Dr. Cathal Gallagher:

The Cathaoirleach’s memory of the River Shannon is fascinating. When I joined Inland Fisheries Ireland, I was privileged to understand some of the history of the fish before the stations went in. There are some scales and records from those days, not only relating to the salmon. The size of the fish that came into those catchments was astronomical.

Much work has been done, particularly in the Shannon, over the years to look at the populations of salmon. Just so everyone is on the same page, there is a unique population going to all of these catchments and they have been tied to those catchments since the Ice Age. These are individual genetic populations. If one were to transfer populations from one river to the other, one would see that they do not do as well. Therefore, the idea of hatcheries, etc., is difficult. One needs to maintain that population all the time because they find it hard to sustain. The natural population in those catchments is critical.

The starting point is to see if we have any genetic material left in those catchments and if we can encourage the restoration using that genetic material. Specifically in relation to the River Shannon, there is part of the EU water framework directive plan. The third cycle of the plan is under consultation at the moment and deals directly with developing a bypass channel in order to allow free access of fish back into the Shannon catchment. That programme is currently under way. A core group is involved with that programme, including the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, the ESB, Uisce Éireann, an independent chair and IFI. There is a whole consultation group. There is a governance structure in place for that big project and it is well advanced. Much work has been done with fish passage experts to look at what sort of solution might be implemented. The study continues and we hope to move ahead with a bypass.

It will not be a nature-like solution because of the evaluation that is done. A vertical slot fish pass will be put in. We are looking at important things such as making sure there is environmental flow so that populations can be maintained when the water is passing down through the old River Shannon. There is diversion work to be done at the tailrace to look at diverting fish. There is quite an amount of work to be done in the Shannon. Similar work in respect of those other catchments that are impounded by hydro stations would be of benefit to fish populations.

One point I would make before I move on to the OPW is that while we are here talking, members will hear much about fish and we are the freshwater fish organisation. The first solution always has to be, if possible, to remove barriers. The impact on water quality and biodiversity will still be there because rivers have a natural process. Rivers flow with gravels and offer migration paths and natural nutrient flow. All of those natural processes are interrupted when there is a barrier. The fish passage might let fish come up a river. Sometimes it is very difficult to achieve the downward fish passage. To explain the complexity of that, let us think of the different types of fish we have and the different shapes that they have, for example, a big long eel cannot jump while a salmon can jump. Different species, as Mr. O’Donnell said, all have different what we call morphology. They have different shapes and can pass through the passage in different ways. Downward passage is often the most difficult part. If you put a flow in place, eels travel down at the bottom of the river and salmon smolts are farther towards the top. Different species are at different levels. Therefore, it is hard to get them down the rivers for the outwards migration part. In addition, fish have different life stages. They are different sizes and they come from eggs to fry all the way through. All of those different elements would have to be accommodated. I strongly make the point that the ideal scenario is actually to remove the barriers. If you are considering the whole biodiversity, the temperature regime, nutrient flow, sediment, spawning – all those different things need to have the natural process reinstated into the river. Those are some considerations.

Some very good work is being done on the Shannon, as colleagues said, in co-operation. Stakeholder engagement is very important. We have an attachment to barriers in Ireland that probably is not reflected in other European countries. We like the amenity value and we like looking at barriers. It is hard to explain the difficulty those barriers are causing the environment. Those are a couple of points on that.

Regarding the OPW, it has the difficult task of balancing the requirement for drainage in flooding and altering catchments, which was its function, with the natural environment and supporting the restoration. We have been working with the OPW over a long number of years to try to ensure that any work it does, either in maintenance of the drain channels or in development of new drainage schemes, can be done in the best way possible to facilitate fish. However, it is never ideal. It goes back to those processes that must be reinstated. There has been much good work done by the OPW in co-operation with others in mitigation of barriers and restoration of catchments. We did much work. A colleague of mine who is unfortunately no longer with us was a famous gentleman called Professor Martin O’Grady. He developed many sound principles on the restoration of drain channels. Our experience with the OPW – I know Mr. O’Donnell wants to come in on this – has been that it is focused on trying to do the best it can for the environment given its remit. It sometimes comes down to balancing flood prevention in an area versus something else. That is the difficult role it has. We have been working with OPW staff and they are very interested in working together to deliver this programme. They have been in contact with us about this barrier mitigation programme and where they can help out, as well as in other environmental programmes.