The proposal to set up of a golf course on the slopes of Tal-Virtù, as part of a tourist complex, has been received positively by many sections of Maltese society but also generated rabid opposition from others.

A vociferous anti-golf crusade has now been going on for years, largely led by a small number of people who have even set up a Front against the Golf Course. This movement has, over the years, spread a number of inaccuracies, exaggerations or downright lies, some of which now risk being accepted as gospel truth. I shall here attempt to expose some of these myths, knowing however that those who have already proclaimed themselves against the project will never admit to having been mistaken.

Myth No. 1: A golf course is not useful to tourism in Malta and may even be harmful.

Fact: It is significant that none of those propagating this myth are actually engaged in tourism or have any direct knowledge of the sector. On the other hand, all those who have experience and interest in the industry - from the Malta Hotels and Restaurants Association (MHRA) to the former Minister of Tourism - acknowledge the vital contribution that a golf course could give; many consider it essential.

Recently, the MHRA stated that "additional golf courses would help attract additional numbers of high spending tourists" and they urged MEPA to take a decision "to pave the way for the development of golf courses in Malta".

I have yet to hear of any real tourist operator in Malta joining the ranks of the No movement or coming out against the proposal of a golf course. Should we think that all these entrepreneurs, associations and authorities are wrong? Is it possible that the No movement is wiser than the entire tourist sector?

This 'harmful-to-tourism' myth is at the basis of many of the objections put forward by the No movement and essential to their entire strategy, which is why they repeat it so often and so insistently.

Myth No. 2: The golf course disregards the social aspect.

Fact: This myth, recently revamped by some conservative elements of the clergy, clearly stems from the previous one and explains why the No movement is so fervent in denying the tourism value of golf. If, as most well-informed persons believe, the project is essential for tourism, it acquires a great social relevance as this industry is one of the main pillars of the Maltese economy. The jobs of thousands of people depend on it and anything which can help to maintain and develop tourism has very real social value.

Myth No. 3: The golf course will destroy 50-70 hectares of prime agricultural land (the area depending on the imagination of whoever is propagating this myth).

Fact: The golf course will destroy nothing. First of all, of the 70 hectares in question, about 50 will be planted with much-needed grapevines. At present the land - which has been mostly classified as "second-grade" by the Department of Agriculture - is highly fragmented and poorly farmed, producing mainly hay and some vegetables. Vines have also been recently planted but only in one or two tiny plots.

Moreover, as an agricultural scientist, I consider the golf course to be essentially an agricultural project. This is something that the No movement absolutely refuses to accept: turf cultivation is indeed agriculture.

To prove this I shall not refer to America or Britain where golf is long-established and traditional. Let us look at a few facts from neighbouring Italy. The Italian Ministry of Agriculture organises and finances ongoing research studies on ornamental turf cultivation with the participation of 27 national entities including 13 universities from all over the country.

Agricultural faculties as far apart as Turin, Pisa and Catania have regular courses on turf cultivation and protection. Catania (which is definitely not "Scotland") also has a specialised laurea in verde ornamentale which includes the study of turfgrass cultivation. Why should all these universities in Italy take such an interest in the subject? Have they all abandoned their mission to promote agriculture? Is it not more reasonable to conclude that growing turfgrass is itself a form of farming and, as such, deserves to be a topic of study for them?

Far from being detrimental to farming, the cultivation of greens - for golf or other recreational purposes - is nowadays an integral part of the agricultural sciences.

Myth No. 4: The golf course will destroy the economy and livelihood of 90-200 families (the number, again, depending on the source).

Fact: Nobody in the No movement has ever worked out how much money is actually generated by the land in question. What is known - and accepted by everyone - is that no one makes a living solely from this land. This is natural when one realises the very small size of each holding. In fact one could easily argue that the real value of the land does not lie in its agricultural production but in its location, which has strategic importance for hunting (more about this later).

There is no doubt that the wealth generated by the upgraded land (golf course and vineyards) will be far greater than that created at present. Moreover, contrary to what the No movement claims, this will not be simply pocketed by the developer but will be shared by all those whose livelihood depends on tourism.

Myth No. 5: The golf course would swallow huge amounts of precious water which could be used for a town of 11,000 people.

Fact: One of the most commonly heard myths, this is also the easiest to expose. There is absolutely no truth in it as the water used to irrigate a golf course would not be suitable for human consumption or indeed for irrigating several types of other crops.

Actually, this is something that perhaps the public is not aware of: when talking about agricultural production, water is no longer the limiting factor it has been in the past. Within three or four years our country will be recycling all its sewage and the Malta Resource Authority calculates that between 15 and 19 million m3 of second-class water will be generated as a by-product. This water - which is over and above the present supply - cannot be used for domestic purposes and is suitable to irrigate only a small number of crops such as some trees and ornamentals, not vegetables, especially those which are consumed raw.

Incidentally, the water requirements of the golf course have been calculated as 80,000-140,000 m3 every year, equivalent to 0.42-0.93% of this recycled supply. More than 99% of the reclaimed water will therefore remain available but up to now there seems to be very little use for it. In fact, the Water Services Corporation is sadly planning to dump most of it back into the sea.

Myth No. 6: The golf course will irreparably transform the natural landscape.

Fact. The so-called natural landscape in Malta is actually the result of intense human activity and is mostly artificial. Sometimes, those who are not involved in agriculture do not recognise how deeply and forcefully our landscape has been moulded and often deformed to turn it into a means of mass-production for an intensive and increasingly industrialized farming.

A golf course can actually be a less intensive form of agriculture and as such would not put so much stress on the land with for. example, less soil erosion. Moreover, the developers have stated time and again that they intend to maintain the present amount of rubble walls. A golf course is simply an alternative way of farming the land without, however, reducing it to the 'open-air factory' it often is today.

Myth No. 7: The golf course, with its lush greenery will disfigure the typical brown scenery which is the natural (and beautiful?) characteristic of Maltese countryside in summer.

Fact: Again, this is based on a poor knowledge of what 'nature' should really look like in Malta. The arid browns and washed-out beiges one sees in summer are not due to natural causes but have been created by humans who, wanting to hoard all the available water for their own cash crops, diligently destroy any scrap of natural vegetation attempting to grow on their land.

In fact nature abhors the burnt-out empty soils (which are also highly prone to erosion) we have at present and, if left to its own resources, would fairly quickly cover the fields with spontaneous vegetation which would remain green(ish) all the year round as long as sufficient water was present.

Myth No. 8: The golf course will destroy the "rural culture" and "traditional life" of 90-200 families.

Fact: This is one of the more vague and mysterious myths. I have never heard any satisfactory definition - with concrete examples - of which aspects of Maltese "traditional life" or "rural culture" would be jeopardised by golf. No explanation has ever been put forward to show how the golf course and vineyards would destroy Maltese culture. The only "culture" carried out at present on the slopes of Tal-Virtù is the uncontrolled destruction of hundreds of protected birds by hunters and trappers for whom this land is vital.

Myth No. 9: The golf course goes against the agreement between Malta and the Holy See.

Fact: I will leave aside, for the present, the issue of whether we Maltese should need the Vatican's permission to make use of our own land. However, there is the fact that a project vital for tourism and the creation of much-needed jobs certainly has social relevance and as such falls within the concept of the "social use" mentioned in the agreement (see myths 1 and 2).

Myth No. 10: The golf course goes against the Structure Plan

Fact: This is another popular myth, often used to put pressure on MEPA. In fact the Structure Plan is rather ambiguous about this issue. It is true that at one point it states that there should be "no loss of good agriculural land" (though it does not define what "good agricultural land" means) but it also concludes that "the ideal location would be on the periphery of an existing built-up area" and goes on to insist that "one of the benefits of golf courses is that they can be made to blend into the rural landscape and become a permanent guarantee that the area they occupy is unlikely to be urbanised."

In other words, the presence of a golf course would save an area from being built up. In this regard it is interesting to note that, at one point, the Rabat council wanted to build a major traffic bypass on the Verdala slopes.

Myth No. 11: The golf course will massacre massive numbers of protected wild animals and destroy all wild plants in the area.

Fact: Wild animals are systematically being destroyed by hunters, trappers and some of the farmers. I have already referred to the shooting of birds which goes on but predators like snakes and weasels are also destroyed as they hinder trapping by sometimes preying on caged decoy birds.

On the other hand, the golf course will, by its very nature, provide a safe haven for such animals. This is the real reason why environmentalists like me are in favour of the project: we are aware of the contribution to nature conservation that a golf course can offer. It is not a coincidence that the only golf course we have at present has been declared a nature reserve by the Environment Protection Act of 1991.

Myth No. 12: The golf course will use immense quantities of pesticides and fertilizers that will poison the water table.

Fact: This myth is not being heard so much nowadays as its inaccuracy becomes more and more apparent. In fact we have recently had sections of the No movement grudgingly admit that the amount of pesticides and other chemicals used by the golf course will be more or less the same as at present.

I can add that a properly run golf course will actually use fewer chemicals than the haphazard "farming" carried out today. As anyone with field experience will confirm, it is much easier to monitor and control agro-chemical usage when the land is managed as one whole rather than fragmented into dozens of holdings. Great strides have been made in greens cultivation and some golf courses are even organic.

Myth No. 13: The golf course will be a triumph for capitalism in Malta

Fact: Incredible but true, the "struggle against capitalism" is still an important issue with some of those opposing the golf course. This ideological gem - equating golf with capitalist exploitation - is not often expressed in public but very relevant to some of the organisations making up the No movement.

Not surprisingly, the preliminary meetings for the setting up of the anti-golf Front, which I attended, were held at the premises of the Maltese Communist Party in Valletta. There was no talk of environmental or agricultural issues in these meetings: it was mostly about "the struggle of the working masses" and the speeches (at least while I still attended) revolved fervently around the "lets-stop-the-march-of-capitalism" theme.

These have been just brief answers to some of the anti-golf assertions put forward by the No movement. I invite all those who, like me, recognise the importance of a golf course for tourism and environmental protection - or who simply want more information - to get in touch with me at antoine.vella@um.edu.mt.

Antoine Vella is a lecturer at the Institute of Agriculture of the University of Malta

Sign up to our free newsletters

Get the best updates straight to your inbox:
Please select at least one mailing list.

You can unsubscribe at any time by clicking the link in the footer of our emails. We use Mailchimp as our marketing platform. By subscribing, you acknowledge that your information will be transferred to Mailchimp for processing.