Mr. Sean Long:

As Mr. Fox outlined, and as Mr. John Ruby mentioned at the start, the characteristics of this fish kill were quite different from what we normally see because we were watching live and partly healthy fish intermingled with dead and moribund fish throughout. When we investigate a fish kill, we work to try to find the source of the pollutant coming in. As Mr. Fox said, we sample above, below and at the discharge point. That is where the water testing comes in. In this instance, we had no point source to use.

Clearly, we looked at the fish. They were clearly showing signs of some form of fungus on the body, particularly on the head. We shared those photos with our colleagues in the Marine Institute to try to get some form of lead or indication. We never eliminated the possibility of pollution in our investigations. We were quite clear that we had to wait for the sampling from the Marine Institute to come back to rule out or in any factor. Throughout the investigation, we continued to investigate the possibility of pollution but we also took into account the fact that it may have been natural causes, given the environmental factors at the time. The water flow was in the 95th percentile. It was very low for a sustained period of time and we had little rainfall. Water temperatures were around 20°C, which is not lethal for trout but it is not the best for them either. It was difficult at that early stage to determine a specific cause. While it may have been lost in some of the media, we were quite clear that we had not out ruled pollution as a source.