Professor Ken Whelan:

I will first address the totality of what we are dealing with before going on to comment on the Shannon. It is important to understand that this is a very complex matter. That became obvious from the submissions this morning. From the perspective of the Atlantic Salmon Trust, we suggest that this we need to look at the catchments in a holistic way. We cannot do one stretch of the Shannon. It has to be looked at as a single entity. Once you get past Ardnacrusha, you are into other barriers and other locations as you move upstream. Importantly, the fish have to spawn. Then you are looking at the spawning streams that may be in Galway or wherever. It is quite a complex undertaking.

The Atlantic Salmon Trust has tried to deal with it by putting together what we call the likely suspects framework. That has been very useful. It lists out the pressures and problems that, in our case, Atlantic salmon have. However, the framework has a bearing on the way we might approach the totality of what we are dealing with. Basically, we carry out an audit, look at the science and the impacts and try to figure out, in terms of always having a limited resource, what the priorities are and what to do first. We also have to assess what the impact will be as a result of following through on that. That approach is very useful to keep in mind.

In the context of the bigger river systems where there are many issues with invasive species, this can work in two ways. If a dam is removed, invasive species are offered the opportunity to move upstream. It is always a balance of trying to get back what has been lost while recognising that nature abhors a vacuum. At that point, you are trying to fill a vacuum in a completely different time and space. That kind of approach would repay large dividends.

On the OPW, I reiterate what I said at the Citizens’ Assembly on Biodiversity Loss. I have been dealing with issues relating to drainage and drained rivers since I started my career at the old Inland Fisheries Trust. My view is that the Drainage Act 1945, which I think is under review, needs to be completely updated and put into the context that currently exists. I take the point that Mr. O’Donnell made earlier. We have to look at the remit of these agencies because they are constrained by their remit. We all understand that. In the times we are living in however, when we are looking at serious biodiversity loss, a fundamental review of the remit of the agencies it called for. I have experience in the context of the River Dodder. Working with the young engineers in the OPW is a pleasure. They are really interested and creative, but they are constrained. The approach to which I refer is the one we need to look at. Then there are the questions as to what the end point will be and how we can structure our bodies to reach it. Otherwise, there is a real danger that, as in the past, we may tie ourselves up in knots.