Canal of St. Bartholomew in Seča/Sezza: Social construction of the seascape

2.1 The development of the Canal of St. Bartholomew and its surroundings through time

The Canal of St. Bartholomew lies in the southwestern part of Slovenia, in the settlement of Seča named after the homonymous peninsula. It is located in the multicultural area represented as a world where “Slavic and Italian cultures and languages meet” and where bilingualism is officially recognized. For this reason, the Canal of St. Bartholomew has – beside its official Italian name “Canale di San Bartolomeo” and local colloquial Italian name “Canale di San Bortolo” – also several Slovene variants of denominations: “Kanal Sv. Jerneja,” “Jernejev kanal,” and “Kanal Jernej.” The mouth of the canal is situated in the northeastern corner of the Adriatic Sea and is called the Bay of Piran, where the national border runs between Croatia and Slovenia.

At the same time, the Canal of St. Bartholomew lies on the margin of the Sečovlje saltpans, which have been formed in the shallow sea basin filled with sediments brought by the Dragonja River, between the peninsulas Seča in the north and Savudrija in the south. More precisely, the Canal of St. Bartholomew delimits the Sečovlje saltpans from the surrounding low hills on the northern side. Its function was to supply sea water to the saltpans. According to some sources, the canal is only fed water from the sea, as there are no tributary flows from inland [7]. Paradoxically, according to some other sources, this water flow is also not seldomly called “Jernejski potok” or in English “Bartholomew’s creek” [8], giving the impression that the canal also carried fresh water. The canal is approximately 3.9 km long and not wider than 40 m, excluding at the mouth. The sea bottom is muddy, and the depth is between 0.5 and 2 m in some parts of the mouth [9].

The area was already settled in the Roman Period. In and near the mouth of the Canal of St. Bartholomew, the remnants of a Roman villa (villa marittima) were found with the remains of a Roman port – the pier, which is now submerged [10,11]. The first written mention of the Sečovlje saltpans dates to 804 [12]. Throughout the history, the only buildings present near the Canal of St. Bartholomew were various salt warehouses. During the Serenissima period, five wooden salt warehouses were built at the mouth of the canal, from where salt was shipped to Venice [13]. At the beginning of the eighteenth century, three wooden salt warehouses were present in the Seča area (near the mouth and near the settlement of Sv. Jernej/San Bortolo) [14,15,16]. In the first half of the nineteenth century, the Austro-Hungarians built several new salt warehouses [17]. All the aforementioned warehouses have been demolished.

Our study area actually does not cover the entire Canal of St. Bartholomew, but only the second half, an about 2 km long stretch between the settlement of Sv. Jernej and the mouth of the canal. Figure 1 shows the study area and the local toponyms for various areas and the location of Seča within Slovenia. The zone around the mouth of the Canal of St. Bartholomew is locally called Ribič (Fisherman). In the middle of the canal, near the other extremity of our study area, is the small settlement of Sv. Jernej. Right beside it, toward the mouth, the factory Začimba (Spice) was constructed, lending its name to the entire nearby area.

Figure 1

Location of the Canal of St. Bartholomew [18,19].

Figure 2 shows the Canal of St. Bartholomew at the time of the Franziscean Cadaster (1827), which was the first cadastral map for this area. We can also see that the saltpans were very active, and in the Ribič zone, there was one salt warehouse (Ro. Magazeno, meaning Reggio Magazeno or state warehouse). There were only a few houses along the canal.

Figure 2

Canal of St. Bartholomew in the Franziscean Cadaster [20].

Figure 3 shows the Canal of St. Bartholomew in 1954. The saltpans still seemed active, and the zone where the Začimba factory would be later constructed was occupied by a big sports camp, and there are some small piers in the Canal of St. Bartholomew and very few buildings in its vicinity. When compared with 1827 (Figure 2), more houses were present, especially in the Začimba zone. Figure 4 shows the year in which buildings that are now present in the Ribič and Začimba zones were constructed. The construction started in 1900 in the Ribič zone, and the first house in the Začimba zone, the so-called Doppolavoro di Sicciole building, was built in 1929. This brick building with stone frames was a kind of cultural home for saltpans workers. One year later, in 1930, a house for a transformer station was built, and in 1947, the “boathouse” building was constructed.

Figure 3

Canal of St. Bartholomew in an aerial photograph from 1954 [21].

Figure 4

Construction chronology of buildings along the canal, (a) the Začimba zone and (b) the Ribič zone [22].

All three aforementioned houses in the Začimba zone are shown in Figure 5 representing an old postcard dating to before the Second World War.

Figure 5

Photograph of the Doppolavoro, the boathouse and the transformer station from the 1930s [23].

In 1954, the Začimba factory producing spices launched its operations in the former Doppolavoro building. Initially, only it produced spices. In 1964, the Začimba factory merged with two other food producing companies and changed its name to Droga Portorož [24].

The following aerial photograph is from 1971 [25]. Unfortunately, it does not cover the entire area; the Začimba zone is missing. Figure 4 shows that the major factory buildings were constructed in the 1970s and the last two in 1980. If we take a look at the canal of St. Bartholomew, we can see a few small piers but almost no boats in it.

The situation had radically changed by 1997 (Figure 6). The Začimba zone was filled with factory buildings, as shown in Figure 4. In the Ribič zone, a small shipyard for repairing traditional wooden ships was built in 1973. According to [13], some repairing facilities and a salt port were already present there during the Serenissima. It should be added that this period also witnessed an increasing number of (private) houses in proximity of the Canal of St. Bartholomew. The biggest change that can be observed in this photograph is that in the Canal of St. Bartholomew, there are many small piers and boats, which means that the trend of constructing illegal berths here started somewhere between 1971 and 1997, or in the 1980s according to one interlocutor.

Figure 6

Canal of St. Bartholomew in an aerial photograph from 1997 [26].

Figure 7 shows the Canal of St. Bartholomew in 2003. In 2001, the food producing factory Droga moved out from the Začimba factory complex and was sold to a private owner. Compared with the situation in 1997, the number of piers and boats (illegal berths) augmented.

Figure 7

Canal of St. Bartholomew in an aerial photograph from 2003 [27].

Figure 8 shows the photograph from 2017. Although it may be said that at least from the beginning of the new millennium the problem of illegal berths in the Canal of St. Bartholomew was very real and acute, the photograph shows that their number increased significantly until 2017. Also notable was the increase in the number of new houses built near the canal. This observation becomes even more alarming, considering that in 1990, the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park was established, meaning that apart from the entire saltpans, the Canal of St. Bartholomew is a protected area as well [28]. In 1992, the Sečovlje saltpans were included in the list of Wetlands of International Importance under the Ramsar Convention [28].

Figure 8

Canal of St. Bartholomew in an aerial photograph from 2017 [18].

In 2004, the Government of Slovenia ratified the NATURA 2000 sites with the Decree on Special Areas of Conservation (Natura 2000 sites), and the Decree on Amendments and Supplements to the Decree on Special Areas of Conservation (Natura 2000 sites), and the Sečovlje saltpans became a Natura 2000 site [28].

The website of the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park features the following statement expressing hope that at least the proclamation of the Natura 2000 site will change something:

“In spite of the secured legal protection on a national scale (Decree of the Republic of Slovenia on the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park) and international protection framework (the Ramsar Convention Regulations), ideas about all kinds of encroachments upon the saltpans area and its transformation can still be detected in various (municipal and national) planning documents. For this very reason, the proclamation of Natura 2000 is no doubt of crucial importance, given that the state is obliged to protect and suitably conserve such areas” [28].

The comparison of the photographs leads us to the conclusion that the appearance and the function of the Canal of St. Bartholomew and its surroundings have changed drastically from the function of sea water supply to the saltpans to an illegal “harbor” for small boats inside the protected area. The last official aerial photograph of this area dates to 2017; however, as we observed during the field work, not much had changed by 2019.

2.2 Walking along the Canal of St. Bartholomew through an anthropological gaze

This part of the article is focused on mobile ethnography [5] and is based on walking around the area within a longer time period, aiming to read the place as a cultural landscape with multiple meanings, explaining various levels of reality embodied in the landscape: the material, socioeconomic, ideological or symbolic levels of the landscape, and the question of identity (local, domestic, foreign, and estranged). It will show how our knowledge about the Canal of St. Bartholomew was produced through the process of mobile ethnography. On the basis of photographs that were taken over a longer period of time (in 2010, 2011, and 2019), written and visual representations in social media (local newspapers, Facebook groups, and maritime forums), and various oral sources, such as informal occasional interviews with several interlocutors, we are going to show how the canal is constructed as a contested and liminal landscape [29].

From the main road leading to the border with Croatia, we turn right toward Seča. A view of the Church of St. Bartholomew and the saltpans opens to us. Some larger buildings rise in front of the shimmering water, while smaller ones are surrounded by olive trees and some pines. We pass several houses and notice a bigger yellow one, a fountain, and a church. Then, we continue to the middle of the bridge, to the entrance of the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park, and from the water side, we see the silhouette of abandoned and empty industrial buildings.

Going back, we can notice the Barcaffe’s inscription on a broken advertising board and identify the former factory Začimba (Figure 9).

Figure 9

Former Začimba factory.

The Canal of St. Bartholomew is located on the margin of the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park, which was the property of Mobitel, until this mobile telephony provider was sold to Telekom. The Canal of St. Bartholomew lies at the foot of the hill, where the scattered but big houses were built. Running along the canal is the local street, the Route of Health and Friendship, a walking and cycling route, Parenzana in Italian, Porečanka in Slovene. Parenzana was named after the former narrow railway connecting Trieste and Parenzo (Italian) (or Poreč in Croatian), which actually did not pass here (Figure 10).

Figure 10

Bicycle lane along the Canal of St. Bartholomew.

In the Canal of St. Bartholomew, there are several berths for mainly sailing boats, speedboats, and rare fishing vessels. We go back from the bridge passing dilapidated buildings and a messy fenced courtyard where three buildings attract our attention with their colorful brick facades. After searching the site in Google on our smartphones, we learn that they are an old electricity transformer, a cultural home of saltpans workers, and an old boathouse. The older buildings were privatized together with newer socialist buildings and are now under monument protection, listed in the register of cultural heritage. However, as a private property, are they really protected behind a fence?

A warning sign that the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park mounted on the boathouse in March 2016 advises boat owners to remove their boats or else they will be penalized for violating the Water Act and the Park Management Plan. The second sign states that the owners of vessels will receive a refund for the use of the infrastructure by the end of 2016, if they paid all the costs. So, were some moorings paid and made legal? Perhaps only those behind the old boathouse? Next to the old boathouse, there are waste containers bearing two inscriptions: “Do not leave waste in front of the container.” “If you do not consider this rule, you are a fool!” “Keep the water clean,” states the third sign.

Alenka turns and sees the crumbling piers behind the boathouse and the former Začimba factory (Figure 11). The view opens behind and in front of her. Are these the nostalgic motifs of demolished boats mentioned by one of the tourist websites? Boats everywhere. In some places, sailing boats are hidden behind the wild canes (Arundo donax in Latin) and tied to long and unstable makeshift wooden piers. The road along the Canal of St. Bartholomew, quite busy with vehicle traffic, is also a popular line for cyclists and walkers who stop and take photographs of the picturesque landscape. Two portable toilets were set up in the summer of 2019 on the waterfront, and we discover a new pier with marked boat registration one kilometer further down the route. Are the toilets intended for tourists? Or did those responsible provide them for boat owners? After almost 2 km down the route, a view of the widened canal and shallow water opens up. During low tide, the sludge appears, and the place looks really muddy and messy.

Figure 11

Boathouse.

Finally, we see the “old traditional shipyard” (Figure 12). Luckily, it is high tide now, and the place does not look so brown. This is where the Bracera Society operates, with a few enthusiasts passing on old knowledge and preserving old vessels as cultural heritage. They renovate wooden vessels with old craft techniques and materials. The old shipyard, locally called “škver” (after the Italian variation squero, or Venetian squèro), is a thorn in the side of some apartment owners who rent their property to tourists. Considered as not being legally there, for some members of the Seča Civil Initiative, it is ecologically controversial due to varnishes and waste oils. Or are some people offended by the symbolic messages and images of, e.g., Marx, Tito, Che, and red stars on the walls of containers? The old shipyard was also where the legendary tourist ship Korala was renovated. Ironically, some from the Seča Civil Initiative believe that the ancient Roman walls that archaeologists discovered in water were built by shipyard users to gain the status of cultural heritage!

Figure 12

Traditional shipyard.

The next location is the Fonda Fish Farm, famous for its sea bass that is sold online and occasionally in high-end supermarkets. Known for its tourist visits of the fish farm, Fonda offers SUP excursions through its fishponds. Formerly owned by a local family that had lived by the sea for generations, the fish farm was later sold and is today the property of an Italian company. Orange buoys, ripped nets, and piles of empty shellfish shells laying around the fishing piers may be an upsetting sight for some. Occasionally, the sharp smell of fish fills the air, which is another reason for complaints raised by some members of the Seča Civil Initiative. Luckily, today, the smell is blown away by burja, a strong coldish northeastern wind. The company’s buildings are located near the fishing pier, where vessels purchased from the European Fisheries Fund are moored (Figure 13).

Figure 13

Fonda fish farm.

Although the pools, which were located along the beach 9 years ago, have been removed, contested space uses have been observed. This place seems somehow liminal, representing at once a landscape park, a fishing port for the locals or industrial aquaculture, and a beach for visitors of the sea.

On the opposite side of the fish farm and the fishing port is a payable parking lot for visitors, a cactus garden, a small animal farm with ponies in the shade of the Tuborg’s parasol, and the restaurant Ribič (Fisherman). There is an underwater archeological site at the cape, hidden from the visitor’s eyes. We can sit next to the folded sunshade, promoting the globalized Czech beer trademark Staropramen: The spirit of Prague. Rethinking about this place and locality, we are definitely not in that spirit! Having a globalized beer instead of former local ones, we can enjoy fresh air and strong wind, and, just like other strollers, watch kite surfers. There, the gaze opens a view toward the Bay of Piran, where the national border between Slovenia and Croatia is set, determined by arbitration, but not yet recognized by the Croatian side. Leaving the national border dispute aside, the place itself is, again, contested and in tension. Is this a place for relaxation, adrenalin sports? Is it an archeological site or a neuralgic point (or more accurately, line) underscored by the ambitions for the conservation of cultural heritage, such as the saltpans and renovated old wooden ships?

Turning around, we note an additional slogan of another globalized beer brand Tuborg, which was present in the region during the time of the former Yugoslavia, after the Croatian Podravka, another food company, was granted license for its production [30]. The Tuborg slogan “open for more” on the parasol above the pony grazing in the nearby paddock reminds us of more open conflicts regarding the regulation and management of the Canal of St. Bartholomew. For the inhabitants of the Municipality of Piran and the local community of Seča, it has been a perpetual conflict point for 25 years because the area has not been managed properly since the mid-1980s, and the situation became even worse on the establishment of the Slovene state. Our interlocutors were literally talking about “floating shit,” and the situation was marked as “complete chaos,” where some boat owners “were taking free vacations,” while others abandoned their boats and let them sink, transforming locations along the Canal of St. Bartholomew into dumpsites (Figure 14).

Figure 14

Abandoned vessels and boats “in use” moored in the Canal of St. Bartholomew.

In short, the area came across as “Little Texas” (a Slovene slang expression for a disorderly, chaotic place) according to the head of the Seča Civil Initiative [31]. In 2017, the Municipality of Piran undertook to remedy the situation; however, due to legal limitations, the cleaning of the area was only possible on land and not also in water.

So, what to do with the Canal of St. Bartholomew? Recently, it has been the subject of an audit of the Court of Auditors and a revision of management among various actors (the state, the responsible ministry, local communities, and the Soline company). The problem with the spatial management was registered in 2003. Only in 2011 that the Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning finally adopted the plan of management with the conservation and usage of the protected area, which was prepared for the Sečovlje Salina Nature Park. The state did not ensure the construction of the bridge and road, and the revision in 2017 pointed to the irregularities and inefficiencies of all involved. The state and the Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning did not manage the place and did not rebuild infrastructures with prevention measures in the event of floods. The same ministry, likewise, failed to ensure the removal of the boats from the canal and an efficient inspection of illegally constructed piers, berths, and moorings. Although in 2009, the Municipality of Piran obtained the water rights to build the communal port with the possible support of interested investors, the revisor did not find any activities that would generate the municipality’s interest in constructing local communal berths. The activities of the private Soline company, which was granted the concession for managing and maintaining the infrastructure and embankment safety, were only partially efficient due to the limited implementation of area surveillance [8].

At the beginning of 2019, following the appointment of the new Minister of the Environment and Spatial Planning, the cleaning of the Canal of St. Bartholomew and the removal of submersed vessels began. The cleaning campaign was to be implemented by the Water and Investments Directorate, in line with the water and ecological management. According to some, the Canal of St. Bartholomew could be used for communal berths where the local inhabitants – and not people from central Slovenia – would moor their vessels. However, this idea seems controversial because those who still have moorings in the Canal of St. Bartholomew launched another civil initiative, insisting to keep the appropriated berths. In congruence with some interpretations of the international maritime law [32] and the Slovene Water Act, the berths in the canal are not legal, but on the other hand, they are not strictly prohibited and vessels may be moored there, because this area may be seen as a public good. In a similar vein, the possession of the berth, even illegal, seems like a fine prospect for acquiring berths in the future based on informal “ownership” and an opportunity to acquire them legally. This interpretation may provide the answer to the question as to why there is such a pressure on this place and why more and more vessels keep arriving in the Canal of St. Bartholomew.

In July 2019, a new conflict escalated, when the local political party GZOP and the Seča Civil Initiative objected to the construction of a new fishing port (near the Fonda aquaculture), berths for fishermen, fishery and aquaculture companies, and shellfish growers, which would be financed through the European Maritime and Fishery Fund. The state could obtain funding from the EU, but the idea was rejected on the local level, and the Municipality of Piran rejected the financial plan at the first city council meeting [33]. Subsequently, the investment plan was passed and the municipality applied for two million euros from the European Maritime and Fishery Fund. The media reported about the conflict in the municipality, where certain political parties left the extraordinary meeting, claiming that it was illegitimate. The dispute also started on Facebook, revealing a huge discordance among multiple voices raised. Why now a fishing port near the Ribič restaurant and not local communal berths along the Canal of St. Bartholomew? How does the fishing port in the Canal of St. Bartholomew fit into the spatial plan of the Seča area because everything seemed interconnected? Why a fishing port for nonlocals and not management of illegally built houses, why not construct a road with sewage infrastructure instead of a fishing port for people who do not live in Seča and are therefore not locals? Another dispute arose over the claims that the fishing port and its piers should not be built of concrete, but with the use of natural materials, such as stone and wooden pillars. Others wondered how much the Canal of St. Bartholomew should be deepened. Why not instead erect a jetty to protect the saltpans? Wooden pillars and piers may seem an aesthetic solution, but this is problematic due to seashells, which burrow into and destroy them [34].

With a host of different issues escalating into a huge row, the conflict about the Canal of St. Bartholomew once again turned into an overheated topic during the long hot summer of 2019. Will the berths be communal for locals or for “continentals” or “occupiers,” wondered one of the participants in the Facebook discussion? The word Ljubljančani, the citizens of Ljubljana (the capital), is clearly used as a derogative word in this context. Who is behind the idea that the Canal of St. Bartholomew should be deepened: the ex-Fonda fish farm, the owners of the former Droga company, or a third actor? One journalist writing for the local newspaper inquired whether the Polič family, which bought the former socialist Začimba (Droga) factory, was planning to build a luxury tourist resort with berths for big, extravagant ships [35]. Should the Canal of St. Bartholomew be deepened for this reason? Where would the sediments be moved, was the question raised by other voices on Facebook. The dispute was further exacerbated by the requirement for the old shipyard Bracera to be removed from the area due to allegedly causing environmental degradation. The Municipality of Piran and the local community of Seča must retain the responsibility for the management of the Canal of St. Bartholomew. They should not allow the state with the competent Ministry of the Environment and Spatial Planning and other institutions to overtake the management of the canal, which would strip the local community of Seča of its communal port, some actors explained [34].

At the moment of writing this article, in the autumn of 2019, the project for the construction of the fishing port and the management of the Canal of St. Bartholomew still needed to be negotiated and orchestrated among different actors involved in the dispute.