Environment Minister Jose Herrera and Infrastructure Minister Ian Borg have so far not responded to the challenge made by Partit Demoktratiku's Godfrey Farrugia to investigate an increased number of tuna pens at Sikka l-Bajda.

Last Tuesday in Parliament, Farrugia said that a visit to Sikka l-Bajda showed that instead of 12 tuna pens as agreed upon in a temporary Planning Authority (PA) permit, there are 21 cages set up, in flagrant breach of regulations.

The public saga with fish farmers began in August 2016 after various media reports showed Malta's beautiful coastlines marred by foul sea slime. Bathers reported how difficult it was to get the sea slime off and the government promptly ordered a report into what was causing the contamination.

There are four zones where tuna pens are allowed to operate in the northern zone.

It was found that high fat content in the feed used by fish farmers was a major cause of the slime. In addition to the findings in the report, industry sources say that the excrement of tuna is also a factor to consider when discussing the pens' relocation, due to its effects on the marine environment.

Unlike the by-product from the feed which is oily and remains on the surface, the excrement does not have the same properties and therefore does not travel on the surface of the water. Some excrement disperses, but some also settles on the seabed and contaminates it.

Back then, the report found that fish farmers of the north had put up more cages than was permitted by their PA licences, along with other fish farmers. However, fish farmers had argued that the quota being farmed is below what is required according to The International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, and different tuna required separate cages. The authorities had revoked all permits until all farmers had brought their operations back in line with their PA permit and a discussion ensued on how to prevent the sea slime epidemic from recurring.

A series of meetings culminated in a decision that fish farms would have to be relocated "offshore" pending a series of studies to find a more suitable location. The relocation was to take place by May 2017. With reference to the aquaculture tuna fish farmers, it was decided that they would relocate 5km away from St Paul's Islands, at the outer edge of Sikka l-Bajda.

Following the relocation requirements, two sets of tuna pens were transferred 5km offshore from Sikka l-Bajda, six pens previously located on the south side of the Comino Channel, and another six which were previously located near St Paul's Island.

Farrugia revealed that a visit to the area last Tuesday shows 21 pens, instead of 12. Pens are accompanied by a circular metal frame. Therefore, it could be that the extra frames do not necessarily translate into more cages being present. This, however, begs the question as to why the extra frames would need to be in place if there are no plans to place more cages; in addition, the quota requirements have not changed from last year.

A pre-screening application, seen by this newsroom, shows aqua culture fish farmers companies currently located at Sikka l-Bajda have requested that another 12 pens be put up.

Interestingly, the site in question is supposed to be a temporary solution pending an environmental investigation. The site forms part of a marine Outside Development Zone area that is bigger than Malta and Gozo put together. Aquaculture tuna fish farmers in the north were granted a temporary two-year licence pending an environmental investigation to ascertain a permanent spot which limited environmental degradation. There is a scientific report being drawn up by the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture. 

Minutes from a PA meeting on the issue show that there is some resistance to extending the cages a further kilometre out, to 6km, to safeguard the marine environment. The arguments in favour stem from the fact that 6km offshore there is a sharp drop in the seabed, meaning that tuna excrement would be more quickly, easily and efficiently dispersed away from Malta's coastline.

The sea-slime issue plaguing the beaches in August 2016 has been solved by relocating the tuna pens at least 5km offshore.

In the wake of public outrage over fish farmers being found with more cages than their permits allowed back in 2016, it was explained that many had increased the number of cages to spread out the legal quota of tuna in more cages.

Asked about this justification, Farrugia, in comments to this newsroom, gave a breakdown of how the process behind the tuna fish farming works.

Small tuna are caught from the open sea in spring and in June they are put in pens to be fattened. Come October, the tuna is harvested, meaning they are taken from the cages and killed for export and consumption.

He explained that not all tuna are harvested in October, but roughly 15 per cent which do not grow to the desired size are kept in the cages until the next year.

Farrugia questioned why the aquaculture tuna farmers need to increase the number of tuna pens in a supposedly temporary location to accommodate the legal quota of tuna when the volumes in cages are heavily reduced in winter.

He stressed that the relevant authorities must answer pertinent questions, such as why are the fish farmers requesting an increase in tuna cages when the current location is supposed to be temporary and the tuna quota has not been increased, and whether the PA is doing its job and monitoring the situation. This also raises questions about the integrity of the scientific report supposedly being drawn up by the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture.