Just over a year ago, the tuna fishing industry in Malta faced a major setback when the International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tuna (ICCAT) announced substantially reduced new quotas for tuna fishing in the Mediterranean. At the time, the problem of overfishing was worrying both this international regulatory body and the European Commission.

Aaron McLoughlin, head of WWF’s European Marine Programme, had said: “Overfishing and massive illegal catches threaten the survival of bluefin tuna. Fishing should be banned indefinitely at least in June, the key spawning month for Mediterranean bluefin tuna.”

It seems the problem remains and the tuna fishing industry has to deal with new initiatives announced by the EU as well as the negative effects of the economic crisis that hit Japan following the recent natural disasters. European Fisheries Commissioner Maria Damanaki is proposing a ban on bluefin tuna fishing in Libyan waters until “Libya is able to ensure the respect of all ICCAT quota provisions”.

It is acknowledged that the local tuna industry depends on the cooperation of Libyan fishermen who sell the tuna they catch in Libyan waters to Maltese businessmen who then fatten these fish in ranches anchored offshore some distance from the island’s shores. With an estimated export turnover worth €80 million a year, many are asking whether the Maltese tuna industry can be disentangled from the Libyan crisis.

With Libya probably remaining a dysfunctional state for the foreseeable future, it is unlikely the ICCAT and the European Commission will be able to act soon to reverse any decision to ban dealing in tuna caught in Libyan waters. The enforcement of the fishing quotas in the Mediterranean, where so many different states vigorously assert their right to protect their national fishing interests, will always remain a major problem. So, it is unlikely the ICCAT will cave in to pressures from countries like Malta to continue to treat Libya as a state that can guarantee the proper observance of international restrictions on fishing.

Some argue the economic benefits derived from the tuna fishing industry in Malta are not all that pronounced and that costs are often underestimated. It is, therefore, essential for the government to conduct a scientific study to determine the real cost and benefit of this industry for the Maltese economy.

The protection of the sea environment is a priority. There is increasing scientific evidence that there is a limit as to how much we can exploit our marine resources before we risk killing an important economic activity like fishing. Ensuring that fishing remains sustainable through realistic quotas makes economic and environmental sense. Like many other things in life, it is a matter of a delicate balance.

It is ironic that the natural disasters that have hit Japan could ultimately do more to save the Atlantic bluefin tuna than the initiative taken by the ICCAT and the EU. The economic downturn in Japan could well lead to milder cravings for the tuna delicacies sourced by fish traders who are prepared to pay up to $100,000 for a top-grade tuna.

Before rushing to declare yet another tuna war in international forums, Malta needs to establish the benefits and the costs of this activity to its economy and to the well-being of the environment. If the economic and environmental cost proves to be too high, then the way forward should be to find new ways of making this activity more sustainable in the long term.