Mr. Denis Maher:

I thank the Deputy. I will address the fish passage issue as best I can, although I cannot address that relating to the repairs to the weir. As I stated, we do not have a remit in that regard and are not involved. On the fish passage, a solution was agreed between the engineers engaged by the council and our engineer, who has 25 years of experience in the context of working on fish passages. We have invested a significant amount of time and effort in terms of personnel and engaging with the council. The sad reality is that the fish passage issues envisaged in the 1959 Act have moved on with the habitats directive. The original fish ladder does not and will not work. It is of its day as it was designed for salmon but there are now more species involved under the habitats directive. I stress that we are not in the business of imposing a solution on anybody. A solution was agreed by the engineers engaged by the council and our engineer. Drawings of a solution to the fish passage issue were prepared. The council is correct in that they are preliminary drawings, but they are quite detailed. I am unable to comment on the repairs to the weir because that is not within our remit, but it is the kernel of the fish passage issue. Matters have moved on. The weir built 200 years ago and the little fish passage that served it simply do not work any more.

The concern of the Department and IFI is that if the weir is restored, it would be an even more significant barrier to fish, would cost a significant amount of money and would leave us completely out of alignment with the habitats directive. If that problem is not overcome, we may end up facing fines. That is not a matter for the Department, but I know from my experience that this is what happens. The weir has been breached to such an extent that there is fish passage. However, as a responsible agency, we cannot accept that as the outcome. The river is used by the local rowing club and other amenity users in the town and we met stakeholders to discuss that aspect in October 2018. Consideration must be given to that element.

We want an all-encompassing solution whereby whatever work is done to put the weir back to where it ought to be would contain a fish passage element such that we do not end up with a regulatory problem having carried out a lot of work on the weir. We are conscious that we could walk away and state that the weir is breached and that there is fish passage, but that would not be an acceptable solution.