Reference is made to the article Mepa to decide on Marsascala tuna penning outline application tomorrow (TMID, 21 December).

It must be stated from the outset, that the concept of developing tuna farming activities in a zone away from the immediate coast, was discussed at length in an ad hoc committee involving all the sectors, including the Malta Tourism Authority, the Malta Maritime Authority and the Fisheries Conservation and Control Division within the Rural Affairs and Environment Ministry. The area being proposed was also identified by Mepa after due consideration to the core and peripheral activities of the operation.

The Environment Impact Assessment (EIA) takes into consideration the macroeconomics of the operation as a whole and not the single operator accounts individually. This concept was included in the terms of reference of the EIA to give an indication to the planners of what it could involve.

The wave and currents study included in the EIA – produced for this proposal – indicates clearly that the probability of floating debris reaching the coast from the area in question, at a distance of 6.3 km, is very remote (not likely to occur on more than two occasions a year, considering the prevailing winds and currents). The study considered data over a 50-year period to reach these conclusions. This would present a significant reduction from the current probabilities with the present location of the tuna farming operations.

The suggested area implies a lower density of fish per cubic metre than the stocking density currently available in the present operations. This, together with the increased distance from the coast, is intended to minimise environmental impacts and their effects on the coastal waters and immediate shore activities.

Moreover, this also shows that the proposed relocation of operations should not produce any health risks to the residents of the immediate surroundings.

Experience of tuna farming to date has proven us correct in assuming the 50-metre depth strategy some years ago. At that time, all tuna farms in the Mediterranean were anchored in 35m of water, while today everybody is looking at our success and following similar paths. Some Mediterranean countries are already proposing areas for production in deeper waters, similar to the depths of our proposed zone.

The proposal to distance the operations from the shore will definitely decrease the visual impact – and whatever the size of vessel used, this will not deduct anything from the scenic value of the immediate coast and the general panorama. It is to be kept in mind that one of the biggest bunkering and ship-waiting areas is located just a few kilometres south of the proposed area, and therefore the general panorama always included vessels on the horizon.

Even though the present operations are considered in the Marsascala area, their land operations do not originate from Marsascala. The present operations use the Freeport and Xrobb l-Ghagin as docking sites. The current proposal will mean that all operations will probably use the Freeport area, as this will reduce operational costs in the transfer of containers of bait fish from the incoming port to the feeding ships. Thus, this should mean no added impact on the traffic using the Marsascala area. The same applies for the fish leaving through the airport or the Freeport, where in both cases these should leave no impact whatsoever on the Marsascala area.

The relocation of tuna farming activities to an area further out at sea will also definitely improve the possibility of the development of Marsascala into a yacht marina. This relocation will reduce the problems of access to the marina.

Another positive result of this relocation is the decreased likelihood of any possible appearance of large fish in the immediate neighbourhood of Marsascala, even though this has never proved to be a major cause of concern, even with the present location of operations. The development of the zone to include new operators other than the relocation of the existing operators, will involve new employment and further value-added, from which the Maltese economy will benefit.

Once again, it transpires that those opposing this proposal are resorting to emotive arguments, rather than striving to present arguments based on facts and factual simulations.

The ministry augurs that this attitude does not hamper the development and realisation of proposals aimed at improving the quality of life, while guaranteeing the economic prosperity of the country.

Ray Bezzina is Communications Coordinator at the Rural Affairs and Environment Ministry