Alan Deidun's letter (December 1) has no other worth than that of highlighting how even a person who elevates his educational level may lack good sense and judgment, by writing unfounded and unwarranted insinuations to try to discredit other persons' valuable work.

Dr Deidun did not tolerate the press release Bicref issued on November 11 which recognised the effective cooperation existing between many individuals and organisations, starting with the turtle rehabilitations personnel at San Lucjan. Of course this, it seems, is due to the fact that I was mentioned too for my voluntary intermediating contribution to the turtle rescue process - an activity I do happily, since it allows me to assist marine turtles in need.

If a person, like Dr Deidun, may have his own reasons why he does not appreciate this, it does not affect my untainted contribution and profession in conservation biology, but may only throw a negative image on such a person, who also writes inaccurate letters with false accusations.

After disseminating his false statements, in his letters and Sunday feature, indicating that I had nothing to do with the turtle rescue process, he had to swallow the truth, clearly stated by Bicref's letter dated November 22. This letter, embarrassingly for Dr Deidun, showed that even the turtle he decided to take a photo with to release in The Sunday Times was indeed assisted through my intermediating role.

Not succeeding there, out of the blue he goes on to try to insinuate other false schemes about me, in relation to the reporting of symposia, which did not even relate to the turtle rescue process. Yet again, Dr Deidun was proved wrong through my letter and the letter of The Sunday Times' editor himself dated November 29.

It is clear that Dr Deidun has managed to mess up over and over again and will not admit it or excuse himself for it. Trying to hide behind other persons will not diminish the fact that he has started futile attacks on valid workers in the sphere of conservation science and practice who clearly did not deserve it. Any future involvement of such a person in local conservation work will need to take all of this into consideration.

Anyone needing some more facts, in relation to the turtle rescue process and the self-glorified feature pages written by Dr Deidun, would have obtained insights through the letters, correcting Dr Deidun's errors, sent to the Sunday Times and The Times, including those by The Times editor, Bicref, The Sunday Times' editor and the undersigned.

Independent journalism costs money. Support Times of Malta for the price of a coffee.

Support Us