Farmers in one of Nadur's most picturesque valleys claim that excavations for a cemetery being built above their fields is ruining a natural irrigation system that has sustained their land for centuries.
The project, which incorporates the construction of a new chapel and 600 graves, was given the final go-ahead by the Malta Environment and Planning Authority in November 2006, after twice being recommended for refusal (at both outline and full development stage) by the authority's planning directorate.
A study carried out in the run-up to Mepa's decision had concluded that the development is 'unlikely to have any adverse impact' on the water supply. An architect appointed by the Gozo court, which refused a request by farmers for an injunction to halt the project, reached similar conclusions.
However, those farmers, who had objected heavily to the development, now say that a few months into the excavations their worst fears are being confirmed. A reservoir used at the time of the Knights has not produced water since March, according to Martin Scicluna, a farmer who led the opposition against the cemetery. But what is upsetting farmers most is the fact that since works started, there has been an abnormal amount of water, (approximately three times the normal rate) streaming downhill.
An aquifer that collects rainwater lies on the plateaux where the cemetery will be built, and which, according to farmers, usually released more or less a constant stream of water downhill throughout the year. The farmers are now suspecting that the excavations somehow affected the aquifer - meaning there will be less or no water left for summer.
"Basically we'll be forced to turn to water from the bore holes which, besides costing money, is not the sort of good quality water we used to get naturally," Mr Scicluna said.
"And why ruin a system that works so well naturally? Frankly, I cannot understand how, on one hand we get EU subsidies for preserving the centuries-old network of canals that works through gravity rather than using plastic ducts, pumps and whatnot, and then this natural mechanism that has worked so well for such a long time is being wasted away. And for what?" he continued.
Hydrologist Marco Cremona pointed out that unfortunately there was no scientific record of how the water flowed before the construction started, as the study carried out by the developer's consultant did not take this into account. "There is only the farmers' word for it. However, hydrologically, it makes sense," he said.
Mr Cremona said: "The study focused on the ecological aspect of the development's potential impact, not the impact it may have on the farmers, which is also an economic impact... The interests of the farmers were not properly assessed."
When contacted, the author of the report used by Mepa to justify its position against the recommendation of the planning directorate simply referred the newspaper to "the lawyer", without giving his name, before hanging up.