The article by Rudolph Ragonesi, CEO at Gaia Foundation, (The Sunday Times of Malta, June 16) is a failed attempt at convincing readers of the technical validity of the recent ‘pebble cleaning’ exercise at Ramla l-Ħamra.

The failure of such an article to convince is a result of the confirmation by Mepa two days earlier than the publication of the article, in response to questions posed by this same newspaper, that the recent works at Ramla l-Hamra were not made to comply with any list of conditions.

This assertion, which comes straight from the horse’s mouth, deflates Gaia’s attempt to condone such works on the back of the past 13 years of ‘pebble clearance’ at Ramla l-Hamra, during which officials from the Environment Protection Department were always present, a stringent list of permit conditions were adhered to and heavy machinery was never deployed on such a large scale.

Mepa claims that it felt there was no need to issue such a list of conditions this year round since it was satisfied with the detailed method statement for the works issued by the Gozo Ministry. Can Mepa or the same ministry publish such a method statement so it can be assessed?

I reiterate my call, made many times on the social media, to the Gaia Foundation to publish any scientific study they commissioned which can lend some credence to their faith in the use of a bulldozer within a Natura 2000 site. I also reiterate the query I made previously to the same Foundation – did they compile a detailed ecological monitoring report while being present on site during the same works and, if so, would they care to publish such a report for the benefit of the public?

The Foundation earned my respect for vociferously, and rightly so, protesting at the treatment of the clay slopes at Ghajn Tuffieha during the recent letting off of fireworks from the site. With the ecological damage at Ramla l-Hamra being potentially more insidious than the one at Ghajn Tuffieha, why the two weights, two measures system being adopted by Gaia with respect to Ramla l-Hamra?

Gaia’s article gives the impression that their sole understanding of the conservation importance of the Ramla l-Hamra beach system is limited to the occurrence of the sand dunes on site, which is a blinkered view as it does not pay tribute to other aspects of Ramla l-Hamra which are equally important from a conservation point of view.

Rather than making academic references to snazzy terms like ‘integrated coastal management’ and ‘ecological integrity’, Ragonesi should make sure that he fully comprehends the gravitas of such terms and he should avoid pandering in to populist calls for a superficially ‘cleaner’, albeit sterile, beach.