Some time has now lapsed since the young lone dolphin incident in B'Bugia / Marsaxlokk passed by, and though for a few the story has already been put aside, many are still waiting to hear how the EPD can really improve its assistance to the dolphins quickly and effectively enough and when still in condition to be assisted.

Sure "dolphins do die" states the director of the EPD, so is this how the EPD proposes to assist any other dolphins in the future? Isn't this third case (Adult Risso's dolphin in 1997, Baby Risso's dolphin in 1998 and the young Common dolphin in 2001) of live dolphin's handling by the EPD enough to realise that procedures have still not improved, even though reminders in this direction have never stopped from the local field cetacean researcher.

We are also told in The Malta Independent of the 6th November 2001, that the director of the EPD felt the department took "the best decision" but how realistically can one state that indeed the decision taken was the best one for this specific young dolphin?

The Director's statement that the "death of the dolphin was in no way connected to this decision" is still without tangible proof. Rather than seeking to improve the way we locally deal with dolphins in difficulty, one is taken aback at noting that the EPD seems to focus more on stubbornly repeating that the decision taken was the right one, while trying to belittle professionals who gave valid alternative solutions. It is thus disappointing to see to what extent the EPD director is ready to go when dishing out haphazard statements such as "the department also noted that self-proclaimed experts apart, there is insufficient expertise on dolphin behaviour in Malta".

The director thus publicly prefers ignoring the scientific Maltese cetacean research, that has been ongoing since 1997, rather than thanking the local cetacean researcher for giving him a practical recommendation which was immediately taken up by himself (in writing as well) as the way forward. It was obvious then that this recommendation was being forwarded because of local research experience gained through years of year-round field research of dolphins (including the species in question) in their natural habitat. Due to this fact and for the record, I believe his inappropriate public comment on insufficient local dolphin behaviour expertise should not pass unnoticed, since it is inaccurate.

Just for completeness, the EPD director might need to recall that one of my scientific papers on central Mediterranean cetaceans was actually presented at an international Symposium in Gozo back in 1998 and subsequently his department paid for the proceedings' publication production. The title of this publication is "Monitoring and Conservation of Birds, Mammals and Sea turtles of the Mediterranean and Black Sea" edited by P. Yesou and J. Sultana 2000. While the title of the paper presented then was "Cetacean research and conservation around the Maltese Islands". Individuals present at the Maltese papers' presentation at this Symposium would recall that indeed apart from the valuable scientific information gained on distribution and abundance of different cetacean species around the Maltese Islands, this cetacean research was delivering aspects linked to dolphin behaviours, habitat preferences and associations with fisheries. Areas that are still part of this scientific Maltese cetacean research project, and which are contributing toward more original results being presented at International Marine Mammal conferences.

Apparently the hours, days and years at sea undertaking scientific field observations may pass 'unnoticed' to our EPD director. However by now not many of us are surprised with the EPD's attitude any longer since other things of vital importance to our environment have gone 'unnoticed' for long, at the detriment and expense of many more living entities.