Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

We will now consider the topic of developing the seaweed industry in Ireland, including the feasibility of developing seaweed farms, with representatives from Bord Iascaigh Mhara and from the Irish Seaweed Research Group. Is that agreed? Agreed. I welcome the following witnesses to the meeting: Mr. Donal Maguire, director of aquaculture development services at Bord Iascaigh Mhara, BIM; and Professor Mark Johnson and Dr. Maeve Edwards, representing the Irish Seaweed Research Group, ISRG, in the Ryan Institute, NUI Galway. I thank them for their attendance. We will hear from the witnesses in the order in which I called out their names.
By virtue of section 17(2)(l) of the Defamation Act 2009, witnesses are protected by absolute privilege in respect of their evidence to this committee. If they are directed by the committee to cease giving evidence in relation to a particular matter and they continue to so do, they are entitled thereafter only to a qualified privilege in respect of their evidence. Witnesses are directed that only evidence connected with the subject matter of these proceedings is to be given and they are asked to respect the parliamentary practice to the effect that, where possible, they should not criticise nor make charges against any person, persons or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable.

Any documentation the witnesses provide in their opening statements may be published on the committee website once the meeting has concluded.

Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that they should not comment on, criticise or make charges against a person or persons outside the Houses or an official, either by name or in such a way as to make him or her identifiable.

Before I call on the witnesses to make their opening statements, I want to make a couple of points. As everyone is aware, the committee began by looking at the issue of licensing but during our deliberations we agreed to look also at the issue of developing seaweed farming in Ireland. The Sea Change strategy of 2006 indicated the processing of seaweed in Ireland will be worth €30 million per annum by 2020. Accordingly, this activity is of enormous importance in Gaeltacht areas and along the west coast, where it is a very important sector and a source of investment and income. I would like the witnesses to tell us whether the estimate of €30 million is realistic. Can we surpass that expectation? What do we need to do in terms of investment, putting in infrastructure or developing policy? Can we offer a unique product and can we compete in the international market? Can we diversify our processes so that seaweed is not shipped abroad but is processed here at home, leading to obvious economic benefits, not least job creation? Do we need to bring in foreign companies to operate the market for us or are there sufficient indigenous skill sets and know-how to develop the sector? Is EU funding available to assist and, if so, how can it be accessed? We have a very large pharmaceutical base in this country, not least where I come from in County Cork, and I believe there are other areas in which we can develop an international reputation and this is one of those areas.

I would also like the witnesses to comment on how we can protect our marine ecosystems and how we can juxtapose eco-marine activity, the fishing sector and the tourism sector while also developing the seaweed industry.

I will call on the witnesses in the order in which I introduced them, beginning with the opening statement of Bord Iascaigh Mhara.

Mr. Donal Maguire:

I thank the Chairman and committee members.
Global production of seaweed stands at just under 24 million tonnes per annum at present. China and the Pacific rim dominate global seaweed production in terms of absolute output and in terms of aquaculture production of seaweed. In Asia, seaweed is mainly produced using aquaculture with little reliance on the harvesting of natural stocks. The situation in the rest of the world is quite different, where the harvesting of naturally-occurring resources dominates commercial exploitation, and that is the situation in Ireland at present. Seaweed production in Latin America, Canada and Europe is almost completely dependent on natural stocks, mainly Ascophyllum nodosumand various kelp species. Aquaculture in these territories has generally been focused on achieving production of low-volume, high-value species and on attempts to overcome scientific and technical obstacles to increasing the production of edible seaweeds like Palmaria palmataor Porphyra umbilicalis.
In Ireland, there are currently seven licensed seaweed aquaculture sites and 23 licence applications for seaweed cultivation in process. The main focus of Irish seaweed aquaculture operations has been on the production of edible seaweeds, however some production of non-edible seaweeds for cosmetic products has occurred in the past. To provide some context, the Irish seaweed industry is dominated by the harvesting of wild resources, mainly, as I have said, Ascophyllum nodosum. Annual production of this seaweed is already approximately 25,000 to 30,000 tonnes per annum. Recent analysis by NUIG - I hope I am not stealing their thunder by citing it - suggests that the value of the industry is approximately €18 million per annum, about €6 million of which goes to exports, with employment of 185 full-time equivalents. It may be justified to speculate, based on the number of new entrants and reported expansion, that annual value and employment in the seaweed industry has increased since 2010, when those volume and employment numbers were last collected. On the other hand, seaweed aquaculture production in Ireland is in its infancy. It is estimated at current volumes to be less than 300 tonnes per annum and at the moment there are less than ten full-time equivalent posts in the sector.
Ireland has been at the forefront of attempts to develop seaweed aquaculture in Europe. Ireland enjoys considerable advantages in terms of the favourable conditions for seaweed aquaculture and there is a high level of scientific expertise within the various third level institutions and development agencies. Ireland also enjoys strong development and research links with other European nations engaging in seaweed aquaculture, particularly, France, Norway, the Netherlands, Denmark and the UK.

Practical tools including cultivation manuals have been produced for the industry. BIM and many other agencies and institutions continue to work closely with the industry in terms of aquaculture processing, new product development and innovation. BIM has worked very closely with the Irish Seaweed Aquaculture sector in terms of providing crucial supports at establishment and early commercialisation stages.

The development of seaweed aquaculture faces challenges. Some European experts have supported a model in which seaweed aquaculture, shellfish and finfish aquaculture and wind energy generation could all be integrated into what they describe as parks in the coastal zone or perhaps offshore. In our view, the scale, cost and complexity of such parks may present difficulty in terms of costs and a possible displacement of or interaction with other coastal zone stakeholders. The proposal, while attractive on the face of it, is unlikely to be suitable for Ireland for a number of reasons.

In our view in BIM, Ireland's opportunity is more likely to lie in a mixed industry comprising of three distinct elements, first, integrated multi-trophic aquaculture, better known as IMTA - a form of seaweed cultivation in collaboration with finfish and shellfish operators; second, on-shore tank culture of very high value species; and third, conventional long-line marine aquaculture in bays where there are long-line farms. IMTA is particularly interesting in that it would allow integration with the conventional aquaculture industry, such as mussel farming which already has access to appropriate culture sites, the relevant expertise and have completed the significant investment in terms of labour, vessels, equipment and infrastructure. We held a conference in Limerick recently and from that we are confident that the Irish farm seaweed industry could reach a harvest volume of between 2,000 to 3,000 tonnes per year and that this level of development is feasible in the next five years or so, particularly if private investment is available for aquaculture development, processing and product innovation. This would generate a first sale value of €10 million per annum and would generate employment for some 150 people both directly and indirectly.

The key issues to realise this vision are the resolution of licensing issues, the provision of grant aid to the industry and encouraging private sector investment. Private sector investment will also be required to stimulate growth. The development agencies BIM and Údarás na Gaeltachta will continue to engage closely with the industry particularly in the areas of technical development, processing, market development and public information.

Significant effort will be required to manage the diverse priorities of various stakeholders and effective communications, consultative fora and information campaigns will be necessary, certainly at least at local and regional level, to ensure that seaweed aquaculture is fully understood by local communities and that an opportunity is presented to entrepreneurs to engage with the sector to ensure that community benefit, ancillary job creation and return on investment are maximised.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Thank you, Mr. Maguire.

Professor Mark Johnson:

I thank the Chairman and members for the invitation to speak to the committee. I will speak on behalf of my colleague, Dr. Maeve Edwards, who may wish to add to my contribution.

Clearly the committee has investigated these issues and I do not wish to repeat many of the topics on which the committee has reached a consensus. We provided a statement and from it one can see that we have much in common with BIM on how we see the issues arising in the industry and what might be needed to take them forward in terms of partnerships and aid for the industry.

I will give a brief outline of my background, which may be helpful to members to know when we are answering questions. My background is broad in terms of role of seaweeds in the ecosystem, how seaweeds grow and what eats seaweeds. Dr. Edwards has that knowledge as well but she has come up through the aquaculture route, so she has worked on a number of aquaculture projects, specifically growing seaweeds.

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

I am very proud to be part of the Irish seaweed research group in NUI Galway. We have spent 20 years trying to do our part for an industry that has great potential. There is now a momentum to make it a reality. We will continue to try to help the industry to grow.

Aquaculture certainly has an interesting and promising future as part of that. I will answer specific questions later.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I thank all three witnesses.

Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

There has been a great deal of debate recently about the development of the seaweed industry in the west. I am not sure how much of it falls within the bailiwick of the witnesses. I will ask my questions anyway and see how many of them can be answered. I am a native of An Aird Mhór, Carna, which is close enough to the Arramara Teoranta plant. My ancestors were seaweed cutters and winkle pickers, etc. I was sent off to school early, so I did not do as much as my brothers and sisters. It is part of our DNA where we come from. There has been a great deal of concern in recent times about the way the industry is developing. As we know, Arramara Teoranta, which was in State ownership until quite recently, has been bought by Acadian Seaplants Limited. Witnesses from that company have appeared before this joint committee.

My primary concern relates to the harvesting methods that have traditionally been used. Industry players and semi-State organisations have suggested that we have not capitalised on the potential of the industry because we do not have a big enough player in the international market and we are not adding enough value to this material. The raw cleaning of seaweed takes place in places like Cill Chiaráin, but no value is added. All of it is exported as pellets to other countries to be developed there. Many seaweed harvesters have made a subsistence-type living from this activity over the years. They have normally harvested lorries of seaweed while doing other things, if they have other jobs on the side. This kind of hand-to-mouth existence from seaweed harvesting has been part of the local fabric of life. There are concerns from a licensing perspective about the major new player in the industry. We know that a number of bigger players have applied for blanket licences for large tracts of seashore. There is a fear that this will take the power from the traditional harvesters. Questions have been asked about who will control the market, what the price will be, how much they will cut and when they will cut.

Many legal issues have been raised as well. I know that Deputy Ó Cuív has done a great deal of work on the pertinent rights that would be attached to folios and on the legal position with regard to who does or does not have the right to cut seaweed on foreshores. Can somebody else come into a traditional stripe? If I had a stripe in Carna, for example, could somebody else legally come into that stripe? Traditionally, people would have steered away from doing that because of the history of the spite feamainne, etc. There is a kind of traditional right in such locations. Other models have been proposed by some of the seaweed harvesters that have come before us. The development of a co-operative that would act almost like a fair trade model has been mentioned. It has been suggested that if some harvesters grouped together in a co-operative-style scenario, it might give them some leverage when they are negotiating with the companies in question about when, where and how they can cut seaweed and what prices they might get, etc.

On foot of the "Ear to the Ground" documentary that was broadcast during the week, I have been contacted - most recently this morning - by smaller players who have a niche interest in the industry in Ireland. They are concerned that the larger multinationals will squeeze them out of the market bit by bit. They have suggested that large companies are coming in to get these seaweed-cutting rights so they can sell them off again. Basically, they are worried that there is a move towards the privatisation of the industry. We have a resource that needs to be used in a way that adds as much value as possible. We need to develop the industry in a way that will aid the development of the local communities where these people live and ensure they hold a stake in the industry. I am interested in the potential that was mentioned for the development of onshore, long-line and integrated multitrophic aquaculture. How could that work? How might it work in the future? I would be interested to hear the witnesses' thoughts on those issues if it is appropriate for them to comment on them.

Mr. Donal Maguire:

I am afraid my answers will probably disappoint the Senator. Most of the ground he covered falls within the sphere of influence or business of Bord Iascaigh Mhara.

As the Senator is probably aware, the question of licensing for a gatherer's rights is a matter for the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government and not the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. As a result, we do not have any particular involvement. The development of that sector is really a matter for Údarás na Gaeltachta and not for BIM. Our interest in seaweed is almost exclusively focused on farm seaweed.

If it is acceptable to the committee, I will move on to the question about integrated multitrophic aquaculture. As I mentioned to the Chairman earlier, we held a very successful seminar in Limerick a couple of weeks ago where 220 delegates looked at the potential specifically for farm seaweed. We had an open session the following day on the greater seaweed industry. A whole range of potential synergies could be achieved by twining up existing mussel farms and turning some of their production space over to the production of seaweed. That appears to be a good model particularly if we can perfect the culture techniques for some of the higher value red seaweeds which they could grow there. That is certainly a success.

The other concept is to use seaweed farming in the vicinity of finfish farms because seaweed is a terrific way of soaking up nutrients out of the water. In areas where there might be some concern about nutrients coming off a finfish farm and a marine finfish farm, the seaweed aquaculture would be an excellent accompaniment and would benefit the speed and lush growth of the seaweed.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I invite Professor Johnson or Dr. Edwards, whoever wishes, to respond.

Professor Mark Johnson:

Very briefly, on the harvesting of seaweed, obviously these questions are broadly about how businesses operate and the rights and obligations of people involved. We are based in the west where we are acutely aware of the issues and wish to see sustainable development. Being a natural resources group, that is one of our areas of interest. The Senator mentioned co-operatives. They seem to work in other contexts. There are examples in the literature of people harvesting goose barnacles in northern Spain. There are other inter-tidal resources where there might be something that could be learned but, perhaps, they have not faced the same challenges as outlined by the Senator of changes in the industry and potentially an industrial scale and part of the industry coming in. On the aquaculture front, there is a great deal of promise about and perhaps I will give Dr. Maeve Edwards an opportunity to say something on that issue.

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

I will finish off with the wild resource. From what we know, we know very little about the seaweed resource. In terms of the estimation of the biomass, it can be wildly variable depending on whom one speaks to and depending on what method is used to quantify it. As a research institute, we recommend a robust system of monitoring to see what we have and to understand it a little more. I have noticed from speaking to harvesters that there is a need and a desire for education. In the west there are many types of harvester. There is the person who does it as a pastime, there are more professional cutters who cut a good deal, and there are those who are very experienced and some who are very inexperienced. Certainly within all of that there is a concern that the inexperience is damaging the resource. By and large, it has been well looked after. I believe further education would be beneficial.

Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

In her research, would Dr. Edwards have experience of looking at that in areas such as Nova Scotia which would have a similar climate and a similar type of seaweed cutting but which is more industrialised? I think the issues to which she has referred about inexperience around the way the seaweed is being cut is affecting the resource going forward and the management of the resource. Perhaps Dr. Edwards can tell the committee how that is measured and monitored and if there are examples of good practice in other areas?

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

I am referring to everything being cleared and it being cleared far too close to the rock. There is a different system in Canada, where it is cut from boats with a rake and part of the plant is taken. That system also has its merits. The way we hand-harvest in Ireland is different and, generally, fine. However, it needs to be monitored, so that we have a baseline study on what it is we are starting out with.

Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is that information available to us? Has there been a study on how much seaweed is on our shores and where it is? It is said that in the Ceantar na nOileán-Leitir Móir-Leitir Mealláin area it has been overharvested, in other areas it is underharvested, and that a balance is required. Is there a study that provides us with that type of statistical information?

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

There have been small-scale studies but they are usually over a period of one year. The Hession report is one example, but that being from 1998 or so is now out of date. The pressure has never been as great as it is now. People are really interested in using the resource and, since the downturn in the economy, there have been many more people on the shore. It is worth investigating again so that we continue to maintain and improve it.

Professor Mark Johnson:

It is important to point out that there is probably quite a lot of regional variation in how quickly the weed will grow back.

Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Why is that?

Professor Mark Johnson:

There are a number of different factors that would affect it, including water movement, quality and clarity as well as the grazing population of invertebrates that are feeding on the algae. The factors are perhaps not particularly well understood, but we could expect it to grow back more rapidly in some areas after it has been cut.

Trevor Ó Clochartaigh (Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Is there research or more information available on that?

Professor Mark Johnson:

Nothing more than anecdotal evidence. Dr. Edwards mentioned a couple of areas to me where it is thought to grow back more rapidly than others.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh na finnéithe anseo tráthnóna. Is dóigh liom gur ábhar fíor-tábhachtach é seo le plé. This is a very important issue that needs a lot of deep thought and analysis. As Senator Ó Clochartaigh stated, the first thing we should do is look at what we have. It is natural, self-propagating and very valuable. We should quantify and do an inventory of all the natural seaweed. In terms of the sustainable harvesting of it, we should get some measure of the possible volumes, values and species. As I understand it, some seaweeds have much smaller volumes but realise a lot more money on the market. When one sees a company applying for 40,000 tonne licences - I do not know if this is in respect of wet or dry matter - over parts of the coast, one gets some idea of the sheer volume of natural seaweed around our coast. This should be the starting point. The risks are much fewer because we are dealing with something that is naturally available.

I accept BIM does not have a role in the licensing regime. However, will Mr. Maguire clarify why BIM does not have a role in the development and promotion of natural seaweed? It has a role in the development and promotion of natural fish and aquaculture. Does he think BIM should have a role in respect of that side of the seaweed industry? It seems strange that it would be involved in farmed seaweed but not in natural seaweed, whereas, in terms of fish, it is involved in both.

I would be interested in the witnesses' views on that. Licensing is beyond their remit but a new licensing regime will come in so it is legitimate to ask for their views on possible inclusions in the new regime. Would they agree that whoever would be granted a licence should be obliged to only hire harvesters who have a tradition of harvesting seaweed in a sustainable way over a long period, in other words, who are experts by tradition and local knowledge? That type of expertise is often undervalued in our society. Often people who have lived with nature and done a thing for a lifetime and have inherited knowledge from previous generations do things to a very high sustainable level. All others coming new to harvesting would have to be educated in the harvesting of particular species in the Irish aquacultural conditions and methodologies. Should this be part of a condition of licences in the future so that we can be satisfied that anybody harvesting seaweed under a licence from the Department has the appropriate training to do so in a sustainable way?

Can they give some more information on the integrated multi-trophic aquaculture, IMTA? There seem to be two big ideas, one, to go to somewhere like the Killary and replace the ropes for mussels with seaweed ropes. In that case are they talking about seaweed growing there naturally or seaweed brought in from outside? Mussels seed themselves from the sea and are made grow on the rope instead of on other natural structures. Second, what is the experience of combining seaweed farming with fin fish farming? I always understood that at the fish farms there is very little growing on the sea bottom. Fish in the area might get bloated but there are not many seaweeds growing under the farms. Can the witnesses outline how that idea works?

The witnesses mentioned a figure of 2,000 to 3,000 tonnes per annum, employment of 165 and a turnover of €10 million as being a level of seaweed aquaculture, which seems very small when compared with the massive tonnages people have mentioned in other types of seaweed. If that is the case why not concentrate on what is there naturally?

Are the witnesses planning to introduce species or forms of seaweed that are not native to Ireland and could that give us unforeseen problems, equivalent to what has happened on the land with invasive species and disease problems? Is this a downside risk in seaweed farming?

Professor Mark Johnson:

I thank Deputy Ó Cuív for his questions. Perhaps I will make a brief comment on the first point he made about bringing in the harvesters already there. In the broader literature, to which I referred, people have looked at systems of natural resources and how one makes a success of managing them. The term used in the literature is the "social capital", about which I think the Deputy is talking. One starts with the social capital and then one looks at way to build that up. I think I would be in agreement with the Deputy. There might be other agreements about who is right and so on but the approach has been established. One would need to look at what one has. There other thing is supporting the leaders in that community who can get everyone to act in a way where everyone has a view.

I am quite happy to pass the questions on integrated multi-trophic aquaculture and on the non-native species to Dr. Maeve Edwards.

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

I think it goes without saying that one would not introduce any non-native seaweeds, as that would be a recipe for disaster.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That is a relief.

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

There are too many examples out there not to go down that road again. From what we understand even about the genetics of seaweed, populations can potentially be quite conservative within small regions. For example, if I was to grow a seaweed in Killary, I would like it to come from Killary because one gets natural competition, which is of benefit as well. One wants to keep things as close to the natural environment as possible. I hope that allays any fears.

We have a lot of experience of growing seaweed and finfish in this country. I think the two things will co-exist very happily together. The growing of the seaweed will happen on ropes, as per mussel long line, so it will not grow underneath the cages. If one is interested in going further, one can add as many different species as one likes to an integrated system. One can even put, dare I say it, things like sea cucumbers on the bottom. This is particularly experimental at the moment but they have a very high value and are eaten by the Chinese, for example. I am not sure it is a delicacy for which Ireland is yet ready, but certainly the seaweed is. It is all about understanding the flow of nutrients around cages. The seaweeds will take dissolved nutrients while other animals and mussels will take particle nutrients from the water. Everything together forms a more holistic approach.

It is something that is being ramped up in other countries. It started in Canada in its current form. In China, it only started about 2,500 years ago, so there are a lot of examples. We have got good aquaculture to try this with and it could be something that strengthens the organic finfish aquaculture, as it is at the moment, and would certainly help.

Mr. Donal Maguire:

I will address the Deputy's questions and, in particular, BIM's role in regard to gathered seaweed. It is a historical rather than a policy issue. Traditionally, Údarás na Gaeltachta has been the agency which has taken the greatest interest in the gathered seaweed sector, in particular the gathering of ascophyllum nodosum, largely because it coincided geographically with its area of interest. We are particularly focused on seafood for human consumption. At the moment, the large volume industry that exists in Ireland is targeted more towards veterinary products, nutraceuticals and cosmetic products. It is not really targeted at direct human consumption, so it is somewhat outside BIM's mainstream of activities. We have tended to leave that area to our colleagues in Údarás na Gaeltachta, who have handled it for many years.
As I said, our particular interest is in the growing of farmed seaweeds and new seaweeds and not exploiting the existing wild resource and, in particular, high-value species of seaweed for direct human consumption.

On the Deputy's question regarding the 2,000 to 3,000 tonnes of volume, while that does seem very small in comparison to the volume from harvesting of Ascophyllum nodosumwhat we are speaking about are different species of seaweed with a much higher value that would be added to what are known as sea vegetables or additives for human consumption. Their value is much higher and as a result this generates a greater degree of activity. A lot of the employment is on the processing and drying side. There is a huge amount of labour involved in sorting through seaweed after drying to ensure there are no impurities in it. As members will be aware, people are particularly sensitive about shellfish allergies and it is important to ensure no little crustaceans have come ashore with the seaweed.
On the Deputy's question regarding Killary, what we are proposing is the introduction of a new seaweed but, probably, from plants that were gathered from Killary in the first instance. The first phase is a hatchery phase which involves the impregnation of strings with tiny plantlets which, in turn, are put out on the long lines. The reason for the attraction in relation to the mixing of mussel long lines with seaweed is because the farmer will already have in place a lot of the infrastructure required to handle large volumes of product, which is expensive infrastructure to put in place. For a farmer who already has in place that type of infrastructure it makes good sense to augment a mussel crop with an additional seaweed crop. The next step is ensuring there is sufficient development for someone to buy, process and dry the seaweed. The seaweeds would not be gathered naturally by hanging the ropes in the water rather a seeded rope would be attached to the long line to allow a single species of seaweed to grow at high volume on that long line.
In regard to the experience of mixing finfish and seaweed farming, this is largely experimental at this stage. Dr. Edwards referred to the anecdotal history in relation to places like China where seaweed cultivation is done in incredibly huge volumes. Seaweed farms in China stretch as far as the eye can see and thousands of people are employed daily on those farms. It is a level of development we would not countenance in Ireland. It is genuinely used to biodepurate China's coastal waters. Given the human pressure of population around its waters the seaweed makes a significant impact in improving its environment and, as a result, also yields a valuable crop. As stated by Dr. Edwards, there is no suggestion of anything other than native species being used here. There is no need to do otherwise. We have plenty of native species with sufficient value and market demand that we would not need to consider doing that.
In regard to the Deputy's question about new entrants into the industry versus traditional handlers, in any situation it makes perfect sense to build up as much social licence as possible. Nobody wants anybody operating on the foreshore who is not sufficiently trained and expert in this area and who might do damage to rather than improve the situation. People applying for a licence, be that for an aquaculture licence through the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, or a foreshore gathering licence from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government would have to demonstrate their bona fides and background to show they are appropriate persons to hold such a licence and carry out such an activity.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I would like to make two brief comments.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I must ask the Deputy to be very brief.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Údarás na Gaeltachta was referenced many times. However, it cannot act outside the Gaeltacht and most of the coastline is outside of the Gaeltacht. China was also referenced many times. It is time to knock down the Chinese walls that appear to be blocking us on two fronts. Human consumption and the fact that Údarás na Gaeltachta was engaged in work in limited Gaeltacht areas around the coast does not in my view justify the decision not to develop natural seaweed along the entire coast. It appears to me logical that that would be done.

If an inventory was to be done of all of our natural seaweed, perhaps, starting in Donegal on the Derry border - perhaps in conjunction with our Northern Ireland colleagues - and continuing around the entire coast of Ireland and its offshore islands, what kind of timescale and resource would be needed? It seems to me that a sensible place to start would be to find out what we already have that could be exploitable and useable. I am sure a fair bit of work has been already done on what is out there but in terms of information gathering on value, volume and species how long would that take and how much would it cost to do it?

What type of annual commitment would be needed to do that? It would be a great job for NUI Galway.

Professor Mark Johnson:

That is an extremely difficult question to answer. With regard to physically surveying the coastline, it would depend which species one would be examining. Some species are sub-tidal and perhaps they could be surveyed with the use of sonar systems or by divers, the use of both of which would considerably ramp up the time and investment involved. Any estimate would involve a deal of modelling involving the light quality, where the seaweed is coming to the end, and then matching that with a small number of test sites. It would bring us into the realm of the more one invests, perhaps the greater coverage and the more variance one would be confident is being explained, but it would involve a large amount of money. I would not like to put a figure on it until a scoping had been done of exactly how much detail we thought we would want to examine.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Would it be worthwhile doing?

Professor Mark Johnson:

I think it has been established in a number of contexts. The INFOMAR survey, which simply gives the symmetry offshore, has been shown to be of great value in finding out what our natural resources are. Whenever we find out something about them, it is of great value.

Éamon Ó Cuív (Galway West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

This would be a job for the Celtic Explorer in the inter-tidal area.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

Deputy Mulherin has a question.

Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

I apologise for not being here for the presentation but I was dealing with other business in the Dáil. With regard to funding the State gave to the universities and third level colleges to engage in research and development on seaweed, by-products and so on, people with an interest in this industry who could be classified as being in the start-up category expressed a concern to me that such funding is being monopolised by existing companies engaged in processing seaweed and other by-products of it. What criteria are applied to the granting of such funding? What provision is made for start-ups to cater for people with new ideas and ensure there is not a monopoly in the industry or, as was said to be, a cosy cartel between the universities and established businesses?

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

I do not necessarily think that is always the case. From our experience, we get many phone calls from start-ups or would-be start-ups and the first thing I always ask them is have they got a market for their seaweed, and quite often they answer "No" to that question. They think such a business is a great idea and want to set it up. Organisations such as Enterprise Ireland are fairly good in making those links. We do a good deal of work though the Enterprise Ireland €5,000 voucher scheme, for example, to do preliminary, very small-scale surveys or very small parcels of work that will ensure they can go on and search for further funding. It just depends who comes to our door. For the larger projects, one must have a more developed business to create a bigger project such as NutraMara. However, there should be something there for everybody and we are certainly happy to work with everybody.

Michelle Mulherin (Mayo, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

The concern is that if one is outside the loop and trying to get into the industry, things naturally favour people who are established, but there are people with good ideas who are not being assisted.

Dr. Maeve Edwards:

Yes.

Michael McCarthy (Cork South West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source

That concludes our consideration of this topic. I thank Mr. Maguire, Dr. Edwards and Professor Johnson. They are now free to go. The next part of the meeting will be an engagement with the Minister and officials from the Department of the Environment, Community and Local Government at 4.15 p.m.