Mepa should do its work

I refer to the letter by the PRO of the Malta Environment and Planning Authority (August 21) on the dead fish floating off St Thomas Bay.

It is nice to note that Mepa is so keen to answer the Biological Conservation Research Foundation's letter to the press when, on the contrary, letters sent directly to this authority remain unanswered, such as Bicref's correspondence to Mepa on the marine protected areas dating back to 2003. A situation made clear to Mepa's chairman as well.

As for Mepa's stating that it is still "waiting" for information, Bicref sees this as wrong coming from an authority whose responsibility is to take care to investigate matters in detail itself. We repeat that facts were given to a Mepa's official; in greater detail and prior to Mepa's assertion on the type, cause and source of the dead fish issued in its letter of August 4. Are Mepa's misleading communications on the incident, without an investigation, the proverbial left hand not knowing what the right hand is doing?

Mepa has staff to undertake regular monitoring and investigations and thus it is unfair to demand from Bicref, a voluntary NGO assisting in other ongoing marine research, to do the work for an authority that does not even bother to reply to its letters.

Bicref is nonetheless aware that Dr Vella has personally sent a detailed written report to Mepa on August 13, since no one from Mepa had investigated matters further after our press release and informative phone conversation with the Mepa environment inspector.

It is good to note that Mepa is advertising its new and partially functional numbers through this case, so that perhaps more of the public will be in a position to contact Mepa officials to report all types of grave environmental incidents. We are not sure whether the authority is also expecting the public to collect samples for them. This sounds naïve and dangerous; furthermore in some cases it is actually illegal to handle dead organisms.