strategies.