Letters | Wednesday, 28 January 2009

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Once again MaltaToday and its correspondent attempt at creating a storm in a teacup and attempt to vary normal straightforward meanings of words to try and attain bigger and wider or different meanings all together. The European Commission corresponds regularly with all competent authorities within the Member States and if this correspondence contains requests for data or information in a different format from the normal reporting templates or outside normal reporting time frames, it is termed to be requesting clarifications. Outside the normal reporting templates that were sent on time, including real-time catch reports sent on a daily basis to Director General MARE as per Council Regulation 1559/2006, the Commission and the competent authority in Malta corresponded various times over the last months on bluefin tuna and obviously there were other communications dealing with other aspects of fisheries.
In this case, like in many others, the relative information is available at many of the offices of DG MARE of the European Commission but it may be aggregated in different formats and time periods and may require a different elaboration to be presented to your endless string of questions all revolving around a concept that you do not want to accept. You are mounting a whole argument on an analysis and not original figures where this analysis is using assumptions and conversion factors to calculate the original total round weight of the bluefin tuna that originated from Maltese cages.
The original round weights of each and every consignment to Japan is known to us, has been reported to DG MARE and to ICCAT and is the only round weight that has a significance. Any other round weights resulting from analysis that involve conversion factors and assumptions is just pure conjecture.
We stand by our original responses and we continue to insist that our data is the only true and correct data. Just to remind you and your readers:
• Bluefin tuna farmed in 2007 – 7,983,435 kg
• Bluefin tuna lost in storm – 1,253,189 kg
• Carried over to 2008 – 1,346,639 kg
Thus the maximum amount of farmed tuna in Maltese farms in 2007 and harvested in the period July 2007 – March 2008 is as follows: 7,983435 – 1,253,189 – 1,346,639 = 5,383,607 of input tuna. This tuna would grow at harvest to: 5,383,607 x 1.25 = 6,729,509 kg. The 1.25 is the maximum growth factor allowed for farmed bluefin tuna according to EU regulations which transpose ICCAT recommendations.
Bluefin tuna caught by Maltese longlines amounts to 143,700 kg while bluefin tuna farmed in other countries and transhipped in the period mentioned:
Thus the above three figures together amount to 11,306,491 kg which is the figure being mentioned in the article.
We can also add that whenever anybody is interested in running a crosscheck, we are ready to oblige as long as the crosscheck is done on a single consignment and release basis. It is impossible to run a cross check on figures resulting out of analysis and on aggregated data resulting from such analysis. Malta will continue to stand by the figures reported and if Japan imported in excess of the weights resulting from the round weights that are contained in the Bluefin Tuna Statistical Documents or in the Bluefin Tuna Catch Documents formally released by Malta, then it should check the original import documents with us on a single consignment basis.
We keep a complete register and copies of all the Bluefin Tuna Statistical Documents and Bluefin Tuna Catch Documents that we issue.
The comment by the Commissioner regarding the 1,000 tons originated from Turkey and Libya in January 2008 maybe referring to a transshipment and therefore bluefin tuna that never entered Maltese cages. There definitely was one such transshipment of bluefin tuna that was farmed by AK-Tuna of Turkey but the fish had been caught by Libyan vessels. This transshipment which took place in Malta and was destined to Japan on the 8 January, 2008 was actually of 349,010 kg of loins originating from 469,702 kg of round weight of fish. In this case whatever the amount, Turkish quota does not play a part but it is the Libyan quota that covers this consignment of fish. We are always happy to send clarifications to anybody who requests them if we have the documentation necessary.

Keith Galea
Ministry for Resources and Rural Affairs

PRINT THIS ARTICLE

Any comments?
If you wish your comments to be published in our Letters pages please click button below.
Please write a contact number and a postal address where you may be contacted.