Mr. Francis O'Donnell:

No, the local authority would not be. When we are undertaking our anti-poaching patrols, as such, we also carry out water quality patrols at the same time. If we identify a problem we notify our environmental officers immediately. They come out on site and we track it back to wherever the source is coming from. That is part of a nearly secondary, cultural thing. Our fishery officers on the ground also hold warrants to prosecute for water quality offences, the same as our environmental officers. The environmental officer is the specialist, he or she, but the fishery officers on the ground also have the same authority. It is delegated to them to do that. We do our best in that area and with more boots on the ground. Fundamentally, when we are trying to protect wildlife, no matter what it is, for all the technology and all the remote sensing data in the world, if we are not actually in those catchments and physically on the ground, we really do not know what is happening and we cannot really do anything about it. We are relying on the public to notify us about something. The agency needs to be much more proactive and we try to be there. When we are doing a patrol of one particular type, we are not just doing that but also looking out for pollution at all times because we have a mandate. We are one of the few agencies, along with the EPA and the local authorities, that have the mandate to do that.

The Deputy asked about the legislative problems. Yes, we had a slight technicality as regards some of our cases. That issue has now been resolved. We did have to set aside a number of cases based on legal advice we got. It was a bit of a glitch. It is unfortunate but it is not the end of the world. We just have to move on from that and make sure our internal authorities and delegations are correct and are in place.