Underwater life at risk

Michael Zarb

Sep 24th 2009, 15:40

@kbgriffen:

I am sorry I can not understand your logic.

Do you not agree that, if enforced, these conservation areas will improve the biodiversity in the said location and protect some residential fish?

Do you not agree that such areas will then act as spawn points for residential fish such as the octopus and groupers?

Do you not agree that at the same time as accomplishing the protection of marine biodiversity (albeit to a limited extent) such conservation areas will still be able to generate economic activity in a sustainable manner?

Also, since I do not have vested interests in the matter, I must assume that I have hampered observational skills, and would thus appreciate your......rather keen, aid in understanding how recreational diving is invasive.

kbgriffin

Aug 23rd 2009, 13:37

Zone B ans C without core A on wrecks do not make any sense at all and are not very fruitful. You are stating that this policy is attempting to protect groupers and octos...well can I ask where does it state this? If it was so, well the policy makers have not considered the potential of other species such as pelagic fish and are just safeguarding scuba tourism from "scary" spearfishing practices...let's be honest...this is what it is all about...nothing about marine conservation.

I am also a frequent diver and diving is a VERY invasive practice...whoever does not admit this either lacks proper observational skills or possesses vested interests.

You mention the dusky groupers, a very hot issue in the Mediterranean with the respective declining populations...you get to see so many caught under legal limit EU directive EC 1967/2006 (which by the way does not even cover sexual maturity size of the female, let alone the male) in restaurants, fish shops etc. . Do the local authorities take the necessary steps to stop these illegalities?. till date...NO...and you expect me to believe that this is about conservational areas.

Michael Zarb

Aug 18th 2009, 14:46

To Claudia C: Thank you for the article. To me it all makes a lot of sense. Creating "zone B and C" conservation areas augments our tourism product whilst also creating valuable protected spawn points for residential species such as octopi and groupers.

To kbgrffin : a) The fishing methods allowable in conversation areas would not target the species which the particular policy is attempting to protect. It is unlikely that you will be able to catch a cave dwelling grouper without specifically targeting it. Most are caught through spear fishing at night.

In my opinion (a frequent diver) diving is not an "invasive practice". I grant that it may be possible for a careless diver to damage poseidonia or soft coral - though such damage is very limited. Diving has no effect on residential fish such as groupers.

Most European countries adopt a multitier approach to marine conservation.

Italy has 3 levels of protection - A,B & C. In Zone C recreational activities, including rod fishing, are permitted. Other forms of fishing are prohibited. Only boats with a permit are allowed.

Zone B allows only swimming, diving & boats with permits.

Nothing is permitted in Zone A .

kbgrffin

Aug 9th 2009, 08:51

These so called " conservational areas" are nothing more but the result of lobbying from the scuba diving enterprises to protect their bread and butter. There is no real commitment from the authorities to safeguard these hotspots of marine life. So much so, that if one follows the link: http://www.doi.gov.mt/EN/gazetteonline/2008/01/gazts/GG%2022.1.pdf one realizes it 's all about making it a safer place for scuba divers, which is good but let's call them "diving sites" and not " conservational areas"!!!

I mean what type of conservational areas allows invasive practices at it's core? Futhermore I quote from the respective document : "surface fishing is allowed including trolling lines (rixa) and angling for pelagic fish". CONSERVATIONAL AREAS?...NOT!!!

Franco Farrugia

Aug 8th 2009, 21:56

@ Francis Buhagiar - And since when is learning and knowledge a negative thing? So, you find a problem with having various marine biologists? And you find the existence and work of Birdlife a problem as well? You probably want the status quo because it suits people who want no order or any form of control at all over what they do. That's Malta.

kbgriffin

Aug 8th 2009, 19:04

Malta desperately requires Marine Protected Areas.

This article is trying to hit two birds with one stone...safeguarding the marine flora and fauna and at the same time the bubble blowers’ local enterprises.

Only a fool could fall for such mockery. I have done scuba diving myself and yes we have to be honest a group of 5-10 people (even more) blowing bubbles, waving, peeping into holes etc. etc is not exactly like stepping on our tip toes but rather we disturb the underworld with our presence. Obviously many of us would disagree..."but we only just take pics" and " we feed the hungry fish". Come on, are we so narrow-minded and blind?

So please do us a favor and stop declaring these scuba diving areas as "marine protected areas", THEY ARE NOT!

All these greenwash, Malta did not even submit it's biodiversity action plan yet link: http://www.cbd.int/doc/nbsap/nbsap-status.doc and the only so called MPAs covered under law, (the sunken ships) are not PROPER conservational areas... falling short of what MPAs entail.

In a nutshell let us keep MPAs as MPAs, thus the core of the zone should be no entry for nobody except for scientific purposes.

Galea. L

Aug 8th 2009, 14:08

I suggest that before sinking ships and boats steel beams be welded to them (sort of sea urchin) so that of fishermen try to trawl nets they will become entangled. This will prevent them doing so and destroying marine life which slowly builds up on/in the artificial reefs thus created.

Francis Buhagiar

Aug 8th 2009, 12:01

I read with interest your article and I would like to point out some important aspects.
I am sure that Mr. Deidun wasn’t born during the late 70’s early 80’s when the situation at our seas was much worse than it is today. I use to dive all around Malta without seeing a single bogue or a damsel fish during those times even the urchins disappeared. Who was to blame at those times? No body knows what has happened, things came to normal on their own after years. No body asked to create conservation areas, nobody cared about the tourists. We had no scientific knowledge and the only reference we had was Jacques Cousteau. The trouble is that today we have more marine biologists than fish in the sea. They all became experts and putting the blame on the Maltese people. We all know that the trouble in the Mediterranean Sea is caused through over heating in our climate and if there is someone to blame, they are our beloved European friends. I think that this interest is manoeuvre to acquire a million euro as birdlife did.

Frans Buhagiar
Safi