Report - Light Pollution and its effect on Yelkouan Shearwater in Malta ...
Filetype:
pdf
Filesize: 3537734
Light pollution and its effect on Yelkouan
Shearwaters in Malta; causes and solutions
Light pollution in Malta (NASA)
December 2007
Helen Raine, John J Borg, Dr. André Raine, Suzanne Bairner,
Matthew Borg Cardona
1
Executive Summary
Light pollution is widely recognised as being a major threat to seabirds and
nocturnal migrant species. This report examines its effect on seabirds and other
fauna firstly in an international context and then at the local Maltese level. Using
the LIFE project site of Rdum tal-Madonna (Special Protection Area - SPA /
candidate Special Area of Conservation cSAC) as a case study, a methodology was
devised to assess light pollution affecting seabird colonies in Malta. The principal
areas affecting the protected area through light pollution were located and
assessed and then a series of fieldwork visits were made to each location to assess
the source and severity of the pollution. Data on the locations of shearwater
groundings due to light pollution was also collated and analysed. The report then
considered in detail which actions needed to be undertaken for each location to
reduce light pollution levels. Recommendations were made which can also be
extrapolated to help to reduce light pollution at all other seabird colonies around
Malta.
An Action Plan was outlined for the government to reduce light pollution
nationally, with a particular focus on important ecological areas. The key actions
which will deliver the best results were identified as (i) the adoption into Maltese
law of legislation to reduce light pollution in future development through the
planning system and enforcement, especially within a prescribed number of
kilometres around ecologically sensitive areas, (ii) the creation of a public
awareness campaign to encourage residents to switch off lights, remove or replace
unnecessary or inappropriate outdoor lighting particularly in key areas, (iii) the
creation of a business awareness campaign to prevent over illumination in hotel
porches and grounds (iv) the removal of globe lights (and the complete prohibition
of their future use) and replacement with a full cut-off design in key problem areas
near shearwater colonies, (v) the replacement of other street lighting with a full
cut-off design in a rolling programme, (vi) a reduction of over illumination (e.g.
removal of multiple rows of lights in the same area) and (vii) seeking funding for
future work in this area, which will also contribute to a reduction of CO₂
emissions.
It was concluded that light pollution in Malta is a serious problem not just for
shearwaters but also in terms of emissions and quality of life. However, simple,
relatively inexpensive and practical solutions were identified to deal with these
issues. Implementing these will however require focus and funding and may be
most efficiently tackled through a project based approach.
2
Table of Contents
1.0.
Introduction
2.0.
Light pollution; the background
2.1.
Types of light pollution affecting seabirds
2.2
Effects on other fauna.
2.3
Effects on humans
3.0
Practical measures used internationally to reduce light pollution and the results of these
measures
3.1
Full cut-off lighting fixtures
3.2
Light shields
3.3
Planning system
3.4
Use of different types and colours of light
3.5
Turning off lights using a timer, occupancy sensor or manually
3.6
Alternatives to road lighting
3.7
Sports arenas
3.8
Lighthouses
3.9
Lights at sea
3.10
Light restriction and conservation during peak of fledging
3.11
Education
3.12
Rescue Campaigns
4.0
Current legal situation with regards to development and light pollution in Malta
5.0
Light pollution and Maltese seabirds
6.0
Methodology for assessing levels of light pollution in Malta
6.1
Grounded birds
(Case study; Rdum tal-Madonna)
6.2
Light pollution sources affecting Rdum tal-Madonna shearwater colony;
Photographic Analysis
6.3
Confirmation of sources and Light pollution assessment at source
7.0
Results
7.1
Grounded birds
(Case study: Rdum tal-Madonna)
7.2
Light pollution sources affecting shearwater colony at Rdum tal-Madonna
LIFE project site
7.2.1
Buġibba
7.2.2
Mellieħa
7.2.3
Adventure Campsite and White Tower
7.2.4
Għadira
7.2.5
Ċirkewwa
8.0
Discussion and Recommendations to tackle light pollution affecting Rdum tal-Madonna
8.1
Buġibba
8.2
Mellieħa
8.3
Adventure Campsite and White Tower
8.4
Għadira
8.5
Ċirkewwa
8.6
Light pollution at sea
8.7
Grounded seabirds
9.0
Nationwide recommendations
9.1
Summary of Lighting to be discouraged.
9.2
Recommendations for changes to legislation
10.0
Conclusion
References
3
1.0
Introduction
The overall aim of the EU LIFE Yelkouan Shearwater (Garnija) project is to protect
the Yelkouan Shearwater (Puffinus yelkouan) in the Maltese Islands and improve
the largest breeding colony at Rdum tal-Madonna (L’Aħrax tal-Mellieħa).
Populations of this internationally important seabird have been declining in recent
years due to a number of major threats to the birds. These are being addressed by
the EU LIFE Yelkouan Shearwater project. One of the key threats identified in the
project is that of light pollution.
This EU LIFE project work is of international importance as an estimated 1,500
pairs of Yelkouan Shearwaters breed in Malta each year. This equals
approximately 10% of the world’s population. The project site, Rdum tal-Madonna,
is home to the largest colony in the Maltese islands, with an estimated 500
breeding pairs. The site has been designated as a Special Protection Area (SPA)
under the EU Birds Directive for birds and a candidate Special Area for
Conservation (cSAC) under the EU Habitats Directive for rare flora and fauna. In
total, out of eleven Special Protection Areas (SPAs) found in the Maltese Islands,
nine are designated for Yelkouan Shearwater. All of these are also designated as
Important Bird Areas (IBAs) for Yelkouan Shearwaters (Figure 1).
MT01 – Ta’
Ċ
en
ċ
MT02 – Comino
MT03 – Filfla Island
MT04 – (Buskett)
MT05 – Rdum tal-Madonna
MT06 – West of Wied iX-Xaqqa to Wied Maqbul Cliffs
MT07 – West of Il-Hagra S- Sewda to Ix-Xaqqa Cliffs
MT08 – Il-Kullana to Ta’
Ġ
fien Cliffs
MT09 – I
ċ
-
Ċ
nus to Tal-Bardan Cliffs
MT10 – Xlendi Bay to Wardija Point Cliffs
MT11 – Dwejra Bay to San Dimitri Point
4
Figure 1. Map of the Maltese Islands highlighting Important Bird Areas (
Borg & Sultana 2004)
Light pollution also has the potential to affect other seabirds in Malta, particularly
Cory’s Shearwater (Calonectris diomedea) and European Storm-Petrel (Hydrobates
pelagicus).
T
here are between 6,090-7,130 breeding pairs of Cory’s Shearwater in
Malta, making it the fifth largest population in Europe, and 5,025 – 8,025 breeding
pairs of European Storm Petrel (mainly on the islet of Filfla), which is the largest
known breeding colony of this species found in the Mediterranean.
Light pollution has been found to affect seabirds worldwide and has become an
increasingly serious problem as coastal areas come under development pressure
from industry, housing and holiday resorts etc. This has had a significant impact
on many nocturnal seabirds including shearwaters, petrels, and some gull species.
Malta has followed this global trend. Other avian species, flora and fauna are also
affected, as is human health and quality of life. As well as causing serious
ecological problems, equally importantly, light pollution in Malta means wasted
energy which contributes to global warming as almost 100% of the electricity is
produced from hydrocarbons in Malta.
This study will examine research on light pollution and how it affects seabird
populations internationally. Measures used overseas to assess and reduce light
pollution around breeding colonies of seabirds will be considered. A methodology
will be outlined to assess light pollution from land based sources and its effect on
seabird colonies in Malta. The focus will be on Rdum tal-Madonna as a case study.
Practical measures on how to reduce light pollution affecting the Rdum tal-
Madonna breeding colony of Yelkouan Shearwaters in Malta will be investigated
and recommendations made to reduce this problem. It is intended that the
recommendations will be applicable to all seabird colonies in Malta and not just
Rdum tal-Madonna. Suggestions will also be made regarding the changes required
in Maltese planning law to prevent or reduce light pollution affecting seabird
colonies in the future.
2.0
Light Pollution – the background
Malta has a small land area but the highest population density in the EU and the
third highest in the world (1,282 people per km
2
). Due to these population
pressures, light pollution at night seriously affects both urban and rural areas in
the Maltese Islands.
This is a major issue from an ecological point of view as man-made lights not only
affect many birds (including seabirds such as shearwaters and petrels) but also
5
other species such as bats and moths (Rich and Longcore, 2006). Light pollution
can influence animal behaviour, animal navigation, competitive interactions,
predator-prey relations, animal physiology and reproductive behaviour (Longcore
and Rich, 2004). Lights can also attract, fixate or repulse animals and can lead to
local extinctions of species (Longcore and Rich, 2004).
Beyond wildlife, the wasted light output produced from night lights creates glare
which can be dangerous for drivers, cyclists and pedestrians and can also affect
human health. Glare is particularly an issue in road safety – directly viewing
bright sources of light at night will temporarily blind drivers or pedestrians
unexpectedly and contribute to accidents (this is known as ‘disability or veiling’
glare). Glare can be drastically reduced simply by using light fittings which allow
one to only view the light, not the light source (Pace, 2000).
Light trespass is also a serious form of light pollution– this occurs when light
shines outside of the area it is intended to illuminate. A common light trespass
problem occurs when a strong light enters the window of one's home from outside,
causing problems such as sleep deprivation or the blocking of an evening view. A
number of cities in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world have developed standards
for outdoor lighting to protect the rights of their citizens against light trespass
(Pace, 2000).
Over-illumination is major form of light pollution. More lighting is not always
better and can result in increased glare and running costs (Pace, 2002). Over-
illumination can arise from various factors such as not using timers, occupancy
sensors or other controls to switch off exterior lighting when not needed, use of
higher levels of light than needed for a given task, incorrect choice of fixtures
which do not direct light into areas as needed or inadequate lighting maintenance
resulting in increased stray light and energy costs.
The last major form of light pollution we encounter is “sky glow”. “Sky glow”
refers to the orange glow that can be seen at night over populated areas. This
occurs when light is reflected from what it has illuminated combined with badly
directed light. This is refracted into the surrounding atmosphere and scattered due
to a phenomenon known as “Rayleigh Scattering”. “Sky Glow” in Malta is so
severe that the Light Pollution Awareness Group run by the Astronomical Society
of Malta has indicated that there is nowhere on Malta or Gozo to observe the stars
without being influenced by light pollution (Figure 2). In fact, perfectly dark night
skies are only available at a distance of at least forty kilometres out at sea (Pace
2000).
Many of these issues can be readily corrected with available, inexpensive
technology; any reduction in light pollution also means a reduction in emissions
which pose threat to human health and environment as well as contribute to global
6
warming, increasing the importance of this work. However, awareness among the
public and decision makers of the effects of light pollution is low, and considerable
public awareness work is required to communicate the large payoff in reducing
over-illumination. Funding also needs to be dedicated to this task and legal
changes will be required.
Figure 2. The Maltese Islands seen by an orbiting satellite; the yellow glow is wasted energy that
shines into the night sky rather than onto the ground (NASA).
2.1.
Light pollution affecting seabirds
Light attraction among the Procellariiformes (the Order of “tube-nosed” seabirds
including shearwaters, petrels and albatross) is a worldwide problem and at least
21 species of Procellariiformes are known to be affected by it (Reed et al, 1985).
Seabirds have been attracted to man-made lights for hundreds of years; fires have
been used to attract and exploit them for food for centuries (Murphy, 1936; Reed et
al, 1985), and birds have been attracted to lighthouses ever since they were first
erected (Clarke, 1912). Today, there is a wide range of light pollution sources on
land with the potential to affect seabirds, including street lights (e.g. globes and
lamp posts), parking places, harbours, airports, fireworks, individual houses and
factories, stadiums, security lights and also car head lights (Reed et al, 1985; Reed, J.
1987; Borg and Cachia-Zammit, 1995; Le Corre et al, 2002). Light pollution in the
marine environment includes lights on fishing vessels, gas flares on oil rigs, and
squid fisheries (Reed et al, 1985; Rich and Longcore, 2006).
Most shearwaters and petrels are nocturnal during the breeding season so as to
avoid predation by gulls and raptors. This also benefits the fledglings that leave
the nest at night. Many nocturnal seabird species have larger eyes with a large
number of rods in their retinas and more rhodopsin than related diurnal species.
However, it appears that this behaviour and physiology also makes the birds
sensitive to artificial night lights (Rich and Longcore, 2006). Different species and
age classes of marine birds exhibit different degrees of attraction and vulnerability
to artificial lighting. Light induced mortality of most shearwaters and petrels is
7
seasonal and linked with the breeding schedule of each species. Highest mortality
coincides with fledglings leaving the nest (Le Corre et al, 2002).
The young Procellariiformes could be attracted to artificial lights as they are not
yet experienced with natural feeding at sea where they hunt for vertically
migrating bioluminescent squid using phototropic feeding behaviour (Telfer et al,
1987; Le Corre et al, 2002); these fledglings may think that the lights signal food.
Fledglings may also have a predilection to fly towards certain star patterns and
artificial lights may appear as supernormal star-like stimuli which again may
confuse and attract the young birds (Reed et al, 1985; Rich and Longcore, 2006).
Equally, bright lights may obscure the star patterns that the birds seek thus causing
them to fly inland rather than out to sea. Herbert (1970) speculates that when birds
fly into lights, they lose their visual clues to the horizon and then use the lights as a
visual reference.
“Fallout” is the term coined for fledglings that are grounded after being attracted
to artificial lights (Ainley et al, 1987; Podolsky et al, 1998). Fallout of fledglings
tends to be low during periods of high moonlight intensity (i.e. full moon) and
higher during darker moon phases (i.e. new moon), as this is the period when the
birds are highly attracted to artificial lights (Telfer et al, 1987). The decrease in the
number of birds attracted to artificial lights during a full moon may be because a
bright moon either inhibits the young birds from fledging, or greater ambient light
causes a visual diminution of point sources of light, or fledgling birds orientate
themselves towards the moon and are not attracted by the artificial lights (Reed et
al, 1985; Le Corre et al, 2002). The birds are also influenced by visibility due to
weather and are therefore more attracted to artificial lights during low cloud cover
and overcast skies (Telfer et al, 1987; Rich and Longcore, 2006).
Shearwaters and petrels that are attracted to artificial lights tend to become
disorientated. This may cause them to crash into buildings, wires, vehicles and also
tall vegetation. Many then fall to the ground and are either killed by predators or
die of starvation and their injuries (Podolsky et al, 1998). Even if the birds are not
injured, they are unable to take off as in many species they need a long ‘runway’ to
take off from, or launch off of sheer cliffs. In addition, birds can become entrained
in intense artificial light and have been seen circling the source for many hours and
even days. This can occur especially during overcast conditions when they are
reluctant to fly outside the sphere of illumination and into the darkness, leading to
high levels of mortality due to exhaustion and emaciation (Avery et al, 1976; Rich
and Longcore, 2006). Mortality due to collision and exhaustion threatens many
endangered and rare populations. In general, seabird fallout tends to be
concentrated around brightly lit urban areas, particularly along coastal sections
and near river mouths (Telfer et al, 1987).
8
An example of the devastating effect that night lights can have on shearwaters can
be seen in Hawaii. Since development began on the Hawaiian island of Kauai there
has been a significant increase in the number of fledging Newell’s Shearwaters
(Puffinus newells) found in urban areas (Podolsky et al, 1998). This fallout of
Newell’s Shearwaters can involve fledglings that have successfully flown out to
sea but are then attracted back to land by coastal lights (Podolsky et al, 1998).
Bright coastal lights on the island attract more than 1000 fledglings of three species
of Procellariiformes each year; this mostly includes Newell’s Shearwater, but also
the endangered Band-rumped Storm-petrel (Oceanodroma castro) and the extremely
rare Dark-rumped Petrel (Pterodoma phaeopygia) (Reed, 1985; Reed, 1987; Telfer et al,
1987). There has also been an increase in the numbers of Hawaiian Petrel
(Pterodoma sandwichensis
)
fledglings found each year due to light pollution on
Kauai. This has been proven to be due to an increase in the number of coastal
lights and not an increase in petrel populations (Ainley, 1997). The Kauai Surf
Hotel near the mouth of the Huleia River accounted for almost half of the fallout
during 1981. Reductions in mortality at the hotel were reduced by Reed et al
(1985) through shielding and elimination of skyward lighting when fledglings
where leaving the nest.
Light induced mortality has been reported for all nine species of petrel breeding on
Reunion Island in the Indian Ocean since the early 1960’s (Le Corre et al, 2002).
Annually, at least 20-40% of fledglings of the Barau’s Petrels (Pterodoma baraui) on
the island are attracted to artificial lights (Le Corre et al, 2002). The most numerous
and widespread source of artificial lights on the island are street lights and sport
installations; they are responsible for at least 78% of cases of shearwater mortality
(Le Corre et al, 2002). The Xantus Murrelet (Synthliboramphus hypoleucus), small
auks that nest on Santa Barbara Island off the coast of California, are also heavily
influenced by artificial lighting. Nesting sites adjacent to the most intensive levels
of light pollution during the breeding season experienced low levels of
productivity and high rates of egg abandonment in 1999 (Wolf et al, 1999).
In the Balearics, an excess of artificial light (such as street lights on the coast) was
proven to reduce the vocal activities of the Balearic shearwater (Puffinus
mauretanicus). The birds vocalised less to avoid attracting predators, particularly
Yellow-legged gulls (Larus michahellis) that might attack them even at night if there
is enough light. However, the fact that these colonies become silent means that
they are at risk of disappearing in the long term as they will not generate enough
social stimulus to attract the new recruits on young breeders (Ruiz et al, 2004)
Lights used for certain fishing practices can seriously affect seabirds. For example,
lights at sea close to colonies of Balearic Shearwaters (Puffinus mauretanius) in the
Mediterranean can negatively affect their breeding behaviour; this light can also
dazzle fledglings (Gallo-orsi, 2003). Lights of a fishing vessel were estimated to
attract about 6000 Crested Auklets (Aethia cristatella) that nearly capsized the
9
fishing vessel as they weighed an estimated 1.5 metric tons (Dick and Davidson,
1978).
Light induced squid fisheries in particular are becoming increasing common and
affect a wide range of seabirds as they use long distance horizontal lights to attract
squid to the surface (Wolf et al, 1999). Light boats used by squid fisheries off of
Santa Barbara Island illuminate and interfere with petrel colonies; this makes them
more vulnerable to predation by Barn Owls (Tyto alba) that are attracted to the light
(Wolf et al, 1999). This type of fishing, especially when carried along the south
coast of Malta and in the visual fly-path of Filfla Island, attracts European Storm-
petrels towards the boats (Borg, in prep). Due to the negative impact of squid
fishing in California, S. hypoleucus has now been listed as a threatened species.
Many other seabirds may be influenced by light pollution in this way and with
competition for breeding spaces already occurring due to habitat loss, many
seabird populations may be unable to sustain themselves in the long term.
2.2
Effects on other fauna:
Artificial lights not only attract and confuse seabirds but they also affect other bird
species. Light associated mortality of nocturnal avian migrants can involve
hundreds of thousands of birds colliding with artificial lights and has been
documented for more than a century (Allen, 1880; Rich and Longcore, 2006). Sillett
and Holmes (2002) have suggested that mortality during migration may be higher
than during the breeding and winter seasons. In Toronto, research by the Fatal
Light Awareness Programme has discovered that 140 different species of birds
have collided with buildings in Toronto alone during migration, and one expert
estimated that across North America, up to 100 million birds die in collisions each
year (FLAP, 2007). Light affects migration in a number of ways. Disorientation due
to light pollution can use up important fat stores that may be unrecoverable and
can lead to emaciation and death. Migrating passerines have been observed to
circle oil platforms continuously for hours to days and then fall exhausted and
emaciated as it severely depletes energy reserves; this is known as the holding or
trapping effect (Rich and Longcore, 2006). The population effects of additive
mortality associated with artificial lighting are unknown and could be profound
(Sillett and Holmes, 2002). Disorientation of roosting birds on migration may occur
and a suitable location to roost may not be found due to high levels of light
pollution which can also lead to collision and/or exhaustion. Night time migrating
birds such as Night Herons (Nycticorax nycticorax) may become disorientated and
confused by lights on tall buildings, this can lead to mortality through collision
and/or exhaustion (Rich and Longcore, 2004). In Malta there are numerous cases
each year of birds being brought to the Birdlife office both dead and alive after
colliding with buildings during nocturnal migration (See Section 7.0).
10
Mammals such as bats are also influenced by artificial lighting. They feed on
insects that are also attracted to the lights. This can benefit bat populations as it
supplies them with easy meals however the lights may also be detrimental as
many become disorientated and fall to the ground exhausted after fluttering
around the lights for a long period of time (Briggs, 2004). There has been some
suggestion by Rich and Longcore (2006) that lights can interfere with bat
navigation during nocturnal migrations or community flights and they may also
disrupt the bats circadian clocks. Artificial lighting can disturb bat roosts if they
illuminate their access points (Briggs, 2004).
Artificial night lighting is a well–documented cause of mortality among hatchling
sea turtles. It also disrupts the normal behaviour of the females searching for
appropriate nesting sites and of hatchlings attempting to orient towards the ocean
(Salmon, 2006). Finally, reptiles, plants, amphibians and insects have all been
shown to suffer negative effects from light pollution (Rich and Longcore 2006).
2.3
Effects on humans
The full implications of artificial lighting are only just beginning to be understood.
Initial research shows that human health can be significantly influenced by light
pollution (Davis et al, 2001). It can cause increased levels of anxiety and lack of
sleep; artificial light can also induce the loss of visual acuity. Fatigue and anxiety
can lead to medically defined stress that can cause further health problems
including hypertension and headaches. Several published studies also suggest a
link between exposure to light at night and risk of breast cancer, due to
suppression of the normal nocturnal production of melatonin (Health Council of
the Netherlands 2000; Davis et al, 2001).
Artificial lighting can blind drivers, cyclists and pedestrians and this can affect
road safety and contribute to accidents. This could ultimately lead to higher levels
of mortality in areas with badly shielded lights (Rich and Longcore, 2006)
3.0
Practical measures used internationally to reduce light pollution
The best method for reducing light pollution depends on exactly what the problem
is in any given instance. The available solutions centre on the reduction of the
above-mentioned effects of light pollution – glare, light trespass, over-illumination
and sky glow. The main focus of light reduction is to ensure that light is not
emitted above the horizontal. Possible solutions are outlined below.
3.1.
Full cut-off lighting fixtures.
11
By far the best choice for lighting (apart from switching lights off altogether) is the
‘Full Cut-Off’ lighting fixtures which direct their light output down only,
increasing the visibility of the night sky and decreasing the amount of energy
required to light a specific area. The light that would normally vector off into space
is collected and redirected down via a mirrored bowl that cowls the light source.
Nowadays all reputable lighting manufacturers produce full cut-off lighting
fixtures, in all conceivable designs. All future lighting schemes should insist on this
design. An explanation of cut-off lighting versus other lighting is given in Figure 3.
Full Cut-Off Lighting:
A luminaire light distribution where zero candela intensity occurs at or above an angle of
90º above nadir. Additionally the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not numerically
exceed 100 (10 per cent) at or above a vertical angle of 80º above nadir. This applies to all
lateral angles around the luminaire.
This should be the preferred type of light fitting. Full cut-off fittings provide excellent
performance in all situations, from the illumination of streets to sports arenas and
outside lights
Cut-Off Lighting:
A luminaire light distribution where the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not
numerically exceed 25 (2.5 percent) at or above an angle of 90º above nadir and 100 (10
percent) at or above a vertical angle 80º above nadir. This applies to all lateral angles
around the luminaire. These are an improvement on no cut-off at all, but should be
prohibited for ecologically-sensitive areas
Semi Cut-Off Lighting:
A luminaire light distribution where the candela per 1000 lamp lumens does not
numericallyexceed 50 (5 percent) at or above an angle of 90º above nadir and 200 (20
percent) at or above a vertical angle 80º above nadir. This applies to all lateral angles
around the luminaire. These types of fittings should be prohibited in ecologically-
sensitive areas.
Non Cut-Off Lighting:
A luminaire light distribution where there is no candela limitation in the zone above
maximum candela. These types of fittings should not be permitted by planning law.
Source:
http://www.kingluminaire.com/darksky.asp
Figure 3. Examples of types of Cut-Off Lighting
3.2
Light shields
To reduce light pollution, street lights can be shielded so that the pattern of
illumination is below the horizontal plane of the light fixture and light is directed
only where needed. These shields reduce upward radiation, avoiding glare). When
used in areas around breeding colonies of shearwaters and petrels, shields can
significantly reduce light pollution (Reed et al, 1985). In Hawaii, their use
12
decreased the attraction of Newell’s Shearwaters to lights by 40% (Reed et al, 1987;
Le Corre et al, 2002).
However, the installation of shields should only be used as a last resort. The
installation of a shield may reduce the amount of light pollution, but it continues to
waste energy in producing unneccesarily high levels of light. It is far more effective
to make a firm commitment in ecologically-sensitive areas to replace fittings in
such areas with properly-designed full cut-off lighting fixtures.
Additionally, a blanket prohibition on globe lights should be made. Partially-
shielded globe lights exist (Figure 5) however their performance concerning light
pollution is not sufficient as a substantial amount of light is still refracted by the
transparent globe itself and allowed to shine above the horizontal plane (Pace, pers
comm). Moreover globe lights are easily vandalised, as opposed to full cut-off
lighting fittings, which by their nature feature the bulb itself in a more
protected/enclosed space and hence more vandal-resistant.
Figure 4. Photograph demonstrating an Figure 5. Even partially shielded globe
effective light shield
lights emit high levels of light pollution
Source:
http://www.kingluminaire.com/darksky.asp
3.3
Planning system
This involves stipulating the use of light sources of the minimum intensity
necessary and limiting unnecessary or multiple lights. It requires legislation as well
as support and enforcement from the planning authority. Existing light plans can
be re-evaluated as well as carefully designing new ones. Replacing or retro-fitting
the existing light fixtures can be carried out where required. Zoning can be
undertaken, such as the Gozo Dark Skies initiative and a simple lighting plan for
areas within a predefined number of kilometres of shearwater colonies and other
ecological areas likely to be sensitive to light pollution can be drawn up.
Awareness raising among architects, builders and homeowners is important to
support these initiatives.
13
3.4
Use of different types and colours of light
Adjusting the type of lights used, so that the light waves emitted are less likely to
cause severe light pollution is important. This can include replacing older high
pressure mercury vapour lights with high pressure sodium vapour lamps and
combining them with “full cut-off luminaries” to reduce energy waste and glow
(Eisenbeis, 2006). Fortunately the former is already happening in Malta as no
mercury vapour lamps are being installed and eventually all remaining
installations will be phased out over the coming years.
Different wavelengths of light have different attractiveness to animals. White lights
appear to be the worst offenders for bird attraction, with yellow lights performing
better in this aspect. Red and blue lights are the least attractive. This may be
important in the construction of tall buildings with lights on top of them and in the
lighting of cranes etc. (Rich and Longcore, 2006). As will be seen in section 7.0, one
of the grounded birds in Malta was actually found on a construction crane which
indicates that lighting on these structures is likely to pose a serious hazard to the
birds.
3.5
Turning lights off using a timer, occupancy sensor or manually.
Outdoor lights can be activated by motion sensors rather than a switch. These
motion sensor lights not only save energy but also reduce levels of light pollution.
Many motion detectors can be set so that they are less sensitive to the movement of
small animals. Particularly in the case of security lighting, Passive Infra Red
detectors (PIR) should be used whenever possible. For domestic and small-scale
security lighting, a 150W (2000 lumen) tungsten halogen lamp is more than
adequate. Higher wattage lamps create too much light, more glare and darker
shadows (Pace, 2000). Equally, occupancy sensors can be used. Most simply, lights
can be switched off manually when not needed; awareness raising is thus critical in
reaching this goal.
3.6 Alternatives to road lighting
Especially in rural areas, preference should be given to passive means of warnings
to drivers and pedestrians. These include installation of reflector roadway markers,
lines, warnings or informational signs and reflectors attached to bollards at the
sides of the road. These are used in many parts of the world, and in many cases
eliminate the need for the use of artificial lighting altogether. As such they should
be seriously considered, and as well as reducing light pollution, would also result
in reduced upkeep and cost. Where road lighting has to be installed, then only full
cut-off lighting should be used. Nowadays the design of full cut-off road lighting
has advanced and it is possible to illuminate a road surface perfectly and to the
14
required standards, without having to increase the number of streetlights or
reduce their spacing.
3.7
Sports arenas
At sports centres, the main lighting of the facility (spotlighting or floodlighting,
etc.) should be turned off no more than half an hour after the end of the day’s
activities or event (Rich and Longcore, 2006). Throughout the Maltese Islands,
sports lighting is quickly becoming a major night-time problem (Pace, pers comm).
In addition to limiting use to the time of play, such lighting should make use of
properly-installed full cut-off lighting fixtures.
3.8
Lighthouses
Lighthouses are clearly a threat for migrating species, and there have been many
cases worldwide of shearwaters and petrels being grounded by lighthouses
(Gauthreaux and Belser, 2006). In studies overseas, intermittent lights or narrow
and less intense beams at lighthouses result in fewer bird losses when compared
with steady rotating beams (Rich & Longcore, 2006). Conversely, illuminating the
light house itself actually compounded the problem. Clearly lighthouses need to
continue to function effectively for safety purposes but trial changes to the beams
should be explored. In Malta, the grounding of four European Storm-petrels
around the Delimara lighthouse (see Section 7.1) suggests that this problem exists
here.
3.9
Lights at sea
Following evidence of the serious impact of squid fishing on seabirds, the
California Fish and Game Commission required that squid fishing vessels shield
their lights and use no more than 30,000 Watts per boat (Rich and Longcore, 2006).
Light-induced fishery permits need to be carefully considered in the context of
their effect on seabirds. Oil platforms, vessels using bunkering zones and other
fishing vessels are also often brightly lit and it is therefore important that these
lights be scaled back to reduce the attraction of birds.
3.10
Light restriction and conservation during peak of fledging
This refers to attempts to turn off street lighting and restrict the use of non-
beneficial interior and exterior lights during the peak of fledging each year (Le
Corre et al, 2002). As can be seen in data presented in Section 7.1, 100% of
shearwaters affected by light pollution in Malta are juveniles and thus newly
fledged birds, so this would be particularly important around key shearwater
colonies. In Malta, Yelkouan Shearwaters typically fledge in late June and July,
Cory’s Shearwaters in September and October and European Storm-petrels from
15
July to October. During these periods, extraneous hotel lights and non-essential
street lights could be switched off or dimmed in critical areas. Lighting systems in
buildings can be programmed to achieve a measurable reduction in night lighting
or ideally to ensure that all lights are extinguished during that period. All exterior
“vanity” lighting e.g. rooftop floods, perimeter spots, should be extinguished
during critical periods. Where lights must be left on all night, options to reduce
pollution could include installing motion–sensitive lighting, using desk lamps and
task lighting, reprogramming timers and adopting lower intensity lighting. The
covering of windows by curtains would also reduce levels of light pollution (Rich
and Longcore, 2006). New planning applications should be required to prevent an
increase in inappropriately lighted structures to help control levels of light
pollution. Again, awareness-raising is the single biggest action which is likely to
achieve success in this area but planning law and enforcement are also essential.
3.11 Education
Individual building owners such as hoteliers can implement strategies to carry
promotional messages about reducing bird collisions and attraction, such as
including information in elevators, putting up notices in the lobby, inserting
information on light pollution in clientele information packs, emailing tenants and
staff during critical periods and general educational displays. A communication
strategy would be the most effective way to outline how to educate people with
regards to light pollution; this initiative could link into government efforts to
reduce CO₂ emissions which lead to global warming. Guidelines for voluntary
compliance with light reduction techniques have been very successful elsewhere.
3.12
Rescue Campaigns
Rescue campaigns of birds occur in the Canaries, Hawaii, New Zealand, French
Polynesia and Reunion Island. The Save our Shearwater (SOS) campaign in Kauai
has recovered and released approximately 26,000 young shearwaters since 1978
(Day et al, 2003). Media coverage of the campaign promotes public awareness so
that people bring the birds in to carers rather than releasing them or leaving them
to die of starvation or predation. Before they are released they are examined for
any external and internal injuries, thus increasing the survival chances of the
stranded birds. It has been shown by Le Corre et al (2002) that rescue campaigns
may possibly be the best way to significantly reduce mortality by light pollution in
cases where larger numbers of birds are grounding. It is not yet clear whether the
birds survive when they are released due to trauma or injuries. Attaching
individual identification rings (through a scientific program) to grounded birds
before release may help to answer these questions.
16
4.0
Current legal situation with regards to development and light pollution
in Malta
There are currently no legal regulations relating to light pollution in Malta and
unfortunately, in the Structure Plan for the Maltese Islands, no mention is made of
the problem posed by light pollution. Guidelines are pending. However, at the
planning application stage, all aspects of any plan or project are assessed by the
Malta Environment and Planning Authority (MEPA), including the effects of
lighting. If necessary, conditions to eliminate or minimise these effects are
included in the permit, particularly with regards to Natura 2000 sites or
ecologically sensitive areas (J Borg, pers comm.). All Terms of Reference for major
projects requiring an Environmental Impact Assessment contain a section on the
effects with respect to light pollution (Pace, pers comm). It is hoped that this report
will highlight the importance of considering light pollution in the planning phase.
5.0
Light pollution and Maltese seabirds
On Malta, light pollution is believed to affect both species of shearwater breeding
on the archipelago and also European Storm-petrels. There are even cases where
single streetlights have been sufficient to cause partial abandonment of nesting
colonies in Malta; e.g. the Hal Far colony (West of Wied Ix-Xaqqa to Wied Moqbol
Cliffs) in southern Malta was partially abandoned by Yelkouan Shearwaters after
the introduction of domestic and industrial lighting (JJ Borg, in prep.). The birds
abandoned a historical section of their colony along the cliffs affected by the lights,
but remained on the unaffected side behind the headland (which was shielded
from light pollution). Even minor light sources such as car headlights and torches
have been seen to disturb the birds while they are at sea or in flight and this can
result in Yelkouan Shearwaters behaving abnormally, and remaining away from
breeding crevices (JJ Borg, in prep). The number of nesting attempts by Yelkouan
Shearwaters and other Maltese seabirds that fail due to light disturbance has not
been quantified, but it is likely to be significant (JJ Borg, pers comm.).
First time breeders of Cory’s Shearwater tend to be more prone to disturbance
during the egg stage than established breeders (Borg and Cachia-Zammit, 1995).
Cory’s Shearwaters at the Hal Far colony have also completely ceased to breed on
top of the cliffs and along the upper section of the cliff face since extensive lighting
was introduced in the industrial area as well as the docking area inside the
Freeport. A small colony of Cory’s Shearwaters inside Xlendi Bay in Gozo was
abandoned when electricity (and thus new sources of lighting) was introduced to
the area (Sultana & Gauci 1970)
Every year, a number of fledgling Yelkouan and Cory’s Shearwaters in Malta
become disorientated and fly inland. This will be discussed further in Section 7.0.
17
6.0
Methodology for assessing levels of light pollution in Malta
It is extremely difficult to assess light pollution in a quantitative manner. A
detailed study requires expensive equipment, complex calculations and long term
studies. For this reason, most studies focus on the effect on the birds rather than on
the light pollution itself. This study combines a number of methods to obtain a
pragmatic baseline of light pollution levels in Malta. Future studies could be
undertaken to confirm the levels of light pollution being emitted quantatively if
required. However, the methods used by the current study provides a
comprehensive overview of the causes and impacts of light pollution in Malta
which is sufficient to initiate action to reduce the problem.
6.1 Analysis of grounded birds
An analysis of grounded bird data was initially undertaken. Data was collected on
the number of Yelkouan Shearwaters, Cory’s Shearwaters and European Storm-
petrels found inland (either dead or alive). The data analysed covered the period
1978 to 2007 and included location, age of the bird, condition of the bird and likely
cause of grounding. This data was then mapped to ascertain whether there were
particular areas that were attracting large numbers of birds. In addition, in 2007
data was included on collisions or grounding by other light sensitive bird species
(particularly nocturnal migrants). This data was collected from BirdLife Malta
members, members of the public and from other NGOs receiving injured birds.
6.2 CASE STUDY - Light pollution sources affecting the Rdum tal-Madonna
Yelkouan colony
A Case Study was also carried out at the Rdum tal-Madonna breeding colony to
investigate the sources and impact of light pollution at this colony. The Rdum tal-
Madonna site was selected as the study site as it holds the largest number of
Yelkouan Shearwaters in Malta (approximately 500 pairs) and measures to reduce
light pollution affecting this area are therefore likely to have the biggest impact. In
addition, the problems of light pollution on the site typify the issues at other
colonies (JJ Borg, pers comm.) and as such, the findings and recommendations at
Rdum tal-Madonna can be used to inform light pollution reduction at other sites.
For the Case Study, two methods were utilised; (i) photographic analysis of light
pollution and (ii) assessment at the source of the pollution to assess light pollution
affecting seabird colonies in Malta. It should be noted that as fieldwork was
carried out in the winter, levels of light pollution are likely to be comparatively
low compared to summer time when hotels have higher occupancy, restaurants
are vying for businesses and night-time activity on beaches and along promenades
increase dramatically.
18
Photographic analysis
The Rdum tal-Madonna colony was visited after dark on four occasions from
September to December 2007 at a time between 18.00 to 22.00. The observer
selected three high vantage points within 50m of the cliffs in the northern, eastern
and southern parts of the site (the western side was excluded as it is away from the
breeding cliffs) and surveyed 360° looking for signs of light pollution. Where
bright lights were clearly visible, photographs were taken of these areas using a
tripod mounted camera (long exposure photos using a Nikon D70 with 18-70mm
lens) and the source of the pollution was identified (where possible). Only sources
of light pollution visible within a 7km radius were included in the report for
practical reasons (to avoid including the entirety of the Maltese islands and to
focus on the key sources of nearby light pollution likely to attract Yelkouan
Shearwaters). The pollution source was graded for its severity as shown in Table 1.
Grade
Description
Grade I
low level pollution, visible only as a distant glow
Grade II
low to medium level pollution; glow with some specific light sources visible
Grade III
medium level pollution; specific light sources visible
Grade IV
medium to high level pollution; multiple specific light source or very bright single lights, intense light emissions
Grade V
high level pollution; multiple specific light sources or very bright single lights close to the colony, intense light emissions
Table 1. Grading of light pollution severity
.
Where entire towns were causing the problem, rather than individual lights, the
towns were split into sections on the photographs taken from the colony and the
sections were dealt with separately.
Confirmation of sources and light pollution assessment at source
Having identified the sources of pollution at the colony, the researcher then visited
each location where light pollution had been identified and assessed the light
sources identified as causing a problem. GPS readings were also taken, and in the
case of hotels, the name of the hotel was noted. Street names were also taken where
relevant. Photographs were taken to exemplify the light pollution issues but these
are by no means exhaustive.
Finally, researchers visited the sources of the light pollution again to ascertain
which methods of light pollution reduction would be most suitable for the sources
in question.
19
7.0
Results
7.1
Grounded birds
Every year, a number of Yelkouan Shearwaters in Malta become disorientated and
fly inland. Between 1978 and 2007 a total of 86 birds were reported to BirdLife
Malta. The results are displayed in Table 2 and Figure 6.
Yelkouan Shearwater
Cory’s Shearwater
European Storm-petrel
Figure 6. Map illustrating the location of all recorded Procellariiformes groundings in Malta
20
Note: Sites shaded in grey (Buġġiba, St. Pauls, Xemxija, Qawra and Salina) are all in the vicinity of each other and
form an almost continuous strip of light to the south of the Rdum tal-Madonna colony.
Table 2.
Number of grounded birds, by species, recorded in Malta between 1987 and 2007.
Disoriented shearwaters and petrels were found in a total of 35 locations. For all
species combined, the five key focal areas for groundings were found to be Ħal Far
(including Għar Ħsan), Ċirkewwa, Għadira and Delimara Lighthouse. Considering
the Yelkouan Shearwater separately, the top five epicentres of these incidents were
Għadira, Buġibba, Ċirkewwa, Ħal Far and Comino.
Most of the birds received by BirdLife Malta are unharmed and can be ringed and
released. However, in some cases, grounded birds do suffer severe concussion or
other injuries which result in either immediate death or injuries that are so severe
that they need to be euthanised. There is no way of quantifying how many other
Location of grounding
No. of birds
Cory's Shearwater
Yelkouan Shearwater
European Storm-petrel
% of total
Hal Far / Ghar Hasan
1
1
17
Unknown
1
3
1
16
Cirkewwa
6
4
2
7
Ghadira
6
3
3
7
Delimara Lighthouse
4
1
3
5
Xlendi
Bay
4
4
5
Birzebbuga
3
1
2
3
Bugibba
3
3
3
Ghar Lapsi
3
3
3
Comino
2
2
2
St Pauls
2
2
2
Zurrieq
2
1
1
2
Qawra / Salina
2
1
1
2
Marsalforn Bay
2
1
1
2
Blue Grotto
1
1
1
Cospicua
1
1
1
Gharb
1
1
1
Gnejna
1
1
1
Golden Bay
1
1
1
Landrijjiet
1
1
1
Manikata
1
1
1
Mellieha
1
1
1
Mgarr ix xini
1
1
1
Naxxar
1
1
1
Pembroke
1
1
1
Sannat,Gozo
1
1
1
Sliema
1
1
1
St Venera
1
1
1
Ta Cenc
1
1
1
Tarxien
1
1
1
Victoria, Gozo
1
1
1
Xaghra
1
1
1
Xemxija
1
1
1
Total
87
5
2
8
21
birds may perish after attraction to artificial lights, either from collisions or because
they are unable to take off in urban areas and thus starve or are predated. It is also
important to note that 100% of these birds were juveniles, which indicates that this
problem is most acute for newly fledged birds which have just left their breeding
colonies.
Finally, a further 47 birds were found offshore apparently disorientated; these
birds have been excluded from the analysis because it is difficult to ascertain
whether they were solely disorientated by light but it is likely that at least some of
them were affected by light pollution.
This problem is not restricted to seabirds. Every year, BirdLife Malta receives
birds from a range of species that have become disorientated during nocturnal
migration and crash into buildings. Extensive data has only been collected on
these cases since 2007. Table 3 shows all birds brought into BirdLife Malta in 2007
with injuries consistent with collision.
Species
Total
Alive
Dead
% juvenile
Little Bittern
10
8
2
33.3
Moorhen
2
2
0
50
Black-necked Grebe
2
2
0
100
Scops Owl
1
1
0
na
Totals
15
13
2
Table 3. Injured birds found with injuries consistent with collision with buildings in Malta (2007
data
only
)
As these birds are passing over the islands, the locations where they were found
were very widespread – indeed the 15 individuals were recorded from 12 locations
in Malta and 1 in Gozo. The site with the most grounded birds was Msida with
three birds (all Little Bitterns).
22
7.2
CASE STUDY : Rdum tal-Madonna colony
Light pollution sources affecting shearwater colony at Rdum tal-Madonna LIFE
project site
The following locations were found to be the main causes of light pollution for the
Rdum tal-Madonna colony
i.
Buġibba
ii.
Mellieħa
iii.
Adventure Campsite & White Tower
iv.
Ċirkewwa
v.
Għadira
In addition, Buġibba, Ċirkewwa and Għadira both featured in the top five
locations for groundings of Yelkouan Shearwaters in the analysis presented in
Section 7.1.
Bugibba and Mellieħa are both south of the Yelkouan Shearwater colony at Rdum
tal-Madonna (Figure 7) and both towns produce high levels of light pollution at
night, Buġibba particularly so. The Adventure Campsite is located on the
boundaries of the protected area and the White Tower is within the protected area,
opposite the island of Comino. Ċirkewwa is the ferry port at the northernmost
point of Malta and Għadira bay is at the bottom of L-Aħrax Tal- Mellieħa
peninsular.
Figure 7. Map showing Rdum tal-Madonna colony and key areas of light pollution affecting the
colony.
23
7.2.1 Light pollution from Buġibba
Figure 8. Light pollution from Buġibba opposite the Yelkouan Shearwater colony at Rdum tal-
Madonna. Buġibba was divided into five different sections for the analysis, as shown above.
In Figure 8, the town of Buġibba has been photographed from Rdum tal-Madonna
and the photograph split into five sections to enable identification of the areas with
the highest severity of light pollution. As can be seen by Table 4, Buġibba
constitutes a serious source of artificial light and all sections were categorised as
severity 4 or 5. It should be noted that from this angle, Section 4 is shielded by
St.Paul’s Island which reduces some of the intensity of the glow
Section
Light Pollution level
1
5
2
4
3
5
4
4
5
5
Table 4. Results of light pollution from each section within Buġibba when viewed from Rdum tal-
Madonna
24
Buġibba – Results from light source specific analysis
Location
in town -
section
GPS
Specific location
Item causing light pollution
Photograph
No.
1
n/a
Buġibba promenade
(continues through all
sections)
Streetlights
9
2
N 35 57 29
E 14 25 23
(beginning of
street)
widespread
Street lights made up of two
rows of globes and a row of
tall lamp posts
9
3
N 35 57 17
E 14 25 02
(in front of
hotel)
The New Dolmen Hotel*
Excessive hotel room porch
lighting
10
3
As above
Amazonian Night Club
2 spotlights
n/a
3
As above
San Antonio Hotel and
Spa
Excessive hotel room porch
lighting
n/a
3
N 35 57 14
E 14 25 24
Buġibba beach
Beach light with reflectors
causing glare; the row of
globes and a row of lamp
posts can be seen on the street
11
4
N 35 57 06
E 14 24 49
(in centre)
Central Square
Multiple unnecessary
decorative globe lights.
12
5
N 35 57 08
E 14 24 43
Buġibba promenade
Large spotlight within a
basketball court.
13
5
As above
McDonalds and
surrounding area
Globe lights and unnecessary
spotlights on outdoor
playground
n/a
Table 5. Results of light pollution from each light source identified as a problem in Buġibba
*Note that the Dolmen Hotel is mentioned in particular because it can be seen from Rdum tal-Madonna
and exemplifies the issues with hotels in Buġibba, but it should be made clear that other hotels in the
town are causing similar problems and would benefit equally from similar light reduction measures.
25
Figure 9. Section 2 of Buġibba showing street lights made up of two rows of globes and a row of
tall lamp posts.
Figure 10. The main town of Buġibba (start of section 3) showing the New Dolmen Hotel with its
multiple lighted porches
Figure 11. Beach light reflectors in section 3 of Buġibba with reflectors shining the light
downwards; the row of globes and a row of lamp posts can be seen on the street. Over illumination
and inappropriate selection of lights is causing massive light pollution in this area.
26
Figure 12. Section 4 of Buġibba with many decorative lights.
Figure 13. Large spotlight within a basketball court in section 5.
Figure 14. Coastline Hotel beyond section 1 of Buġibba (Salinas)
.
Although this hotel cannot be
seen from Rdum tal-Madonna, it is on the outskirts of Buġibba and its light pollution is so severe, it
was thought important to include it in the report.
27
7.2.2 Light pollution from Mellieħa
Figure 15. Mellieħa, as seen from Rdum tal-Madonna
Overall, the severity of light pollution from Mellieħa is slightly lower than
Buġibba, with most artificial lights sources being from street lights and houses.
There were two specific light sources identified as causing severe pollution from
Mellieħa. One was found to be a spot light that points at the Mellieħa parish
church (Figure 16). The lower light was a floodlight situated half way up a crane
(Figure 17). A more diffuse source was from residential housing.
Section
Light Pollution Level
1
4
2
4
3
2
Table 6. Results of light pollution of the two lights found within Mellieħa.
28
Mellieħa – results from light source specific analysis
Location in
town - Section
GPS
Specific
location
Item causing light
pollution
Photograph
No.
1
N 35 57 37
E 14 21 39
On street in
front of
church
Parish church
spotlight
16
1
N 35 57 41
E 14 21 38
Throughout
garden
under the
church
Globe Lights
18
2
N 35 57 58
E14 21 49
Top of
Crane
Crane at worksite
17
1, 3
N 35 57 38
E 14 21 43
Along the
roads
Streetlights made
up of tall
lampposts
19
Table 7. Results of light pollution from each light source identified as a problem in Mellieħa
Figure 16. Spotlights around Mellieħa parish church.
29
Figure 18. Lamp posts situated in small garden under church
Figure 19. Streetlights near Mellieħa church
Figure 17. Floodlight situated half way up a crane.
These figures highlight the key areas for attention, but the list is not exhaustive.
30
7.2.3 Light pollution from White Tower and Adventure Campsite
Around the north of the colony lies the White Tower and the Adventure Campsite
(Figure 20 and 21). The White Tower has a wall light which is causing light
pollution. The Adventure campsite has a lamp post and an upward pointing wall
light (Figure 21). The toilet light (a strip light) is also emitting large amounts of
light pollution. Overall, due the close proximity of the sites to the colony and the
intensity of the single lights, these two locations were graded as “3”.
Figure 19.
White Tower at Rdum tal-Madonna
Figure 20. Adventure Campsite from Rdum tal-Madonna
Location
Light Pollution Level
White Tower
4
Adventure Campsite
4
Table 8. Results of light pollution in the Rdum tal-Madonna immediate vicinity
31
Adventure Campsite and White Tower – results from light source specific
analysis
Location
Item causing light
pollution
Photograph
No.
White Tower
Wall light
21
Adventure
Campsite
Wall light
22
Adventure
Campsite
Street Light
22
Adventure
Campsite
Toilet light
n/a
Table 9. Results of light pollution from each light source identified as a problem at the Adventure
Campsite and the White Tower
Figure 21. Light on White Tower
Figure 22. The Adventure Campsite showing the lamp post and wall light.
32
7.2.4 Light pollution from Għadira
Note: the bright light under section 2 on the near side of the Bay should be ignored as it is originating from
passing vehicles.
Figure 23. Light pollution at Għadira.
Għadira Bay was split into three sections, as shown in Figure 23. In section one, the
light pollution is mainly emanating from residential flats and the RIU Seabank
Hotel at the end of the road. At the hotel, all balconies have light bulbs switched on
even when they are not in use. In section two most of the light pollution is coming
from streetlights along the road situated behind the beach. In section three, a
building thought to be a bar is generating light pollution through a spot-lighted
exterior. The rest of the light sources are situated in Mellieħa (see section 7.3.3).
However, this photograph was taken in the winter. It is well documented that in
the summer, extreme levels of light pollution are produced from activities on the
beach (e.g. discos, BBQs and parties with generators etc) and from the lines of
kiosks which use very bright neon lights and spot lights.
Section
Light Pollution Level
1
3
2
4 (5 in summer)
3
2
Table 10. Results of light pollution within Għadira.
33
Figure 24. The project site from Ghadira beach, showing very near proximity (Rdum Tal Madonna
is the spit of land in the centre of the picture
Ghadira – results from light source specific analysis
Location in
town - Section
GPS
Specific
location
Item causing light
pollution
Photograph
No.
1, 2
N 35 58 05
E 14 21 04
Along the
street behind
the bay
Streetlights
25
2
N 35 57 56
E 14 21 13
Seabank Hotel
Excessive hotel room porch
lighting
26
2
N 35 57 57
E 14 21 12
Seabank Hotel
Light Globe
27
3
N 35 58 25
E 14 20 58
“Adira” Bar
Spotlights
29
Table 11. Results of light pollution from each light source identified as a problem in Għadira
Figure 25. Streetlights along Għadira Bay (in front of reserve)
34
Figure 26. RIU Seabank Hotel with globe lights and porches visible. Mellieha Bay Hotel is similarly
brightly lit.
Figure 27. One of a series of kiosks at Għadira beach known to be brightly lit in the spring and
summer
Figure 28. Poor quality street lighting at Għadira beach compounds the problem.
35
Figure 29. “Adira” Bar situated in Għadira Bay with spotlights visible
In addition, the Mellieha Bay hotel has excessive lighting in its porches and
grounds. Due to its location, it cannot be seen directly from Rdum tal-Madonna
but the light pollution being emitted is likely to affect the birds as they fly away
from the cliffs nonetheless. Again, the above list exemplifies the issues in the bay
but is by no means exhaustive.
36
7.2.5 Ċirkewwa; results from Rdum tal-Madonna
Figure 29. Ċirkewwa from Rdum tal-Madonna
In figure 29, Ċirkewwa was divided into 3 sections. In section 1, light pollution is
mainly being generated by streetlights. Although these are not visible from the
project site, they still produce a glare which is then visible especially with low
clouds. In section 2, there are a series of spotlights to illuminate the route used by
passengers who are boarding the ferry. In section 3 there is a row of streetlights.
The Paradise Bay Hotel has a row of globe lights in front of it (this is missing in the
above picture but is shown in Figure 28)
Section
Light Pollution Level
1
2
2
4
3
4
Table 12. Results of light pollution Ċirkewwa.
37
Ċirkewwa – results from light source specific analysis
Location
in town -
Section
GPS
Specific
location
item
causing
light
pollution
Photo
graph
No.
1
N 35 58 11
E 14 20 08
On street to
Ċirkewwa to
Għadira
Streetlights
30
1
N 35 59 11
E 14 19 54
In front of
The Paradise
Bay Hotel
Globe
Lights
31
2
N 35 59 16
E 14 19 45
Along the
pathway for
boarding
passengers
Spotlights
32
3
N 35 59 20
E 14 19 45
Along the
dock
Streetlights
33
Table 13. Results of light pollution from each light source identified as a problem in Ċirkewwa
Figure 30. Streetlights on the way to Ċirkewwa from Għadira
38
Figure 31. Light Globes in front of The Paradise Bay Hotel.
Figure 32. Picture showing both spotlights and streetlights on dock
8.0
Discussion and Recommendations to tackle light pollution affecting
Rdum tal-Madonna
Malta has a unique scenic environment with ecologically important protected areas
as well as an important architectural heritage. Rdum tal-Madonna in particular is
an extremely important site from an ecological point of view. However, light
pollution is a growing and serious problem in the islands and even areas that have
remained darker due to lack of development in the immediate vicinity, such as
Rdum tal-Madonna, are now being affected by the glow from light pollution along
the coast. This has implications not just for wildlife on the site and beyond but for
human health and, importantly, for climate change. Reducing unnecessary lighting
is therefore in the interests of the community as a whole. Intelligent planning of
lighting is critical to ensure that the needs of both people and wildlife can be met;
the quality of lighting should be improved to ensure that less lighting is more
effectively directed, thus reducing light pollution and saving energy.
The results of the study demonstrate the severity of the light pollution situation in
Malta and around Rdum tal-Madonna. In Buġibba, one single street had two rows
of globe lights which cause severe light pollution, reflectors on the beach which are
serious offenders and an additional unnecessary row of streetlights without a full
cut off design. Combined with the fact that the hotels in Buġibba have multiple
lights on in porches, light pollution from windows, globe lights in the grounds, lit
facades and the light from restaurants and the amount of wasted energy and levels
of light pollution are staggering. This is just one of many examples of poor quality
lighting causing high levels of pollution. Furthermore, it is important to note that
globe lights are still being installed even recently in Malta, despite the fact that
they are one of the worst emitters of light pollution. This occurred for example in
39
Xemxija Bay in 2006. This shows that the situation is deteriorating rapidly rather
than improving.
Guidelines have been drawn up by Maltese Light Pollution Awareness Group
(LPAG) to reduce light pollution which are practical and helpful; we strongly
believe that these guidelines should be expanded and adopted into Maltese
planning legislation. Where necessary, reference can be made to planning
legislation and practice in other European countries such as the UK, Italy and
Spain. In the U.K., for example, the government has provided the tools required to
bring action against those deemed to cause a nuisance through light pollution. The
"Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act" Chapter 16, Section 102 has a
clause regarding "statutory nuisance: lighting". This updates the previous
legislation, The Environmental Protection Act of 1990, by adding a subsection that
relates to "artificial light emitted from premises so as to be prejudicial to health or a
nuisance". This now gives the individual the recourse to law to try and reduce the
amount of light pollution being emitted reducing the visibility of the stars and
affecting wildlife or health. Equally, in the Canary Islands, the local government
has fitted light cowls to all street lighting that stops light interfering with their
observatories or causing light pollution in other ways.
Clearly it is important to balance the needs of wildlife with human health, safety
and business interests. Nonetheless, we need to make a start to cut down on the
levels of pollution being generated. The results from the grounded birds clearly
indicate that Malta follows a global trend of attracting seabirds to artificial lights.
Given the international importance of the seabird colonies in the Maltese Islands, it
is important that we act. The following recommendations contained within this
report are therefore cost effective, relevant suggestions to reducing light pollution,
which will also result in cost savings and reduced emissions of CO₂. All methods
have been proven to work elsewhere.
8.1 Bugibba; light pollution sources and reduction proposals
Buġibba is one of the liveliest holiday destinations in Malta where bars, restaurants
and clubs can be found in abundance. This has resulted in considerable artificial
night lighting. The night time glare from Buġibba from its decorative and hotel
lights can be seen from the photos in Section 7. This serious light pollution has the
potential to attract many fledgling Yelkouan and Cory’s Shearwaters every year.
There are several key issues in Buġibba. These are dealt with separately below
•
Street lighting
There are frequently multiple rows of unshielded street lighting. Globe lights are a
particular problem as the light is emitted in all directions rather than being
40
focused. They cause serious over-illumination and throw more than half of their
light output above the horizontal.
It is therefore suggested that only one row of street lighting should be illuminated,
particularly at the critical fledging period (June to July). Globe lamps should be
replaced with full cut-off lighting designs. If this is not possible, at the very
minimum, globe lamps should be capped to reduce upward radiation. Main street
lights should be shielded. Some streetlights are also supplemented by spotlights on
the top which are entirely unnecessary and should be removed or permanently
switched off. By reducing the lights in this area and using light shields the area
would still be well lit for tourists along the pathway at night.
•
Beach lighting
Beach lights in Buġibba are in addition to the standard street lighting. These
should be switched off in the critical fledging period (June to July) and replaced
with a full cut off design instead of the current upwards reflector designs which
are incredibly wasteful and produce significant light pollution.
•
Hotel lighting
The New Dolmen Hotel is a good example of how poor lighting contributes to
light pollution, but simple measures can be taken to reduce this problem
.
There
are outside wall lights at every apartment; every single light is on continuously
after dark. If the lights were on only when the occupant switched it on or by using
a motion sensor, rather than as a matter of course, energy would be saved and
light pollution reduced. In addition, these and all other exterior lights should be
replaced with a full cut-off design.
Other hotels are causing light pollution due to over illumination with
inappropriate lights in the grounds, especially from globe lights. Again, replacing
the lights will help, but switching off some or all of the lights during June and July
would also make a significant contribution in the meantime and as a bare
minimum, globe lights should be capped.
Room lighting in hotels is also resulting in light pollution. Advising guests of the
effects of light pollution, particularly in the breeding season and asking them to
keep curtains closed during the hours of darkness would help to reduce this
problem. Alternatively, special windows can be fitted in hotels which reduce light
pollution emissions through the glass.
•
Restaurant lighting
