|
James Debono
The Malta Environment and Planning is claiming that only an environment impact assessment can determine whether the use of pesticides in the Xaghra l-Hamra site will affect the underlying under ground water resources.
This was MEPA’s first official reaction to MaltaToday’s revelation that the golf course lies on a drinking water safeguard zone, identified by the Malta Resources Authority as part of the implementation of the European Union’s Water Framework Directive.
MEPA however claimed back in May 2005, in its assessment report on the development of the golf course at Xaghra l-Hamra, that “the proposed golf course would not affect the aquifer protection zone.”
It was on the basis of this report that MEPA concluded that the Xaghra l-Hamra site initially proposed by the Prime Minister is better than any other site.
MEPA had also said a month later that the Xaghra l-Hamra site was situated outside the aquifer protection zone. MaltaToday later revealed the proposed site was actually a drinking water safeguard zone.
MEPA has however admitted to the fact that the report gives no further analysis of any impact, “as this would depend on operational aspects of the golf course, such as the use pesticides.”
Asked whether the fact that the proposed site lies on a drinking water safeguard zone contradicted the conclusions of the report, MEPA acknowledged that “the report states that the site selected should not adversely affect the aquifer protection zone.”
According to MEPA this sort of detail would be dealt with in the EIA on the golf course, which is being carried out by ADI consultants, whose partner is Kevin Morris, who drew up the EIA for Anglu Xuereb’s proposed Verdala golf course in Rabat.
No comments have so far been made from the authority on whether it was aware or not that the golf course was on the drinking water protection area when it published its May report.
On that occasion MEPA had also told MaltaToday “the risk of affecting underground water resources” was one of the reasons as to why the Habel Bellu site, another area touted for a golf course, was “not recommended for further consideration.”
MEPA has however said it considers the EIA, which is being coordinated by ADI consultants, as the determining factor in the selection process.
However it was the Verdala golf course EIA, prepared by ADI partner Kevin Morris, and its observations on the effects on the ground water which had been disputed by the Malta Resources Authority.
Morris’s EIA in fact stated that water from the Verdala golf course would not penetrate down to the underground water due to the impermeability of blue clay.
The Malta Resources Authority later disputed this claim, saying in a June 2002 letter that it had “reservations on the theory stated in the EIA that the site is impermeable to surface infiltration. Therefore, the conclusion reached that this would mitigate against groundwater pollution is not considered to have been adequately substantiated.”
In the case of the Mizieb perched aquifer, over which the proposed Xaghra l-Hamra golf course would be situated, there is no impermeable Globigerina or Blue Clay between the surface and the aquifer, but highly fissured Upper Coralline Limestone.
The aquifer underlying Xaghra l-Hamra is for this reason even more vulnerable to contamination than the groundwater underlying the Verdala area.
Yet, thousands of Maltese liri have been spent for the EIA process by the government, as more evidence shows the impact on groundwater from a golf course at Xaghra l-Hamra, is even less defensible than Anglu Xuereb’s Verdala proposal.
Whilst Xuereb bore the costs of his EIA, the costs for the Xaghra l-Hamra are being borne by the taxpayer. These costs will only be recouped when an eventual developer is found-till then the tax payer will be expected to bear the costs for the Prime Minister’s golf mirage.
jdebono@mediatoday.com.mt
|
