Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 30 September 2025
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy
Fish Kill in the River Blackwater: Discussion
2:00 am
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Apologies have been received from Deputy Heneghan. Deputy Aindrias Moynihan is substituting for Deputy Malcolm Byrne, Deputy O'Sullivan is substituting for Deputy Ó Cearúil and Deputy Eoghan Kenny is substituting for Deputy Ahern. The first item on the agenda is engagement with witnesses on the fish kill in the Blackwater river in County Cork. The purpose of this meeting is to have a focused discussion on the recent fish kill incident at the request of members of this committee and Members of the Oireachtas. Our goal is to understand the causes, assess the environmental impact and identify the immediate and long-term actions required to prevent future occurrences. We will hear from key stakeholders including representatives from environmental agencies, local authorities, scientific experts and local angling groups to build a comprehensive picture of what happened and what needs to be done.
I welcome to our meeting the following witnesses: from Inland Fisheries Ireland, Mr. Barry Fox, deputy CEO, Dr. Fiona Kelly, head of research and development, and Mr. Sean Long, river basin director; and from the EPA, Dr. Tom Ryan, director of the office of environmental enforcement, Ms Pamela McDonnell, industrial licence enforcement programme, Mr. Noel Byrne, drinking water and wastewater enforcement programme, and Dr. Jenny Deakin, water programme. From the Marine Institute, I welcome Dr. Rick Officer, CEO, Dr. Glenn Nolan, director of marine environment and food safety services, and Dr. Jamie Downes, section manager of the fish health unit. Online, joining from Cork County Council, we have Mr. Ger Barry, director of services, and Mr. Alan Costello, senior executive scientist. Also welcome are representatives of the angling community Mr. Conor Arnold, Killavullen Angling Club, and Mr. John Ruby, Mallow Trout Anglers Club. I remind all those in attendance, including myself, that phones should be switched off or at least put on silent, please.
Before I invite witnesses to deliver opening statements, I advise them of the following in relation to parliamentary privilege. Witnesses and members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice that they should not criticise or make charges against any person or entity by name or in such a way as to make him, her or it identifiable, or otherwise engage in speech that might be regarded as damaging to the good name of that person or entity. Therefore, if their statements are potentially defamatory in relation to an identifiable person or entity, they will be directed to discontinue their remarks. It is imperative that they comply with any such direction.
On the format of the meeting, I will invite witnesses in turn to make an opening statement for a maximum of five minutes. Once the opening statements have been delivered, I will call on members of the committee in the order in which they indicate to me to put their questions. Members and their substitutes will be called. Non-members in attendance will also be called in the order in which they indicate at the end of the first round. We operate a rota system that provides each member with an initial six minutes to engage with our witnesses. The six minutes are for both questions and answers. Therefore, it is essential for members to put their questions succinctly and for witnesses to be succinct in their responses. When all members who have indicated have had their initial engagement, time permitting, a second round will commence. In that round, each member will have up to three minutes for questions and answers. The duration of the meeting is limited and therefore the times must be strictly adhered to. I ask everybody to be focused in their contributions.
I will now call on each organisation to deliver their opening statement as follows: Mr. Barry Fox, Inland Fisheries Ireland, Dr. Tom Ryan, EPA, Dr. Rick Officer, Marine Institute, Mr. Ger Barry, Cork County Council, and Mr. Conor Arnold and Mr. John Ruby, anglers representatives.
Mr. Barry Fox:
I thank the committee for inviting us this evening to discuss the recent fish kill in the Blackwater river in County Cork. I am accompanied by Dr. Fiona Kelly, head of research at Inland Fisheries Ireland, and Mr. Sean Long, south-west river basin district director. Freshwater and marine ecosystems across Ireland are facing unprecedented environmental pressures, with many native species now threatened with extinction. These pressures stem from a combination of factors, most notably declining water quality and the ongoing degradation of natural habitats. The Environmental Protection Agency identifies the primary drivers of water quality deterioration as agriculture, hydromorphological alterations such as river channel modification and habitat loss, forestry, urban wastewater and domestic wastewater discharges. These activities lead to elevated nutrient concentrations, particularly nitrogen and phosphorus, along with organic pollution and significant physical disruption of aquatic habitats. Together they undermine both water quality and the overall health of ecosystems. Additional contributors to environmental stress include industrial effluents, drainage of peatlands and the spread of invasive species, all of which compound the challenges facing Ireland’s aquatic environments. Addressing these pressures requires co-ordinated, science-led action and a renewed commitment to protecting and restoring our water bodies. The large-scale fish kill mortalities that occurred on the River Blackwater in Cork in August constitute a severe ecological event inflicting significant near-term damage on local fish populations and a profoundly distressing impact on surrounding communities.
The harrowing sight of thousands of dead and decomposing fish in the protected waters of the Blackwater is both unacceptable and deeply alarming. Such events must not, under any circumstances, be tolerated on our rivers or lakes. It is the duty of all State agencies with statutory responsibility in this area to act decisively and comprehensively, to pursue every investigative avenue, determine the root cause, assess all contributing factors, and identify and hold the responsible parties to account.
Accountability must be grounded in the meticulous assessment of all available evidence, supported by robust data and rigorous scientific analysis. Only through such a transparent, evidence-based approach can we safeguard our natural ecosystems, restore public trust and prevent the recurrence of environmental tragedies of this kind. Ireland’s native fish species, including Atlantic salmon, sea and brown trout, lamprey species, Arctic char, pollan, native oysters and the critically endangered European eel are highly dependent on clean, well-oxygenated and ecologically rich freshwater and saltwater systems for their survival. The continued decline in the quality, diversity and resilience of surface waters is a direct driver of biodiversity loss within these fragile aquatic ecosystems. Inland Fisheries Ireland has the statutory responsibility for the protection, development and management of Ireland’s 74,000 km of rivers, streams and lakes as well as coastal waters to the 12-mile jurisdictional limit. IFI’s environmental role is limited to the protection of waters from pollution and the prevention of injury or damage to spawning beds as set out in sections 171 to 173, inclusive, of the Fisheries (Consolidation) Act 1959 and as authorised persons under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act 1977. IFI prosecutes offenders under these Acts when the source of a deleterious discharge is identified and linked directly to the party responsible. Inland Fisheries Ireland has in recent years engaged proactively with the Department of Climate, Energy and the Environment on the need to modernise and strengthen Ireland’s primary fisheries legislation, much of which remains based on the 1959 Act. A critical priority is the introduction of more effective penalties and enforcement mechanisms for pollution and habitat destruction, alongside enhanced statutory protections for native fish and shellfish populations. This legislative reform has been identified as a priority in the current programme for Government and will play a central role in the delivery of IFI’s statement of strategy from 2026 to 2030.
Inland Fisheries Ireland is fully committed to the investigation of all pollution incidents and fish kill events within the State. To support this, IFI operates a 24-hour confidential hotline, enabling members of the public to report suspected pollution, habitat damage or illegal fishing activities. Where a fish kill or pollution incident is found to have resulted from an action that constitutes an offence under the fisheries Acts or the water pollution Acts and where sufficient admissible evidence is available, IFI will initiate legal proceedings against the alleged offender.
Fish kills occur periodically in aquatic environments and can arise from a variety of natural and anthropogenic causes. Increasingly, such events are linked to human activities, particularly point-source discharges and diffuse, chronic pollution. These are frequently associated with low dissolved oxygen levels in nutrient rich surface waters, one of the most pressing and persistent water quality challenges in Ireland. Climate change is expected to significantly exacerbate these pressures. Prolonged droughts, reduced flows, higher temperatures and extreme weather events can lower dilution capacity, alter water chemistry and intensify the impact of both point and diffuse pollution. As climate disruption accelerates, the frequency and severity of fish kills are likely to increase, underscoring the urgent need for co-ordinated, science-led responses in monitoring, prevention, mitigation and enforcement. Agriculture is the principal pressure affecting 64% of the 73 waterbodies classified as "at risk" within the Blackwater, or Munster, catchment followed by forestry, which impacts 25%, and hydromorphological pressures, accounting for 15%. These pressures primarily manifest as nutrient enrichment, habitat alteration through changes to the physical morphology, and organic pollution in surface waters. Inland Fisheries Ireland and its staff are firmly committed and dedicated to safeguarding aquatic habitats and our native fish species, a mission that aligns directly with IFI’s statutory responsibility to conserve, protect, and sustainably develop Ireland’s inland fisheries resources. In 2024, IFI officers conducted a total of 23,425 environmental and habitat inspections nationwide, including more than 2,700 agricultural site inspections and over 2,030 assessments of wastewater and water treatment facilities. Over the same period, IFI initiated 39 prosecutions for environmental offences, successfully concluding 27 cases, and issued 158 warnings for water quality infringements. IFI also pursued 99 prosecutions for fishery-related offences, of which 64 have been resolved. Within the Munster or Blackwater catchment, IFI has successfully closed 18 environmental prosecutions since 2019, addressing critical issues such as deleterious discharges and damage to spawning habitats. At present, three prosecutions remain pending in this catchment, involving similar serious offences.
The fish kill reported on the Munster Blackwater on 11 August 2025 was a catastrophic environmental incident that prompted one of the most extensive investigations in Inland Fisheries Ireland’s history. Despite comprehensive efforts, the precise cause of the event remains undetermined. IFI officers initially responded on 11 August to reports of dead and distressed fish upstream of Mallow, County Cork, with retrospective evidence indicating the first sightings of mortalities on 9 August. In the days that followed, affected fish were observed along a 39 km stretch of the river, both upstream and downstream of Mallow as investigations progressed. Under the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley’s direction, an interagency investigative group was established on 22 August to co-ordinate the response and facilitate the systematic sharing and analysis of all relevant data. The affected river section traverses a region characterised by intensive agriculture, multiple drinking water and wastewater facilities, urban centres, and a range of food, drink, and chemical industries compounding the complexity of the investigation. Notably, the fish kill was atypical. Live and apparently healthy fish were frequently observed alongside dead or moribund fish throughout the affected reach, complicating efforts to identify a discrete pollution source. Marine Institute assessments pointed out environmental insult, with a waterborne irritant identified as the likely cause by 21 August. Between 11 August and 8 September, IFI conducted over 200 habitat inspections at 47 sites, collecting samples submitted to the Marine Institute, the competent authority for fish health for bacteriological, virological and histological testing. IFI also undertook independent analyses for approximately 900 chemicals, ammonium compounds and heavy metals. Throughout the investigation, IFI pursued multiple public reports, including allegations of illegal land spreading upstream of the affected area, suspicious activities near Roskeen Bridge, in co-operation with An Garda Síochána, and illegal waste disposal. IFI has actively engaged with local elected representatives, stakeholders, and the media to provide updates while balancing the confidentiality necessary due to potential criminal prosecutions.
Inland Fisheries Ireland remains committed to the enforcement of existing legislation and has a strong and proven track record in this regard. However, IFI acknowledges the legislative shortcomings of the current fisheries Acts, which provide the organisation with limited enforcement powers, primarily restricted to addressing harmful discharges and interference with spawning beds. Furthermore, the minimal penalties available through the lower courts significantly undermine the effectiveness of enforcement efforts. We strongly contend that these penalties are not proportionate to the severity of environmental crimes, which cause significant harm to fisheries, their habitats and the communities that depend on our rivers and water quality for both amenity value and livelihoods. A detailed timeline of the investigation is available, and IFI welcomes questions to provide further clarity on this significant environmental incident.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Fox. I now invite Dr. Ryan to make his opening statement.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
I thank the committee for inviting the EPA to contribute to this important discussion. I am joined by EPA programme managers Pamela McDonell, Noel Byrne and Jenny Deakin, who have been involved in the investigation for the EPA and in the production of our report on the incident. In the interests of time, I am going to read an abridged version of our opening statement.
The extensive fish mortalities that occurred on the Blackwater river in Cork during August are a serious harm to the local fish stocks and have had an unjust and negative impact on the local communities. The devastation of damaged carcasses of thousands of dead fish floating in the protected waters of the Blackwater or tangled in the weeds of any of our country's rivers or lakes are events that are not to be tolerated. When such detrimental incidents occur, as on the Blackwater, and where causation can be established and the wrongdoer identified, they should be held to account, and it is incumbent on all the State agencies with responsibility for these incidents to do all in their power to identify the cause and the wrongdoer and to bring them to account. This can only be achieved by following and assessing the available evidence, data and science. The EPA's primary role in the investigation was to assess whether EPA-regulated sites within the region of interest could have been responsible through their water discharge activities and to take action against any operator found to be at fault.
The EPA first became aware of the serious fish kill on the morning of 12 August and immediately mobilised resources in the Blackwater catchment to investigate. The EPA’s investigation encompassed the deployment of three teams of inspectors to EPA-regulated sites in the Mallow and Kanturk area within an hour of the EPA becoming aware of the fish mortalities. There was an immediate expansion of the investigation on 22 August to include a broader timeframe and geographic scope within the Blackwater catchment. This was in response to preliminary fish postmortem results from the Marine Institute. The EPA completed 41 inspections of 31 facilities in the catchment, collected 40 samples and assessed operational practices and monitoring data associated with ten industrial sites, 17 wastewater treatment facilities and four drinking water plants. We completed five invertebrate quality surveys in the Kanturk to Mallow area on 12 August and 1 and 2 September.
Of the 31 EPA-regulated sites investigated, 27 had either no discharges or had compliant discharges during the weeks prior to 12 August. However, four of the 31 facilities investigated had discharges that were not compliant with licence requirements in July and August and one small wastewater facility with a certificate of authorisation was operating above operational capacity. These issues are dealt with in detail in the EPA’s report which is contained in full in the annexe to the interagency report. All these issues remain the subject of ongoing enforcement action, which is separate and distinct from the investigation into the causality of the fish mortalities on the Blackwater.
To determine if there was a causal link between the fish mortalities and EPA-regulated sites, the EPA assessed the relevant monitoring and operational data for the sites and the impact of the non-compliant discharges on receiving water quality in the period 28 July to 12 August. Overall there is no evidence from the ecological water quality data that there was a chronic water quality problem in the Blackwater catchment in advance of or following the fish mortalities. This suggests that the cause of the fish mortalities was a short-term pollution event, which may have been localised in extent, and was not due to an underlying chronic water quality problem.
The detailed analysis and assessment of discharges from all 31 EPA-regulated sites, including industrial sites and Uisce Éireann-controlled urban wastewater discharges and drinking water plants during July and August 2025, does not support a causal link between these activities and the serious fish mortalities found in the River Blackwater.
One of the 31 EPA-regulated sites investigated by the EPA was North Cork Creameries, NCC, situated on the River Allow near Kanturk. While NCC was an important focus of that investigation, it is specifically mentioned in this opening statement as it attracted significant public attention and speculation throughout the course of the current investigation. NCC is a site with a history of failure to consistently achieve compliance with its licence discharge conditions and was already the subject of significant enforcement activity by the EPA prior to the incident, culminating in a prosecution which concluded in April 2025. Non-compliances were detected in the wastewater treatment plant discharge from NCC in the June to August period and were serious and entirely unacceptable. The licence breaches arose primarily due to a lack of organised management or control of wastewater treatment plant activities, a lack of appropriate expertise to resolve significant operational issues, a failure to appropriately generate, manage, maintain and use critical data sets to inform corrective actions and a disregard for licence requirements and licence limits.
However, despite the seriousness of these issues and the significance of licence breaches at NCC, the EPA’s assessment, as set out in our report, does not support a causal link between the NCC’s discharges into the River Allow and the fish mortalities in the Blackwater. In summary, this reasoned conclusion is based on an assessment of the yard drainage configuration and operation at the site; an assessment of the load to wastewater treatment plant operational data; an assessment of the toxicity of NCC discharge to fish in the context of the prevailing environmental conditions during the period of interest; and an assessment based on the proximity of site to dead fish where no dead or marked fish were observed in the River Allow during the period of interest, noting that there is a stretch of 4 km river water between the NCC discharge point on the Allow and where the Allow enters the Blackwater.
The EPA regulates, through authorisation and enforcement, almost 900 industrial and waste facilities, over 1,000 wastewater authorisations and approximately 750 drinking water treatment plants, with almost 1,800 inspections carried out across these sectors annually. The EPA does so without fear or favour, in the interests of the public and in the protection of the environment. It does so by detailed assessment and by drawing reasoned conclusions based on the available evidence, data and science as it has done in this investigation. To do otherwise would be to draw conclusions based on speculation which would be both environmentally irresponsible and regulatorily negligent.
The detailed analysis and assessment of all 31 EPA-authorised sites does not support a causal link between these activities and the serious fish mortalities found in the River Blackwater. Throughout the investigation, the EPA worked closely with our colleagues in Inland Fisheries Ireland, Cork County Council and others, both bilaterally and through an interagency group.
It is important to acknowledge the EPA also received videos and pertinent information from concerned members of the public in relation to discharges from EPA-regulated sites during the investigation period. The EPA acknowledges with gratitude the work and commitment of those concerned groups in contributing to the EPA’s investigation. The issues raised by those members of the public have been considered in the EPA’s assessment.
I assure the committee that the EPA continues to rigorously enforce environmental protection legislation and authorisation requirements at all EPA-regulated sites in the Blackwater catchment area and across the country.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Dr. Ryan. Next is Dr. Rick Officer from the Marine Institute.
Dr. Rick Officer:
I thank the Cathaoirleach and thank the committee for the invitation to meet the joint committee this evening. I am joined by my colleagues Dr. Glenn Nolan, director of marine environment and food safety services, and Dr. Jamie Downes, section manager of our fish health unit. We welcome the opportunity to discuss the important work that the Marine Institute undertakes and particularly our involvement in the response to the recent Blackwater river fish kill.
Before we discuss that response in more detail, I will first brief the committee on the context for the Marine Institute’s involvement. The statutory remit of the Marine Institute is set out in the Marine Institute Act 1991. That Act established the Marine Institute as the State agency responsible for undertaking, co-ordinating, promoting and assisting in marine research and development and in providing services related to marine research and development that promote economic development, create employment and protect the marine environment.
In practice, this involves the Marine Institute in the conduct of environmental, fisheries and aquaculture surveys and monitoring to meet Ireland’s national and international legal requirements. We provide scientific and technical advice to the Government to inform policy and support the sustainable development of Ireland’s marine resources. Within that context the Marine Institute is the competent authority in Ireland for the implementation of aquatic animal health law. The relevant EU regulations are in the opening statement. This law lays down rules for the prevention and control of animal diseases which are transmissible to animals or humans. Our imperative is to ensure that Ireland maintains an excellent health status in relation to fish and shellfish in rivers, on farms and in lakes and that we remain free of the many diseases that occur in other countries.
As Ireland’s competent authority for aquatic animal health, the Marine Institute’s fish health unit is designated as the national reference laboratory for finfish, mollusc and crustacean diseases. That designation is made in accordance with the animal health law on the basis that the fish health unit has the technical expertise necessary to carry out analysis of samples in relation to diseases of fish and shellfish.
As the national reference laboratory for diseases of fish, molluscs and crustaceans, the fish health unit’s primary responsibilities are to develop, validate and implement appropriate methods to test for relevant listed diseases under the EU animal health law and the relevant annexes to the implementing decisions, as well as to test for potential emerging diseases. These diagnostic services are provided as necessary and in support of the management of non-listed diseases by operators, their veterinarians and other State agencies. We maintain modern and well-equipped laboratories, which enable the fish health unit to diagnose fish and shellfish diseases using a variety of methods such as parasitology, histology, bacteriology, virology and molecular diagnostic methods.
It is in this context that the Marine Institute’s fish health unit was called upon to assist Inland Fisheries Ireland in its investigation of the recent fish kill. We have made a written submission which outlines the engagement of the fish health unit in that investigation and a summary of our findings. Dr. Nolan, Dr. Downes and I now welcome any questions on our involvement in this incident.
Mr. Ger Barry:
I thank the Cathaoirleach and the committee for inviting Cork County Council to discuss the recent fish mortalities in the River Blackwater. I am acting director of planning and environment for Cork County Council. I am accompanied by Mr. Alan Costello, who is a senior scientist in the planning and environmental directorate.
Cork County Council delivers certain statutory and regulatory inspections and monitoring programmes with respect to water quality protection. These programmes are outlined in the annual recommended minimum criteria for environmental inspections plan, also known as the RMCEI plan. The national enforcement priorities, NEPs, are identified by the EPA and underpin both the development and implementation of the council’s RMCEI plan. The 2025-27 NEPs programme identifies 15 priorities, including four in water, namely, pressures or risks from agricultural farmyards relating to soiled water, slurry collection and storage; pressures from agricultural farmlands relating to slurry and fertiliser spreading; section 4 discharge licences under the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts 1977 to 2007; and local water quality issues including septic tanks and private water supplies.
The RMCEI plan is subject to annual review and assessment by the EPA, with performance benchmarked against performance indicators and environmental outcomes across the local authority sector in the annual local authority performance framework report. Cork County Council's performance in environmental protection is also subject to audit by the EPA. The key statutory and regulatory functions of Cork County Council are across several sectoral activities, including monitoring of compliance with good agricultural practice regulations by reference to targets specified by the EPA in the national agricultural inspection plan, which is a national, risk-based inspection plan; licensing and ongoing regulation of low risk or risk trade effluent and sewage effluent discharges, as defined under section 4 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Acts, which are not scheduled activities under the Environmental Protection Agency Act 1992; inspection of residential septic tanks in accordance with targets specified by the Environmental Protection Agency and the national inspection plan; and responding to and investigating reports or complaints relating to water pollution incidents and taking enforcement action, as appropriate, where Cork County Council is the competent authority and liaising with other agencies, where necessary. Cork County Council also supports the EPA water framework directive sampling programme by undertaking the collection of samples on behalf of the EPA and sending samples to the EPA for analysis.
Cork County Council was first notified by IFI of a reported fish incident at 12.15 p.m. on Monday, 11 August. A council officer attended the scene at 2.30 p.m. with an officer from IFI. Several dead and injured brown trout were observed by the council officer and IFI inspectors among seemingly unaffected fish. A visual inspection of the river was undertaken in the vicinity of the reported fish mortalities and upstream of Mallow bridge. No discharge or plume was evident. IFI shared its initial assessment suggesting a possible fungal outbreak or disease, exacerbated by low water levels and high temperatures, as early investigation yielded no signs of pollution. Investigations by both IFI and Cork County Council officers continued in order to ascertain the extent of the area impacted and what rivers could potentially be affected. The council carried out sampling at the River Clyda and River Blackwater on 12 August. Test results shared with other agencies showed that ammonia and dissolved oxygen levels were within normal range.
From 12 August through to 22 August, our investigation was primarily supporting IFI in its investigation to establish the scale and extent of the affected catchment and investigating reports from the public about activities that may be linked to the incident.
On 22 August, IFI confirmed, based on the Marine Institute’s findings, that the cause was not a fungal infection as previously suggested and the likely cause of the fish mortalities was an “environment insult or irritant”. Cork County Council attended the initial online interagency group meeting, chaired by IFI, on 25 August, consisting of agencies including the EPA, the Marine Institute and Uisce Éireann and eventually expanding to include the HSE, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, and LAWPRO. The interagency group meetings agreed specific actions, including further analysis of tissue samples by a contracted laboratory on behalf of IFI, as well as further catchment macroinvertebrate assessments at agreed locations. These assessments, undertaken by Cork County Council, the EPA and IFI, found no evidence of an impacted macroinvertebrate population.
Between 13 August and 27 August, Cork County Council staff inspected 20 light industrial and commercial sites within the catchment, comprising businesses licensed under section 4 of the Local Government (Water Pollution) Act, and other commercial operators. No issues were identified that might have given rise to the incident. Cork County Council undertook 14 investigations of agricultural activities within the catchment. These investigations established no causal link with this incident.
Between 12 August and 5 September, a total of 20 complaints were received from members of the public in respect of this incident. All complaints were triaged and assigned for inspection, where deemed appropriate. Again, no causal link to the fish kill was found. Results from fish tissue testing undertaken by a specialist laboratory on behalf of IFI found no specific factors that could be conclusively said to have caused the incident. Cork County Council briefed elected members of the northern committee on 8 September and 22 September. Cork County Council has supported IFI and has worked closely with other State agencies throughout this investigation and will continue to provide support on an interagency basis.
I thank the committee for the opportunity to outline Cork County Council’s role and contribution with respect to this investigation. I look forward to addressing any questions members may have for the council.
Mr. Conor Arnold:
I thank the Cathaoirleach and members of the committee for the invitation to come today. I am the chairperson of Killavullen Angling Club. I own an angling centre where I teach fly-casting and run a day-ticket salmon fishery on the River Blackwater. I am also an APGAI Ireland qualified fly-casting instructor and a pro-team member for LOOP Tackle and Patagonia.
On 11 August 2025, a catastrophic fish kill was reported to Inland Fisheries Ireland. Up to 32,000 salmon and brown trout plus another 10,000 of other fish species were killed in this pollution event according to the interagency group report published last week. These numbers do not include juvenile fish or fry, which are up to one or two inches in length. With this in mind, the number of fished killed could actually run into the hundreds of thousands.
What followed was a fundamentally flawed and unco-ordinated investigation. It took 12 days to get preliminary test results in the first instance, whereas it took our club a mere 24 hours to get preliminary results from an EU accredited laboratory. It took three days for the Marine Institute to arrive on-site and take moribund fish samples. It took 14 days to set up an interagency group to investigate the event. It took 15 and 18 days, respectively, to take sample fish from a tributary of a main river for residue sampling. There was no procedural advice for river users, or indeed the public, with regard to health and safety from the chemical irritant or disinfection protocols from the secondary fungal infection. Ultimately, the time lost and the State bodies' complete inability to observe international best practices during their investigations have resulted in a lack of evidence due to the fact that most of it had been washed away.
This has made an appropriate prosecution very difficult. On 20 August, the EPA stated there was no causal link to North Cork Creameries. Would someone please explain to me how any facility with a track record of having multiple convictions for pollution, as well as having 125 non-compliance notices since March 2020, could be excluded from an investigation when further samples were only taken for residue testing on 26 and 29 August? In other words, all of the evidence was not available at the time of the publication of the report.
Sadly, these fish are now dead and gone. This catastrophic fish kill has passed us but what we need to happen next is as follows: an extensive habitat restoration programme; constant water quality monitors to be strategically placed into the river but paid for by every discharge facility as part of their EPA licence criteria - these monitors need to be under the remit of a rapid response team to give one single focal point in any investigation and this system needs to be always transparent to the public; a fish counter installed in the lower reaches of the river to monitor returning migratory species; the removal of all commercial netting; increased fines and other stringent stipulations on all facilities that discharge into the River Blackwater and its tributaries; and an independent inquiry into all departmental bodies involved, focusing on protocol and timelines.
The distressing scenes of thousands of dead and dying fish in the River Blackwater have outraged the community and we demand answers and solutions. We simply cannot allow this to happen anywhere in this country again. The conservation, recreation and angling reputation of Ireland depends on what we do next. To quote a well-known legal maxim, without prosecution, there is no crime and no law.
Mr. John Ruby:
I thank the committee for having us here today on behalf of our club, Mallow Trout Anglers. Our president was contacted by his neighbour who was out walking his dogs by the river on 11 August who explained all the dead fish he spotted in the River Blackwater, below Mallow town bridge. Kevin Healy went down to investigate himself and, shocked at what he witnessed, contacted Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, at 10.20 a.m. IFI was on site on the same day, by Mallow bridge, and found a few dead fish. After receiving a call, I went to see for myself a sight I will never forget. Dead fish were floating down the river, giving the odd kick as they slowly died.
On 12 August, the EPA arrived to take water samples at the licensed sites. The IFI was seen everywhere up and down the river and on 14 August the Marine Institute were on site by Mallow bridge taking samples of trout. These were the State bodies getting the process started. On 12 August, I made contact with our local TD, Eoghan Kenny, to ensure the public water supply was safe. He was very efficient and engaging with me and we are very proud to have him representing us. As it turned out, the drinking water was supplied from the River Clyda so we turned our attention to the river and keeping the public safe.
There were reports of animals getting sick after being in the water. Blackwater Veterinarian Clinic in Mallow posted on social media for animals and humans alike to avoid the River Blackwater. By 13 August, the fish mortalities were still increasing and what we witnessed was very disturbing: dead fish everywhere, with markings, mainly on the head, and bulging eyeballs which exploded as we looked on helplessly. Fish were blind and I was able to collect them live out of the river, as seen on RTÉ news. Catastrophic was an underestimation. Club members walked the river for miles as we had a definite point where fish were dying and this was spreading down river slowly but still devastating. In total, 37 km of our beautiful river were being attacked. We witnessed fish run up streams while in the warmer water in the main river healthy and damaged fish were in very large numbers. Although this gave hope of fish surviving, they were still dying in front of us with no explanation.
After speaking with Sean Long of IFI, we offered our services to help remove dead fish from the river. Sean was arranging the disposal of such fish and explained it was €600 to have them collected so we delivered to the location at our own cost. On 14 August, all three clubs - Lombardstown Trout Anglers, Killavulen and Mallow - arranged to remove fish from the river, with around 4,000 dead fish removed. Safety precautions were observed, with rubber gloves supplied, and I personally disinfected all our members' gear. It was physically clear this was the single largest fish kill in all of Ireland. IFI requested we leave the dead fish in situ and this request was observed. We have stopped anglers fishing for the rest of the season.
After constant media interviews, the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, arrived in Mallow to speak with us and witness the river for himself. After a second meeting with Deputy Dooley, IFI and the EPA, the long wait had begun for results that never materialised. I thank the committee for its time.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank everyone for all their opening statements. I now invite members, in the order in which they have indicated, to engage with the witnesses. It is members, substitutes and then other members. A reminder that members have a time of an initial six minutes and to please try to stick with this. I call Senator Noonan.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
At the outset, I want to acknowledge the deep trauma and upset this has caused the local community, particularly the angling community, who are our custodians of the rivers up and down the country. Surely, these rivers are worth more to us in pristine condition as healthy rivers for tourism, leisure and nature, than they are as open sewers or for the short-term gains of a few.
I have four questions. Irrespective of what caused this fish kill, the compliance record of North Cork Creameries is truly appalling, stretching back years. In spite of repeated prosecutions and enforcement notifications from the EPA, at what point does the EPA revoke a discharge licence and was that ever considered in the case of North Cork Creameries?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
I thank the Senator for the question. We concluded a prosecution of North Cork Creameries in April of this year. There was a conviction and fines. Throughout this investigation and before, it had been in serious non-compliance. We go through a process of escalation. Our first role is to try to secure compliance and that is what we are doing now. North Cork Creameries is in compliance but it is operating below the operational activity it wants to get to. The idea of suspension is there. The bar is quite high for that and is set out in legislation but it is always an option. Our first option is to try to secure compliance and that is what we are trying to work towards at present but there are serious issues there.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There are some other discharge licenceholders who have been on the EPA worst offenders list, along with North Cork Creameries, all of which appear to have persistent breaches. Again, this is about at what point we set that benchmark. What percentage of EPA IPC licenceholders would Dr. Ryan say regularly breach their licence?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
We risk-rank the non-compliant sites through what we call our national priority sites list. We have almost 900 industrial and waste facilities we regulate and, today, there are four of those on our national priority sites list. All would have serious enforcement action against them as we try to promote compliance with their licences. They are sites our inspectors would be on regularly until we secure compliance.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Dr. Ryan for that. What does he believe needs to be changed in terms of legislation? I know we have had reference from IFI relating to legislative change in the programme for Government. This relates to legislation or policy to strengthen Ireland's licensing and enforcement regime so that the fines and probation orders are not merely - and this is what seems to be happening - being absorbed into the cost of doing business.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
That is an interesting point.
Many of our prosecutions are taken at District Court level where, on the face of it, the fines on conviction are relatively small. For each charge, a fine of €4,000 or €5,000 is imposed. If there are six charges, there is a multiple of that. Even fines or tariffs of €40,000 are small in comparison with these industries. What is not seen during those prosecutions, between detection and successful prosecution maybe 12 or 15 months later, is all the work that goes on between the EPA and the licensed facility to secure compliance. That could mean the investment of hundreds of thousands of euro in infrastructure to secure compliance. That is part of the process that is not seen.
On the other side, we have the ability to work with the DPP to take prosecutions on indictment. Over the past three years, we have secured a custodial sentence on one operator, a fine of €500,000 on another and fines and penalties of €350,000 in another case. Once we go to indictment, those fines and penalties become substantial and persuasive.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My final question goes back to the point that Mr. Conor Arnold made about the delays in the response. Is there a required standard operating procedure for rapid response and analysis in response to fish kills, including rapid water chemistry testing, which all agency staff in county councils should be employing? If not, perhaps it is something that could come out of recommendations of this committee. We should try to give consideration to this so that we do not have continued repeats of this situation.
Mr. Barry Fox:
I will take that question. We have discussed this at the interagency level. It is not something that IFI normally does in its standard operating procedure. When we investigate a pollution or fish kill, our primary objective is to find live discharge because that is what we require to take action. Certainly, there are lessons learned from this. It is something we will have to look at. There is an appetite from the agencies that are involved in this under normal circumstances to move to that position and have the rapid response team and a protocol in place to do those types of analysis.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank everyone for coming in today. I particularly thank Mr. Conor Arnold and Mr. John Ruby. We met yesterday at the River Blackwater to have a chat and a more in-depth conversation. I thank them for coming up today. It is a long journey.
From looking at the front of the report, there are a lot of agencies involved. Who was responsible for managing this process?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On 11 August, IFI was informed there had been a fish kill. It was on site by approximately midday.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What samples were taken on that day?
Mr. Barry Fox:
Our operating procedures are very clear. We are required to find a discharge of a deleterious matter into a water course. Our officers were immediately investigating where that occurred. That is our primary objective. We do not take water quality analysis to determine what went into the water. Rather, we try to track down where the pollutant actually entered the water. That is our primary role under our statutory remit.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that not a huge flaw in the system when discharges actually flow away? Often, it is not possible to quickly identify the point of discharge.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry but I am going to be quite short and go back and forth because I am so limited in time. When a fish kill is identified, I would have thought people would be on site – which IFI was - taking water, sediment and fish samples. That did not happen on day one.
Mr. Barry Fox:
It happened on 12 August. Certainly, water samples were taken on 12 August. IFI’s remit is very clear and quite weak with regard to our legislative remit, if I am totally honest. It is something that is being addressed at the moment. Our primary role is to locate the discharge, sample it and prosecute the offender.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Although I am not sure whether it was on 11 or 12 August, at some stage, IFI said there were high water temperatures and low flow and deduced it to be a fungal disease. It deduced that it was a natural event. Is that correct?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In the report that Cork County Council submitted, it says that IFI shared its initial assessments suggesting a possible fungal outbreak or disease, exacerbated by low water levels and high temperatures, as early investigations yielded no signs of pollution. Did that happen?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If that was the indication or suspicion, however, did that lead to a belief that it was a natural event and that there was nothing to be seen?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Fox does not believe that.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Did IFI look at the fish on that day? I am just trying to work out who was doing what on site. IFI arrived. Its primary remit relates to fish, rather than water quality or anything else. Is that correct?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Did IFI look at the fish on day one? Did its officers pick fish up to look to see whether there were fungi on their gills? Was any of that carried out?
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.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This was not in the media; I am reading this from Cork County Council’s report. In that document, it says that IFI shared its assessment suggesting a possible fungal outbreak. It seems absolutely incredible that an agency was on site when there was a fish kill and no water samples were collected, regardless of IFI’s remit. That seems like a huge gap in any protocol. It should not matter which agency was on site. There should be a series of samples that are required in order to actually ascertain what happened. Walking up and down streams trying to find a pipe, particularly in instances like this, is not going to work.
The EPA was not notified-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy has one more question. We have a lot of speakers indicating.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
IFI and Cork County Council were notified on 11 August, while the EPA was notified on 12 August. Why was the EPA not notified until 12 August? It is also mentioned in the report that the first mortalities were spotted on 9 August. When and to whom was that notified?
Mr. Sean Long:
The initial report came in on Monday, 11 August. On the afternoon of Tuesday, 12 August, a report was made through our hotline.
Someone had heard about this and noted they saw a fish on Saturday, 9 August, and then reported it to us. Our officers spoke to that person to investigate the location.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That was after the fact. The EPA, then, was notified on 12 August. As standard, would the EPA not be notified on day one? Who was responsible for notifying the EPA?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Long. I call Deputy O’Sullivan.
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will follow on from Deputy Whitmore. It is quite clear that everybody in the room might have been fulfilling their statutory duties to the letter of the law, or that is what has been presented. That may well be the case, but it is quite clear from listening to people on the ground and other public representatives over those weeks that there was an absence of information at times. People were not sure if they were meant to go into the river at some stage or whether they could take fish. There was just information everywhere. This is the first incident of this type that I have ever been involved with as a public representative and it has shown me the entire system around this area needs a dramatic overhaul. I mean a legislative overhaul, as identified by Senator Noonan. We could get bogged down in dates here and who knew what and when they knew it, but, ultimately, in future, is this report that we have got, which is inconclusive, let us call a spade a spade, where this incident ends? Will there be further investigation or a review at any stage?
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is that decision to consider the organisation’s position on the emergency response taken in light of failings that everybody here has identified concerning this particular incident, or was it happening anyway?
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is a lesson learned from this particular event.
Mr. Barry Fox:
Yes. Regarding the opportunity for organisations to become better equipped and be provided with the tools to do more work in this area in the future, the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, only yesterday committed to increasing the powers of IFI around water quality and habitat destruction. This is very welcome. An MOU is also being progressed by IFI with the National Parks and Wildlife Service with a view to cross-warranting under the habitats legislation and the wildlife Acts. We are going to have many more strings to our bow for future events.
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Specifically regarding fish kills, although perhaps not of this massive magnitude, how many incidents like this have there been nationwide in the past 12 to 24 months? Following on from that, how many incidents were similar in terms of having inconclusive reports or findings?
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry to interrupt, it is just that I am watching the clock as well, but I suppose this goes back to Mr. Arnold’s point earlier. From the time this incident was identified to the time people actually got to sitting around the table collectively, the best part of a week if not longer had passed. Let us be honest about it. Water flows fairly fast in parts of the River Blackwater, and whatever had occurred had likely run through at that point.
Mr. Barry Fox:
We estimate that this may have occurred 72 hours previous to 11 August, and this is the issue. The plume, as we would call it, would have dissipated out of the system at that stage. I guess the position for IFI and our statutory role is something we adhere to and deliver to the letter of the law. It is not ideal. There was a joint and co-ordinated effort to try to determine what happened here, but, unfortunately, with the nature of these types of discharges, it is difficult to locate them unless they are continually flowing.
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Obviously, I understand that the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, has written to IFI to ask it to undertake the review of legislation and make recommendations. From what Mr. Fox said, the key to all that will be how the agencies are brought together in a co-operative way and, probably most importantly, in a timely way. Is this something IFI will be specifically focusing on in terms of legislation?
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am going to ask another question and I am not trying to be smart with my use of words. In the opening statement, Mr. Fox said that "under the fisheries Acts or the water pollution Acts and where sufficient admissible evidence is available, IFI will initiate legal proceedings against the alleged offender".
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am not trying to ask Mr. Fox to identify anybody, but the word “admissible” there is just sticking out to me. Just to be clear about what I am asking, was there evidence that was not sufficient in terms of identifying somebody in the context of the reference to admissible evidence?
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will use my last 30 seconds or so to turn to the anglers. For the future, given the state the river is in, will Mr. Arnold tell me what it is going to take in terms of investment to get tourists back and bring about restoration and possibly compensation for people on the river?
Mr. Conor Arnold:
Yes. I thank the Deputy. The timescale involved if the river is left to its own devices, given the species incorporated in this incident, could be anything up to ten years. As I said in my earlier statement, without prosecution, there is no crime and no law, and this could very well happen again in the near future or two years, three years or ten years down the road. If this does happen again on this scale in that river, then it is finished as an economic and recreational facility. It will be finished. I suppose we could say the same about any river basin in the country, basically. The fact that we do not have protocols and procedures in place to monitor the EPA licensed facilities, section 4 discharge facilities, means my business is finished for this year. Since 11 August, I have completely lost the two most profitable months of the season. From the vague information given, as the Deputy pointed out, we were not even aware if we could go into the river. That was relayed at a meeting in Mallow to Cork County Council and we did not get an answer on this point for quite some time. I do not know how feasible the river as a fishery is in future. The reputational damage to the river as a salmon and trout fishery, from a business point of view, is extremely serious. This is not to mention recreational angling for all the clubs involved and all the juveniles. They now have nowhere to fish, effectively. It is one thing for an adult to jump in the car and head off to another river, but 15-year-old and 16-year-old kids have nowhere to go now.
Pádraig O'Sullivan (Cork North-Central, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. I thank Mr. Arnold.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I call Deputy Daly.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a few questions arising from what was said. They are for Mr. Fox regarding his opening statement. He said there were investigations into allegations of illegal land spreading upstream, suspicious activities near Roskeen Bridge and illegal waste disposal. Are any prosecutions arising out of those three incidents?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No prosecutions will arise from them.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Again regarding the investigation, are any studies under way, such as sediment sampling or macro invertebrate surveys? Are any other investigations like that going on?
Mr. Barry Fox:
No. We undertook macro invertebrate surveys throughout the period after the ailing and moribund fish were identified in the river. Significant work has been done on invertebrate sampling. During the next field season, we intend to undertake significant assessments of the affected area. As Mr. Arnold already referred to, we are also going to look at a lot of habitat assessment to see what kind of work can be done to improve productivity in the catchment area.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it anticipated that any of these proposed further works would assist in any investigation under way into this fish kill?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Fox mentioned the possibility of an emergency response team. Have there been any meetings this month about revising or preparing emergency response protocols to enhance early detection systems? Mr. Fox said that he wanted to do it in the future. Has he started?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There have not been any meetings so far, since 11 August, let us say.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Not specifically to enhance the procedures. Okay. On the prosecutions, the District Court is for minor offences. Mr. Fox said that the lower courts undermine the effectiveness of enforcement efforts. Is it that people are not afraid of the penalties that are in the District Court?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The few regular offenders are dismissive of having to go to the District Court.
Mr. Barry Fox:
If you pollute in a river and are prosecuted by IFI, the average fines are between €1,500 and €5,000 with expenses of possibly €1,500. The penalty does not fit the crime, really. We need to be looking at bringing all these cases where they are significant on indictment. That is my position.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the regular offenders that have been prosecuted more than one time, is Mr. Fox happy that they have licences are allowed to dump into the river, in effect? Is he happy about the amounts that they are by law allowed to discharge into the river are low enough?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does Mr. Fox have an opinion as to how much they are entitled to discharge?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. Is Dr. Ryan happy with that? He mentioned some Circuit Court prosecutions also. How many Circuit Court prosecutions has the EPA established in the past few years?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How many have gone to the Circuit Court since 2020?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The levels that are allowed to be discharged and if the EPA is happy with them.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
The fundamental role of the licensing process is to control the discharges from these facilities. Typically they have wastewater facilities on site that discharge. We set allowable levels for discharge, and that is based on a number of things. One is an environmental impact assessment, appropriate assessment, that is, the impact it would have on the environment and on protected species. It takes account of best available techniques. These are standards set down by Europe. It also takes account of the assimilative capacity of the receiving waters.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am short of time. Is the EPA happy that the amounts are appropriate?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. Going back to Mr. Fox, he said the penalties are not taken as seriously as they should be. What does he think they should be increased to?
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If I can ask Mr. Fox one final question, he mentioned forestry, although it is not necessarily related to the Blackwater. Has he any opinion on the drainage from forestry in the north Kerry, west Limerick area? There have been complaints from locals about the absence of fish life compared with what there was 30 years ago. They say that vertical drainage from forestry has contributed to this. Does IFI have any opinion on that?
Mr. Barry Fox:
Vertical drainage is going to impact on water quality generally and the habitat available to fish to spawn. Absolutely, it is going to impact on the productivity of that catchment. It is an issue, there is no question, but I would say of forestry in general that the management practices are improving. Certainly there are significant pressures on our water in the surface water areas all over the country, not just in Kerry. Forestry has certainly had impacts. Historically, it had much more impact on fisheries. We are keeping a very close eye on it.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Vertical drainage allows large volumes of water to access into the tributaries, for example, of the River Feale, in a quicker way. Does Mr. Fox think that any investigation into flooding in the Listowel area is limited without addressing vertical drainage from forestry upstream?
Mr. Barry Fox:
There is a very in-depth examination of drainage being done at the moment. We are moving back to discussions around slowing the flow and trying to get our flood plains back established so we can slow the distribution and discharge of water into main channels to avoid that type of flooding. There are discussions ongoing in that area.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If the relevant bodies were not taking it into account, it would be a mistake, in regard to the flooding in Listowel. It is a yes or no question.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy, come on now.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Deputy can ask it in round two.
Pa Daly (Kerry, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If the relevant bodies are not taking into account discharges, is it a mistake in regard to the flooding in Listowel?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Dr. Ryan has indicated.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
Just to answer the Deputy's question about EPA prosecutions, since 2021 we have concluded a total of 57 prosecutions against licensees in the District Court. Four cases have been concluded in the Circuit Court on foot of files sent to the DPP. A total of 74% of those cases resulted in convictions while 23 were either given the probation Act or struck out. The penalties imposed included fines of over €1 million with a further €210,000 in charitable donations.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will go straight to a question for IFI. If tens of thousands of fish can die and we cannot find a cause, would Mr. Fox believe our monitoring system is ineffective?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If we cannot find the cause of a fish kill to this extent, would Mr. Fox believe that the monitoring system we have monitoring our waters is ineffective?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That statutory remit we continue to talk about and that statutory duty to protect our rivers is not being fulfilled. It actually is not.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This instance clearly showcases that your statutory obligation is not being fulfilled in your role.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What is that regulation?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What would that be?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Have you asked for those powers?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Have you written to him?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
For the EPA, on North Cork Creameries, how can it keep polluting year after year and still be licensed? Is the agency protecting the rivers or is it protecting the agrifood industry?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
-----and we are dealing with that from an enforcement point of view, but from the perspective of this very serious fish kill we have established there is no causal link. That facility has a poor record. We are enforcing to bring it back into compliance. It needs to invest significantly in its infrastructure to do that.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It has not done that for years, so why is it going to do it now?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It has not done it for years. Why would it do it now?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It has not implemented the infrastructure. Why would it do it now?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is a complete understatement. The company has not invested in infrastructure in years, is making millions in profit and the EPA is allowing it destroy a river. That is what is happening.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The EPA is failing in its job to protect the environment, as Dr. Ryan said, by allowing companies of this nature to destroy rivers and kill over 40,000 fish.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy, with respect, it is clear that link has not been made.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am just making the point.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Yes, but the 40,000 fish link has not been made here.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I know, I am just relating the river to it.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The report refers to the river as having "good" status. How could it possibly have a good status if 40,000 fish have been killed?
Dr. Jenny Deakin:
We have a role under the water framework directive to conduct the national monitoring programmes, which we do in accordance with the directive in line with what every other member state does so our information is comparable to other member states. It is set out very clearly in the directive how we monitor waters and how we assess their ecological status. We look at a combination of water sample information and also the living things in the water. In the Blackwater, for example, we have 166 ecological monitoring stations and 66 chemistry sampling stations.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. Is it normal procedure for IFI to contact the Marine Institute if it comes across a fish kill? This is considering it does not have the infrastructure to sample and investigate.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Did Mr. Long contact the Marine Institute on 11 August?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How come it took until 14 August for its staff to come out?
Dr. Rick Officer:
The contact came through Dr. Downes, who looks after our fish health unit. As I mentioned in my opening statement, the Marine Institute has a variety of functions. We had a team who were deployed doing other fish health unit-related work. I will defer to Dr. Downes to explain the circumstances of this particular response.
Dr. Jamie Downes:
At the time we got the call we had our resources committed elsewhere under our remit for fish health. They were carrying out sampling on live fish at the time. On the risk related to this fish kill, in terms of fish health, the risk of it being a disease was relatively low so we had to deal with live fish before we-----
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would Dr. Downes say the institute does not have enough resources?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would say we do not have enough resources because we are being told the chemical irritant was washed away within 72 hours and it took three days for the team of investigators to come out and take a sample.
Dr. Jamie Downes:
On that, fish health and fish disease is our remit, whereas chemical irritants and that kind of sit outside that. While we can identify the insult to these fish was chemical, we ensured there is no fish disease. That is where our remit sits, really, rather than identifying chemicals or toxins.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay, Deputy Kenny. We will do a second round. Deputy Moynihan is next.
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Cathaoirleach. I thank each organisation for their presentations and for taking the time to travel and be part of this meeting.
The whole incident of the fish kill was so traumatic for people locally. It seems to add insult to injury that the investigation came up inconclusive. It is frustrating and leaves so many unanswered questions hanging over different organisations. Would it be normal an investigation would end up inconclusive like that?
Mr. Barry Fox:
From IFI's perspective, approximately 25% of our pollutions would be from an unknown source. That is because we are investigating live discharges and trying to understand something that may have happened 12, 24 or sometimes ten days before we get notified. Some of these rivers are so remote the fish kills or the impacts are not observed for a period of time. The officers who are on the ground doing this job do it professionally, diligently and they are authorised officers of the State. We are averaging 100 to 120 prosecutions a year. About 50% of those of are environmental prosecutions, but it is a reactive type of role. It is not something where we are sitting waiting for something to happen, as such.
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
About one in four or one in five would end up-----
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One in three end up with no clear direction.
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is going to leave question marks hanging over everyone on it. What about the possibility of reoccurrence if IFI is not able to say where it came from or what brought it about? What is the probability of reoccurrence?
Mr. Barry Fox:
We undertake significant investigations, as do the other organisations, if we are referring to the Blackwater. In general, IFI would be very active in areas where something like this occurs. We carry quite a lot of inspections to try to understand where it may have come from. From that then we obviously speak to the stakeholders and the potential offenders and it certainly deals with a lot of the issues we experience, but-----
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The point was well made earlier about collecting samples or not taking water samples in the first couple of days. IFI would not be the only ones out there taking samples, though. The EPA would have gone towards the different licence holders and approached them about their data. They would be taking samples of the discharges from the river, as would other organisations, I imagine. Was it a desktop kind of exercise looking at data and the results, or do they still have live samples of water from the river taken over a period of time at that stage? Might they possibly still hold them?
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
it is not so much the EPA’s sampling, but the other organisations that would be taking water samples. For example, Irish Water would take samples and test the water before putting it into a drinking water supply. Other organisations in their discharge would be taking water samples. What I am getting at is whether there are samples of water out there all the time that are available to be examined.
Is there a possibility for somebody with fresh eyes, other than the EPA, the IFI or the Marine Institute, taking a look at further data to drill in closer to see what actually happened?
Mr. Noel Byrne:
For drinking water, Uisce Éireann has online sampling on the water as it comes into treatment plants and take it out of the river. That would be available on time. It watches the water as it comes into the plant and tests for things like PH and ammonia. So Uisce Éireann would see any changes in the water. That is a very instant test it would see at the time. It would not tend to hold that sample after a period. Uisce Éireann would sample the water sample there and then but would not retain it for a period of two or three weeks.
For wastewater discharge licences, Uisce Éireann uses composite sampling and flow proportion of the discharges. A small sample is taken every hour, relative to the flow. So Uisce Éireann has that sampled daily and can observe the sample. For regulatory purposes, Uisce Éireann will test that in line with what is required for legislation. If it happens to sample it for the purpose of operational reasons, so if it sees something different in the discharge or in the sample, then Uisce Éireann can take a sample for operational purposes.
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It sounds like there are not water samples-----
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
-----that one would expect. The report indicates that IFI is scheduling electrofishing in the Allow river. Why in that river and not any other river? The Blackwater is not being scheduled until next year. What is the IFI scheduling that for and what is it looking for?
Mr. Sean Long:
I had requested a survey of the Allow river following the fish kill last year at Freemount. So that was scheduled to take place. We extended it below the affected area from last year to include below Kanturk town and the creamery. The survey work was completed last week. We will carry out electrofishing throughout the catchment to provide baseline data on trout and salmon samples, for future use should we need it.
Aindrias Moynihan (Cork North-West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A number of people have repeatedly raised with me their concern about a delay in acting and, most importantly, whether everything that could have been done was done. It is a point that arose earlier in one of the submissions. Do people feel that everything that could have been done was done to identify the source?
Mr. Sean Long:
On the immediate response from Inland Fisheries, we arrived in just over an hour from the time of receiving the first call and that is when our investigation began. I am satisfied that we did everything that we could. We had co-operation on the ground from the council, the EPA and the Marine Institute in terms of the sampling. Once an inter-agency group was assembled, I can say, and it was my first experience of it, there was excellent co-operation in terms of sharing data and information. Even in the very early stages, on the 11th and 12th, inter-agency colleagues fed data to each other in terms of water temperature and dissolved oxygen. That was happening in real time immediately on the 11th and the 12th. So it is not a case that the investigation did not begin until the 25th or post the request made by the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley. The investigation was happening from the start.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to follow on from Teachta Kenny's question about the Marine Institute. I wondered why it took three days to begin processing the samples and it was because the Marine Institute was busy with something else. Could that work have been delegated to Inland Fisheries Ireland? Also, what about the impact of allowing 72 hours to elapse before testing the samples?
Dr. Rick Officer:
There are two dimensions to the answer to the question. Yes, we have limited staff in this area and they were deployed on the day on other activities. There is a second dimension to the answer given by Dr. Downes, which concerns the perceived risk around this being a disease event. Dr. Downes is an expert in this area so he can explain more deeply. The characteristics that were explained to the institute at the time did not suggest that this was a disease event. They suggested that it was an environmental irritant or pollutant in the water, which is down to the number of fish that were dead at the same time. If it were a disease event then we would expect fish to die over a longer period. I ask Dr. Downes to elaborate.
Dr. Jamie Downes:
The profile of this fish kill is that a large number of fish were killed all at the one time and that is indicative of something generally being environmental. Also, while we saw pictures of the fish kill first, the initial impression was that it was environmental and not something that we would see from a disease situation.
To be fair, the IFI did offer to deliver fish to us but we need live or moribund fish in terms of disease in order to get the best sample.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What about the impact from allowing 72 hours to elapse before testing the samples?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Why did the Marine Institute find out about the fish kill before the EPA? The Marine Institute found out about the fish kill on the 11th and the EPA claims it found out on the 12th.
My apologies for being late but I was contributing to a debate on an environmental Bill in the Dáil. Dr. Ryan said that the EPA did not find out until the 12th but Mr. Long said that the EPA was told on the 11th.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
I can clarify that. We recognise that there was an informal attempt to contact the EPA on the 11th. A message was left on an EPA inspector's phone at 5.20 p.m. on the 11th. That message was not received so it was not an effective communication. It did not come through the EPA out-of-hours emergency service, which would have activated our teams immediately. So we did find out the next morning. That said, because we have access to all sorts of on-site data, which means we can interview licensees and check logbooks, at the end of the day it was not material to our investigation or to the conclusions that we drew. Of course we would like to hear about this immediately.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I asked because I wondered why there was confusion around that. The results of the EPA's investigation are different from those of the Marine Institute. Does the EPA use different metrics used? Please explain why different conclusions were reached.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The EPA had a different reply.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
We looked at our regulated sites. We looked at the discharge data. We looked at whether they could be responsible for this. We looked at the environmental parameters around the discharges. We looked at the discharges over the period back into July whereas our colleagues in the Marine Institute were doing other analyses that helped direct some of our investigation very helpfully.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My next questions are for Inland Fisheries Ireland. Mr. Fox mentioned legislative shortcomings. Is it only from this circumstance that the IFI has liaised with the Minister of State about increasing its enforcement powers?
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is good. What preventative measures can the Government take to address the frequency of fish kills in Ireland? Since I was elected five and a half years ago, there have been several fish kills in my constituency, in north Kildare, in the River Rye. The distress that fish kills cause to local fishermen is horrendous and a fish kill has an impact on income as well.
Earlier today in the Dáil regulations for the EPA were discussed. During the week the EU released results which showed that we do not take biodiversity seriously at all. If we were a parent going to a parent-teacher meeting, the report card would say, "poor, poor, poor; must do better". It is deplorable. We dine out on our green image so much yet we are an absolute disgrace when it comes to protecting our biodiversity.
Mr. Barry Fox:
There are huge pressures on our water quality nationally and on our biodiversity. There is no question about that. A lot of steps have been taken through a number of Government bodies in advocating for better regulation. There has been a lot of engagement with the farming community by the likes of Inland Fisheries Ireland and Coillte. Inspection rates among all of the State agencies responsible for biodiversity and water quality have increased and we just need to flex up on that and increase our activity in those areas. We must ensure that the surveillance continues in order to try to stop these types of events from happening in the future.
Réada Cronin (Kildare North, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have one quick question for Cork County Council. How often does the council collect water samples from the Blackwater? Does it happen on a regular basis or was it just done as a result of this fish kill?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair for allowing me to attend as a guest today. I also thank the witnesses for being here. There is a very striking pattern of non-compliance by North Cork Creameries outlined in the interagency report. This was referred to in the EPA's opening statement, by Senator Noonan, by Deputy Eoghan Kenny and by Mr. Arnold in his opening statement. Given those repeated breaches in respect of wastewater treatment between June and August of this year and the more long-standing pattern of non-compliance over several years, it sounds like they are at the upper end of seriousness for regulatory breaches. Mr. Ryan mentioned that the EPA regulates 900 sites, of which four are on a priority list. North Cork Creameries were on that list. He also mentioned regulatory cases where the EPA secured very substantial fines and, in one case, a custodial sentence. How close to indictment has the EPA come with regard to North Cork Creameries in respect of this chronic pattern of non-compliance?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How would Mr. Ryan rate the responses of North Cork Creameries to the EPA's enforcement actions to date? Mr. Ryan mentioned that they are now compliant but are operating at reduced capacity. Compared with earlier this year, how reduced is capacity? When exactly did this reduction in operations take place?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
I can speak to that. As is the norm in the dairy industry, peak production season starts around March and continues into the summer time. It starts to taper off around this time of the year. Our understanding from the site is that production levels have been scaled back even further than normal to give the wastewater treatment plant a chance to get into compliance. There is a long way to go. We want to get them to a place where they can manage normal operational activities on site while still complying with the licence and managing their own effluent appropriately.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is the EPA happy with how they are operating at the moment?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
At the moment their effluent is compliant but as I said, that is a tentative situation and we are watching that very closely. They are still very much a high priority for us. Until they get to a point where they can sustainably deal with their own effluent and discharge compliant effluent under normal production activities, we will be keeping them very much on priority list.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It sounds like there has been a pattern over a number of years. What other measures did North Cork Creameries have to take over the years to comply with the EPA's enforcement actions? Did they undertake those actions willingly and in a timely fashion? How would the EPA rate their general responsiveness?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
There were lots of issues at the site and a lot of complex issues that required investment. They ended up on our national priority sites list initially in 2022 and remained on it in 2023 and 2024. It is only in quarters 1 and 2 of 2025 that they have been off our national priority sites list. A lot of the issues related to storm water management, air emissions and also wastewater discharges. They made investments and improved their wastewater discharges but then they had an incident in June of this year which has put them back into the non-compliant space that they have been in. We are focusing our enforcement efforts on that now to get them back into compliance again in a sustainable way.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Did it take a lot of perseverance on the part of the EPA to get those actions undertaken?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the EPA ever revoked the licence of a creamery or large dairy plant?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The interagency report notes that North Cork Creameries failed to test wastewater treatment plant samples taken on 5 August and 6 August as required as a condition of their discharge licence. What explanation did they give for this? Is this omission unusual for North Cork Creameries? It sounds like the EPA is on site quite a lot and monitoring operations closely. Was this an anomaly?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
There was a pattern of data not being appropriately generated and maintained on site. Under their licence, they are supposed to have monitoring data for every single day of the year when they are discharging. They did not have that in this case and there were other days when monitoring was missed over the course of the year. That constitutes non-compliance with their licence and that is part of what we are following up on with them.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On what percentage of the days when they were meant to produce that data did they not do it?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Would 5 August and 6 August be fairly anomalous in terms of what they were reporting?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I invite the agencies to respond to the very strong points made by Mr. Arnold of Killavullen Angling Club in his opening statement about the delays to investigations and the gaps in the conclusions that resulted.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask the various agencies for their response to the points Mr. Arnold of Killavullen Angling Club made in his opening statement about the delays that occurred and the disjointed nature of the overall investigation.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
By all measures this was a terrible event. Nobody wants to see this happening. From the EPA's perspective, once we were informed and became aware of it on 12 August, we acted immediately. We were in a really good position in terms of being able to interrogate data going back across the previous few months. If there was a delay, it was not material to our investigations. We certainly did not delay once we became aware of the incident.
Mr. Barry Fox:
I confirm to the Deputy that there was no delay on IFI's part. Our statutory role is very clear in events like this and I want to commend our staff on what they did. They worked tirelessly. They were on site not quite 24/7 but for every hour of daylight. They worked tirelessly to try to detect a discharge but unfortunately were not in a position to do that.
Dr. Rick Officer:
From the Marine Institute's perspective, we have mentioned the risk-based approach to our initial response and the resource implications. Our response, when we had the samples, was a fulsome devotion of the team on the diagnostic testing that we undertook and the provision of preliminary reports during that period.
Mr. Ger Barry:
Cork County Council has been proactive and transparent in its support to the agencies. We were on site on day one and had officers looking for signs of pollution within the vicinity of the fish kill. We had up to 14 members of staff on site over the duration of the investigation to carry out investigative works throughout the catchment. We provided support insofar as was possible.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will let Deputy Quaide back in at the end. I want to be fair to the other speakers on my long list.
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will try to be as quick and direct as possible and not repeat questions that have already been asked. We have in front of us an inconclusive report.
I am aware that I am a new TD. How regular is an inconclusive report from the EPA and from the organisations present? It has been stated that an official report - another report - will come from this one, which will inevitably and undoubtedly be inconclusive as well because, as Mr. Long is telling me, the evidence is inconclusive.
Mr. Ryan made the statement that it was a terrible event. I agree, but what do I go back and say to my neighbours in Mallow - the people who are walking their dogs along the river, who occasionally leave them off the lead and who get into the Blackwater and swim, who have not done it for a long time? What do I say to Mallow Search and Rescue? What do I say to the people who canoe there? At the moment, is the Blackwater safe? Would Mr. Long eat a trout or a salmon out of the Blackwater at the moment?
We have touched on the awfulness of what has happened. I have a question for Mr. Fox and I will stop then. He mentioned that once he was notified - I accept there was a time lapse - he swung in immediately within an hour and a half. Where did Inland Fisheries Ireland go first to make its inspection? Did they have the knowledge that North Cork Creameries had several problems with the EPA and might be the source? One of the witnesses mentioned that no fish kill was found within a 4 km radius. Obviously, there would not be a fish kill there because fish run away. Nature moves very quickly when it is in danger. We all know that from forest fires and the rest of it. They move far down the line. We know that this is a very fast-moving river at times. Did IFI go to North Cork Creameries to start the investigation?
Mr. Sean Long:
I might come back to the Deputy on that question. The environmental officer concerned took the call about the report in the Macroom office. He was with me at the time. He immediately proceeded to Mallow, which is just over an hour's drive. He was there in about an hour and a quarter from the time the call came in. En route, he stopped at two locations upstream, as he was working his way down towards Mallow, which is where the fish kill had been reported, at Mallow Bridge. That was his primary destination.
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I asked whether the river is safe. Can we fish in it? Can we use it again? Can we swim in it? Can Mallow Search and Rescue operate? What do I tell my constituents and my neighbours?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
We can only speak to what comes within the remit of the EPA, that is, the water quality. We can talk to the Deputy about that. With regard to what he can say to his constituents about what the EPA did in this respect, we responded immediately when we got the call. We took this very seriously-----
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am sorry; the question is whether the water quality is fit for purpose.
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to know if the river is fit for purpose. I also want to know what we can do to prevent this. We have an inconclusive report in front of us, telling us we do not know where the problem came from or how it ended up here. We do not know if it is water borne or if it is pollution. We do not know who put it into the water, where it came from or how it emerged.
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like to know. It strikes me as amazing that we have an inconclusive report before us at an Oireachtas committee.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A number of Deputies have raised that. Could Dr. Ryan please respond on water quality?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
I might just talk the Deputy through the logic model that we use in these kinds of investigations. A very serious fish incident was reported and our first reaction was whether one of the EPA's licensed sites was responsible. We reacted to that and carried out an investigation. We have accounted for those facilities. Yes, there are serious issues of non-compliance in one of them, but there is no causal link. Then we look at local authority permitted sites and activities. Cork County Council has accounted for those. Then we look at things like biological effects. Our colleagues in the Marine Institute have looked at them and ruled them out. Then we look at environmental conditions. We have looked at that and assessed the assimilative capacity, and the discharges into the river and ruled them out. Then we are left with the possibility that it was some kind of undetected environmental accident. Once we go there, we are into the area of assessing whether it was an undetected criminal act, either intentional or reckless. From our perspective, it is beginning to look like we are essentially looking at the devastating consequences of an unsolved environmental crime.
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The reply has been inconclusive as well. When we eliminate the impossible, we take whatever remains, however improbable, and we are left with the truth. We are skating around that.
I wish to ask about restocking. Some people in this room have mentioned 40,000 fish and others have mentioned 10,000 fish. How are we going to restock and get the Blackwater up and running? How is it going to be usable again for both recreational and commercial use?
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does that include nurseries or incubation units on the river?
Dr. Fiona Kelly:
No, natural recovery, as in the population that remains will colonise the depleted areas and reproduce. We are expecting the fish to reproduce this winter. We have done electrofishing surveys at Roskeen Bridge and on the Allow river and there are fish present in those areas. It was not a complete and absolute fish kill. Live fish were mixed in with ailing fish, so there are fish there to allow the river to recover naturally. We encourage the improvement of water quality in the catchment and habitat restoration where necessary, but in an environmentally sustainable way. Hatcheries have certain risks from an ecological, genetic and legal perspective so the recommendation is natural recovery where possible.
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What is the timeline on that?
Ken O'Flynn (Cork North-Central, Independent Ireland Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses very much.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank all the speakers and contributors today. There has been huge reputational damage to the River Blackwater since this incident occurred, from an economic point of view, as was mentioned the anglers' representatives, but also from a tourism perspective. That needs to be acknowledged. I do not think it was acknowledged by anyone here today, but it must be acknowledged by everyone that damage has occurred throughout the previous two months.
I want to refer to the IFI statement that was issued on 12 August. The first line of the statement says:
Inland Fisheries Ireland (IFI) is investigating a possible fungal infection outbreak that may have killed up to 1,000 brown trout in the River Blackwater, Co Cork.
Does IFI regret that statement, given the fact that results show it is not a fungal infection but a pollutant?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There is a line on the second page of the statement saying "Investigations, at this stage, have not yielded evidence of pollution."
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is regrettable that the IFI came out with a public statement on that occasion and reiterated halfway through the first line that IFI is engaging with Uisce Éireann, the EPA and Cork County Council. It asked anglers to refrain from fishing on the affected stretch of the river and it also asked that people would wash, clean and dry their equipment at that stage. On reflection, and talking to our colleagues here in the Marine Institute, Dr. Downes said that based on the evidence it received in a phone call, it was a fungal infection. It is my understanding that Dr. Downes suggested that is why the Marine Institute took the decision to say it should treat the other aspects of its business rather than come to investigate. If he was advised that the cause was a pollutant event, would he have changed his mind and come sooner?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In his earlier contribution Dr. Downes said that on the evidence provided to the IFI, he suggested they were otherwise engaged. Is it correct that the decision was based on the IFI's statement in which it was informed that the cause was a fungal infection?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Did it state that there was a potential fungal infection or a pollutant infection?
Dr. Jamie Downes:
No, it did not say either. It outlined the profile of the fish kill, which was quite unusual, with marked fish and unmarked fish beside one another. In those statements, it did not outline, either way, what it was. The role that we were taking was to rule out disease being a cause. That was our role in it.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On reflection, given the fact that we had 40,000 trout killed and the River Blackwater decimated, does Dr. Downes regret that decision of not attending for three days?
Dr. Jamie Downes:
Well, no, that would not necessarily make a difference to us because we were ruling out disease being a cause here. The information that I had received was indicating that this was an environmental effect and the pictures that I received on the Tuesday were a further indication that this was an environmental cause.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The IFI mentioned procedural deficiencies and seeking more powers and said that it had been discussing this for seven years. Why has it not progressed?
Mr. Barry Fox:
As the Deputy will be aware, primary legislation takes quite a long time to bring forward. It has been in development for seven years. A new primary Act is being developed by the Department. The Minister has committed to fast-tracking some sections of that new primary legislation to empower the organisation-----
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Did the IFI request the Department to fast-track this before any event?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Fox mentioned previously that one out of four of its investigations had been inconclusive. So, given the fact that in 25% of investigations there is no conclusion, did it become important for the IFI to try to fast-track the legislation so that it could investigate more?
Mr. Barry Fox:
The nature of these types of events - deleterious discharges or point sources of pollution, as they are called - is such that unless we are on site while the discharge is occurring, we cannot possibly link it to an offender. There are going to be instances where we cannot actually detect the offender and where they have actually caused the discharge. That is just the reality at the moment. There are 1,200 rivers and over 4,000 lakes in Ireland. We cannot be everywhere at once. This is reactionary. An event happens to which we have to react.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As an organisation, is the IFI happy that it responded adequately to this?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What about as an organisation? I am not talking about the individual members of staff. I am talking about the organisation. Is Mr. Fox happy that the IFI responded appropriately?
Mr. Barry Fox:
We responded within our statutory remit. It was appropriate. Unfortunately, we did not locate a discharge, which is a requirement under legislation, and we do regret not finding that discharge. I might add that IFI staff, particularly in that location, are extremely upset about this event and that should be noted.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is right. I know a few of them and I know that they are very distressed by this event. Still and all, we have a situation where there are significant numbers of dead trout in our rivers.
Regarding the EPA, there has been a lot of speculation in relation to four locations but it is important to base commentary on facts. The public statements from the organisations here have left a lot to be desired. There is reputational damage for everybody involved and it is hugely important that we operate on facts going forward to ensure that we get appropriate results. I hope that we will have a final report and final recommendations and a restoration plan. I was not convinced by Ms Kelly's contribution in relation to having a restoration plan. I am not just talking about a restoration plan to bring trout back into rivers, which is hugely important, but also about bringing back the economic and tourism-potential value that has been lost in north Cork in the last number of weeks.
Noel McCarthy (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair for facilitating me and other Oireachtas Members who are not on this committee. I welcome all of our guests today. I live in Fermoy and the Blackwater is very important to us. When the incident happened, people in Fermoy were very upset and were also very taken aback by the lack of information being made available. That is still the situation at the moment and our guests cannot deny that. As I have been sitting here listening to 12 of my colleagues speaking, I have been asking myself where we went wrong.
We have four agencies here today and we still do not know what happened on the day of 11 August. I want to go back to something Mr. Fox said. He said that he thought it happened 72 hours before that, or three full days before it was reported on 11 or 12 August. Is it the case that we are lacking an adequate monitoring system? I want to praise the staff and I agree, no doubt about it, that they are very upset over it. I can see that but can we learn any lessons from this? If this discharge happened three days before it was detected on 11 or 12 August, when the other agencies were contacted, how did we miss it for three days? Is there monitoring constantly going on, every day, by Cork County Council? Does the council have staff out there doing that? Does the IFI have staff out there doing that? Who is doing the monitoring? Is there someone out there who checks the river in different locations every day? That is a very important question and we need to know the answer. Those three days caused the problem we have. Fish started to die, the fishermen saw it and it was reported to all of the different agencies but why did we not pick that discharge up before then? Mr. Fox said that it was very hard to find and I understand that but surely we have someone in place.
When I spoke in the Dáil last Thursday week, I said that this was the worst pollution incident in any river in this country. It is absolutely terrible. I heard Mr. Arnold's opening statement. I also met him and his associates and heard about the impact this has had on their livelihoods and businesses. The River Blackwater has given recreational enjoyment to so many people, whether fishing, rowing or other activities, for many years. To hear someone like Mr. Arnold say that it could take ten years for the river to recover is so concerning.
One of the things the general public is asking us as public representatives is whether there is a cover-up here. I am not being disrespectful of anyone by saying that but that is what is being said. People point to the lack of a response and any action and ask how we missed this.
Finally, what can we learn from this? We have four agencies in front of us at this committee today and we still have the same questions. We have no solution for how it happened and it is very concerning.
Mr. Barry Fox:
I thank the Deputy. I will defer to the EPA on the monitoring of the licensed discharge points but in general on the Blackwater, we would have staff on the river every day in certain locations. They would not be monitoring water quality per se but they would be keeping a very close eye on the environment in general and ensuring that the Fisheries Acts were enforced.
This is a really disappointing event; there is absolutely no question about that. It is a catastrophic event for the local users and for the environment itself. We cannot deny that. A discharge, by its very nature, could happen for ten seconds, two hours, or it could continue for a couple of days. The unfortunate thing for IFI is that, as I have pointed out previously, we have to find that discharge to take action under our legislation and in this instance, we did not find it. That is where we are.
I understand the upset of the local users, local angling clubs and so on. I am an angler myself. In terms of the future and looking at what we will do to try to improve the situation in the Blackwater, we are going to undertake significant habitat assessment over the next six to eight months. We are going to come up with restoration plans for the upper catchment to try to increase productivity in that location. We are going to work with local stakeholders to ensure that is delivered. That contact has already begun with our local director. I can assure the Deputy that we will continue to work closely with local stakeholders and try to speed up the recovery of this section of the Blackwater.
Noel McCarthy (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My next question is for the EPA and it concerns the fact that we have a business that has constantly broken regulations.
I want to simplify this because we have a business that has constantly broken regulations and received constant calls from officers. How many times did Ms McDonnell say she has been there since this incident in North Cork Creameries? Just to simplify this, if you are playing a football match and a person commits a foul, you get a warning, then you get a yellow card, a red card and it then comes to suspensions. Where is the suspension here? If there are so many incidents happening, why has somebody not stepped in to enforce it because it has gone beyond a point where we can accept it any more? Something should have been done. Does the EPA take any responsibility for not acting on that? It is not linked to it but it is obviously a concern. That is what people are saying as well. They say if there are breaches of licences by someone, there obviously must be a check up.
It does not make sense how it was not really acted on and that there was no enforcement. That is the concern and that is what the public is saying out there. I am only passing it on and I mean no disrespect. I appreciate the creamery brings employment and so on but we must get things right. I again go back to the football match; if you break the laws, you suffer the consequences. Where is the suspension here?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
I thank the Deputy. His analogy is an excellent one. That is the way enforcement works. We give a warning, we escalate matters and with regard to that facility, we concluded a prosecution of it in April. We have been on-site raising non-compliance with it and it came back into compliance after some investment on-site. It was in June of this year that it had an incident that set the plant back again. It is in serious non-compliance at the moment. All of those options remain on the table.
Noel McCarthy (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Lessons must be learned from this. In the report, we must put something in place like that. I thank the witnesses for coming in and answering the questions.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for their attendance today. I live along the River Suir but I am also here to show solidarity with the angler groups along the River Blackwater. In essence, what we have here is the murder of 40,000 fish and the murderer is still at large. To catch the murderer, you need evidence. I want to focus on the way the evidence was collected. I have a few quick questions first.
It was reported on 11 August and IFI was on-site within an hour, is that correct? The immediate response from IFI was to carry out a visual inspection of the licensed discharge points along the - no, it was not? Was the first collection of evidence after IFI was on-site?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I just want to understand. I also want to understand when Cork County Council, the EPA and the Marine Institute were on-site and then I will talk about the evidence.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was this one individual?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
What did that one individual then do over the next two to three hours?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is this within a 1 km stretch or a 2 km stretch? How soon before he walked the 26 km stretch that was under investigation?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Was it a day, 24 hours or 48 hours? Was this one individual carrying out a visual inspection of all the different discharge points?
Mr. Sean Long:
No. That was not his immediate action. His immediate action was to go to Mallow to try to get some grasp on the extent of the fish mortalities. He met stakeholders there and he got information from them. He liaised with his contact and the first person he met on scene was a contact from the environmental section of Cork County Council. The person from Cork County Council started to carry out his inspections of various areas. From the officer's point of view, he tried to understand what was happening and took documentary evidence, which was then forwarded on to the Marine Institute to make-----
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My time is limited. Was there no collection of physical evidence by this particular individual?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay. I just want to move on. How quickly was Cork County Council on-site?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In the immediate three to four hours after the officer was on-site, to what extent were samples taken?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is really important. How many samples were taken in the hours immediately after Cork County Council was on-site? Where were those samples taken from?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How many samples were taken and what was the size of that sample?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to come to what is in the report. I presume the Marine Institute is responsible for tissue sampling and not for the environmental and chemical analysis. It talks about how samples were sent for independent analysis on 900 different parameters. I am trying to understand about the samples that were sent away. We know this is where the problem was. It was not a tissue issue. Where did those samples go to? What was the independent, accredited lab?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I really want to come back-----
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The critical time for taking water samples was immediately after going on-site. The critical place to take water samples was along the whole area of investigation, particularly at the discharge points. Were there any samples taken within 24 hours along the river and along the 26 km stretch, particularly at the discharge points? How many companies are licensed by the EPA along this 26 km stretch?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There are 31, okay. Were samples taken at the discharge points from those 31 plants within 24 hours of the notification of this kill?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
One sample was taken?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Were these actually taken from the river?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am asking about the river itself. How many water samples were taken within 24 hours from the 26 km stretch of the river?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We are talking about a handful of samples. It was one sample?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will not dwell on this. I do not know if Dr. Downes agrees with me but it is about taking samples at the earliest possible opportunity along the entire stretch of the river. Ultimately, we do not have the evidence to find the murderer. For me, the big red flag here was how the evidence was collected and how quickly the evidence was collected.
Somebody once said to me that the best solution to pollution is dilution. As the hours and days went on, this contaminate was simply diluted. I want to conclude by asking Dr. Downes if he agrees with me that it is absolutely critical to take samples at the earliest opportunity at as many different sample points as you possibly can in terms of trying to have some chance, at best, of finding evidence?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I know what his focus is but he is a very well qualified individual. He understands analyses and he has a background in all of this. I am simply asking does he agree with me that it is absolutely crucial to take as many samples as possible at the earliest possible opportunity and at as many points, particularly the critical points and the 31 discharge points, at the earliest possible opportunity?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Deputy O'Donoghue is next.
Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the witnesses for their attending and for their contributions. Did the EPA test the NCC or any of the other licensed facilities in the vicinity for elements or compounds not specified or covered by their licences? In particular, I am looking to see if tests for the presence of hydrogen sulfide and the associated compounds that may be expected in a wastewater treatment plant that has changed its biological status from aerobic to anaerobic.
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
We tested for the parameters specified in the licence. These are specified in the licence, taking into account the materials that are stored on site and the parameters that would be of most concerned within that discharge. These were the parameters that were focused on as part of our sampling.
Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Hydrogen sulfides, specifically, were not tested for.
Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
No causal link was found. In the context of EPA-licensed facilities, in a case like this, how long does a sample typically need to be taken after the end of a discharge in order to establish causation?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
We have to look at the samples we take, and it takes time for those to go through our laboratories and for the results to come back. Different tests take different lengths of time. We can also rely on the monitoring data that the licensee holds on site. We took a combination of those factors for across the investigation period.
Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the IFI have a procedure in place and a lab lined up to test dead fish in order to establish what killed them? If so, where is it located and when was it last used?
Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
My apologies. Is there a procedure in place and a lab lined up to do tests to establish what killed fish? If there is, where is it located and when was it last used?
Mr. Barry Fox:
Sorry, yes, Eurofins Ireland. The only time we take samples is when we are trying to answer a question about what has killed the fish, particularly in the context of an event like this. What needs to be pointed out is that our primary role is to locate discharges. We have a very limited role in water quality and enforcement. This was a criminal investigation that involved trying to identify who caused the discharge. Unfortunately, that is IFI's position. While it is not ideal, that is what we tried to achieve in this investigation.
Robert O'Donoghue (Dublin Fingal West, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Mr. Fox. I have one last question. To anyone's knowledge, since the fish kill, have corrective measures been put in place at any of the EPA-licensed facilities in the vicinity to address further discharges? Is guidance being given to them or will increased monitoring take place going forward?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
In all of the cases of non-compliance that were detected during the investigation, further enforcement action has been taken. We use a range of different options. We will be working very hard on keeping it under surveillance to ensure that non-compliance is dealt with as quickly as possible.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is it for the initial list of speakers, so we will do round two. I ask members to be concise and to keep to the three minutes. Deputy Whitmore is next.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have one simple question for the Marine Institute. Regarding the gill erosion seen in the samples, could that have been caused by particulate matter in the water or was caused by chemicals?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Dr. Downes does not think it could have been erosion from particulate matter, is that correct?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It sort of burned it?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it possible for the two things to be present?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It could have been particulate and caustic, is that correct?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank Dr. Downes. Mr Ryan stated that, last year, North Cork Creameries was on the national priority sites list but that it improved so it was taken off the list. That is quite a kind picture really, is it not? North Cork Creameries was on the national priority sites list in quarter 3 of 2021, quarters 2, 3 and 4 of 2022, and for all of 2023 and 2024. It went back on for two quarters this year, and it is unlikely that it will go back on again. That is a significant amount of time on the priority list when there are only four or five on the list at any one time.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
For two quarters.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
North Cork Creameries has been on the list for four years. That begs the question, which has been asked already, as to the point at which a licence suspended. Ms McDonald said that the EPA has never suspended any dairy licence. To clarify, has it ever suspended a licence?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Not generally. Has the EPA ever suspended a licence?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The EPA has never once revoked a licence from an entity. Is that correct?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But the EPA has never suspended a licence.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
At what stage, after such significant non-compliance year in and year out, does the EPA decide that an entity is not in compliance with the terms of its licence and that its chances are gone?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The EPA did not secure compliance in 2021, 2022, 2023 or 2024, and again now 2025. Am I correct in saying this licence was issued in 2019?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I looked on the LEAP Online portal. North Cork Creameries had the licence for four or five months before the first non-compliance came in early 2020. The company has never been in compliance with the terms of its EPA licence for longer than two quarters over the entire period. How many chances does it deserve? The EPA's role is to protect our water systems. We are continually breaching any targets that have been set. Our water systems are in such poor condition. This impacts fishers, anglers, local communities, nature and the environment. The EPA has all the tools and all the evidence. However, entities like this are still being given chances.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will Mr. Ryan address that point?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Do you accept the point that two quarters of compliance since the start is the longest period?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How much was the company fined?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The fine was €11,000 and the company's revenue is over €200 million a year, is that correct?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I want to continue on from what Deputy Whitmore said. The EPA indicated that it is giving full consideration to all enforcement options available to it in respect of the non-compliance detected. Will Dr. Ryan explain that?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is the EPA considering suspension of North Cork Creameries' licence?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Is it not possible that a short illegal discharge occurred at North Cork Creameries and that this was missed by the monitoring?
Ms Pamela McDonnell:
As part of the monitoring at a licensed site, there are grab samples, which reflect a point in time, but there are also composite samples. Composite sampling takes a small amount of sample over the entire period of the flow of discharge. That gives us a sense of what has happened within the previous 24-hour period. From the data we have seen, the composite samples show that the worst-case ammonia levels that went out were from the grab sample on 12 August. Everything before was much lower. We have a good picture of what happened across that whole period. We have also looked at continuous monitoring data on the site. All of the on-site records have been cross-referenced.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Were there samples for 5 and 6 August?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
If it was the case that the first fish was killed on 5 or 6 August, as is believed, it is very possible the discharge happened 72 hours before that, but we have no sample for that time.
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Does the EPA have that data for 3 and 4 August?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Were 3, 4 and 5 August part of the EPA's investigation?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In his professional opinion, does Dr. Downes have any idea of what the chemical irritant could possibly have been?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Mr. Fox has left, but perhaps Dr. Kelly might answer this question. He said that the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, had written to him about extending the powers. What did the Minister of State say? Mr. Fox has returned. I just asked a question. The Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, wrote to him about extending the IFI's powers. What did he say in that letter?
Eoghan Kenny (Cork North-Central, Labour)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Will the IFI provide a copy of that letter?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask Mr. Fox to share it with the committee please.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Dr. Ryan emphasised the lack of a causal link between North Cork Creameries and the Blackwater fish kill. He referred to some conjecture in the public domain about culpability. He appeared to be responding to that. As a neutral enforcement agency, I find it unusual that the EPA would be at pains to rule out the involvement of an entity in a case of such seriousness, which is still very much open. Why did Dr. Ryan have that emphasis in his opening statement? We have heard analogies made to other types of criminal cases here today. I cannot think of any scenario in which a suspect's involvement would be ruled out by a neutral enforcement agency. Does Dr. Ryan see how that might be interpreted as in some way going out to bat for North Cork Creameries?
Dr. Tom Ryan:
Yes, I understand the Deputy's question. What we found in the course of the investigation was that we were inundated with queries directed at North Cork Creameries. We fully investigated that facility because it was a prime suspect in this matter. Given the level of speculation, I thought it would be helpful to the committee to highlight our investigation in that regard.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In the previous round, I asked how close North Cork Creameries had got to indictment, which is where the threshold for very serious penalties is met, as a result of its regulatory breaches. Dr. Ryan said that he did not want to prejudice any possible future prosecutions. My question was about previous non-compliance rather than current regulatory proceedings, however. Can that question be answered?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Has the EPA ever got to the point of imposing very serious penalties?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am referring to North Cork Creameries in particular.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In my final question of the previous round, I made reference to the points made by Conor Arnold of Killavullen Angling Club. He expressed the opinion of many anglers and other members of the community that the investigation was disjointed, delayed and deeply flawed. The responses from all of the agencies here suggest that they all acted in a timely and appropriate fashion. It sounds like they would not necessarily act differently if this happened again. That prospect is deeply concerning to the communities impacted by this catastrophic event, which are looking to the agencies to offer ongoing protection to the Blackwater. Do the agencies have anything to learn from their handling of this investigation? Is there anything they would have done differently?
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
In the context of his concrete actions, is there anything Mr. Fox would have done differently?
Mr. Barry Fox:
I would probably have deployed additional resources to the area. We have very limited staff in each region. I would possibly have added additional staff from other locations around the country, but, again, that would take time to arrange. We cannot just decide people are going today. There are a lot of arrangements to be made. The interagency co-operation is a far more valuable prospect if something like this were to occur again.
Liam Quaide (Cork East, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context
May I just the EPA if it would do anything differently?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay but I ask the EPA to respond very quickly because we still have speakers.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
When the incident was notified, we were all doing our own things. In our case, we were working to look at all of the regulated entities to see if they were the cause. We were co-ordinating professionally between the agencies but it was not until the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, stepped in that the response became co-ordinated. I am sure we could have moved to that situation earlier. That is the kind of protocol we will work to. The other deficit I see relates to communication. Perhaps we could have communicated with the public earlier as to what we were doing. We were responding to all of the media queries that came in but providing information to the public is really crucial in these sorts of incidents. There are definitely learnings for all of us.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I thank the Chair for letting me in for a second time. We were notified that the first statement issued by the IFI determined that this was a fungal infection. On what date was this changed to show that it had been pollutant outbreak?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
From 12 August to 21 August, a potential outbreak of a fungal infection was being investigated, but this ended up being a pollutant-related infection.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Dr. Ryan mentioned a lack of communication and working in isolation. When was the public going to know about this? Where were the local angling groups supposed to know the IFI was working on a different type of outbreak. As public representatives, we did not know. Even though the IFI said it engaged with local representatives, I did not have any communications from it. I want to clarify that. When was this going to be communicated to the public.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But IFI could have made a public statement that it was investigating a fungal infection outbreak and a strong indication of a pollutant outbreak. That is the challenge we face here. My colleague Deputy Murphy went to great pains to find out in his six-minute slot how quickly the tests were done. There does not seem to be any serious co-operation among the groups here in trying to get to the bottom of this on a timely basis.
If there is anything we can learn from this, it is to work together. It is regrettable that has not been acknowledged today. The simple fact is it was announced on 12 August that it was a fungal infection outbreak and then IFI waited until 21 or 22 August to say it was a pollution outbreak. I do not think that is satisfactory or acceptable. Where is the Eurofins lab, which carried out the testing, based?
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How quickly were the lab results returned?
Mr. Sean Long:
We expedited the response. We had a seven-day turnaround. Two sets of samples were taken. After the first set was taken, Eurofins came back to say it could extend the range of chemicals it looked for from 600 to 900, so a second set of samples were taken. Both sets were sent on the same date.
John Paul O'Shea (Cork North-West, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
So we had an outbreak on the 12 August and the samples were sent off on 1 September.
Mr. Sean Long:
It was not until the report came back from the Marine Institute to rule out disease that it could be identified as a chemical contaminant or waterborne irritant. At the interagency group meeting on 25 August, it was determined that tissue sampling or residue sampling in the trout was the most likely route to identifying the chemical causing the problem. The fish were delivered to Eurofins the next morning.
Noel McCarthy (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It sounds like the four agencies that are here today did not work together. If they had, we would not be in this situation. Dr. Ryan said it was a criminal investigation. Is it still a criminal investigation? Is the investigation ongoing?
Mr. Barry Fox:
It is not a live investigation now. We are aware a discharge occurred. That discharge has dissipated. There is no question of that. The investigation has concluded. We will be looking at what we can do to bring the Blackwater back to an acceptable state with regard to fish populations, working with local stakeholders to improve the habitat in the catchment.
Noel McCarthy (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
As public representatives, we will go out of here today and tell the people affected by the River Blackwater that there is no outcome of what happened on 11 and 12 August. Am I right in saying that? We have no answer for the people.
Noel McCarthy (Cork East, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That is terribly disappointing. I go back to what Deputy O’Shea and others said. When the witnesses got this information, were they assuming a fungal infection? When they saw 40,000 fish dead in the river on 11 and 12 August, that was a serious pollution problem. Why did it take so long for the samples to go to that unit in Little Island on 1 September? That is the first thing coming out of here today that people will ask. How did that happen when there are four agencies involved? That is the serious question.
We have to go back and tell the people affected by this all along the River Blackwater that we have no solution, we do not know what happened and there will be no more investigation. I appreciate it has been said we will try to restock the river and get it back. Mr. Arnold has said it will take ten years. This affects people in business, such as bed and breakfast operators, guesthouses, angling and sports shops, anglers and so on. I do not think it is good enough. It is appalling. We as public representatives have to tell the people we represent that we have no answers for him. They will hear this today and say it is not right.
The Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, has written to IFI. The first thing that has to happen is another meeting with the Minister of State to bring this back. This has to be realised. It must go back to the Chamber as well because it is appalling. It is hard for me as a Deputy living in Fermoy to go back to people living in Fermoy and along the River Blackwater, people like Mr. Arnold and Mr. Ruby, and tell them I have no answers and we got no answers here today.
Mr. Barry Fox:
I assure the Deputy that the Minister of State is taking this very seriously and has been in continuous contact with the agencies involved in the investigation. As a consequence of what has happened, he has prioritised equipping IFI with additional legislation to allow us to modernise what we do in this environment. The weakness in IFI at the moment is that we are operating under 1959 legislation with a very narrow field in water pollution and water quality enforcement. That is a challenge. There is no question about that. Our staff on the ground and environmental officers are highly professional and diligent. They go above and beyond to try to deliver in instances like this.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Regarding the first samples sent to an independent lab – it is Eurofins now but was ELS – what date did Mr. Long say? Were those tissue samples and not water samples?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How were those whole fish kept? I am just trying to think of the integrity of the sample. Where were they kept?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
On the 11th or 12th.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
They were taken from the river.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
None of the fish that died on 11 or 12 August were analysed. Were none of those sent to ELS or Eurofins?
Mr. Sean Long:
No. The fish were first sampled on 14 August. That was with the Marine Institute and IFI at Mallow. Once disease was ruled out on 21 August and the group met on the 25 August to discuss the best way forward, it was agreed the best way to identity the cause was to sample the fish for chemical residues.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
But those fish were taken from the river on 25 August.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Were samples from 11 and 12 August not retained? Why not test those samples?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Were no samples taken on 11 or 12 August?
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Okay, that is a big red flag. Was no independent analysis of water samples taken on 11, 12, 13 or 14 August? I presume Cork has an in-house lab but I am not talking about that. Was there any independent analysis of all those 900 parameters? Water samples should have been taken on 11 August. I am still not clear whether they were taken on 12 or 13 August, how many samples were taken or whether a composite sample was created. We do not have the evidence and it is clear to me why we do not have the evidence. This is where the failure is, in the collection of evidence.
Dr. Downes kicked for touch so I will ask the EPA. Am I right or wrong here about how the evidence was collected? Samples of water should have been taken on 11, 12 and 13 August. You cannot see many of these chemicals with the naked eye. I think it is incredible.
Michael Murphy (Tipperary South, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am not asking that. Dr. Ryan has a lot of experience, is an expert and understands what I am talking about. I am asking him to speak from his expertise, not from his defined role.
Dr. Tom Ryan:
You can always do with more evidence, data and samples but from our investigation we had sufficient evidence, data and samples from all the sources, on site and off site, to make the reasoned conclusion we made about our 31 regulated facilities.
We had enough information to make that reasoned conclusion. It is in the report that is annexed to our main report. It is there for public scrutiny or other expert scrutiny.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is difficult to summarise where we are at, to be honest. From what I see, it is as follows. It looks like the agencies were working away on the issues, approaches, protocols and processes, but they did not pull it all together. Nobody joined it all up. The impression was left with the people on the ground and the communities that they were overwhelmed because nobody was really communicating and telling people what was happening. It seems to be the nature of the incident that it is all over unless it is caught. One of the witnesses said it was about 72 hours before the first fish was identified as dead. As Deputy Murphy and others have said, it seems that unless the agencies respond very quickly with all of the measures like sampling of fish and water sampling, they may well miss it.
That is what happened in this situation. First, it looks like there is a huge hole in the sampling, particularly water sampling, because nobody is taking responsibility for water sampling. I am happy to be corrected but that is what it looks like. There is clearly an ongoing issue that the EPA has to deal with. There are members here who are unhappy with the situation in north Cork. That is a matter for the EPA. It is clear there is a lot of local dissatisfaction with what is happening there.
Ultimately, we have no cause. Ultimately, we are all going away with no idea why this happened. The witnesses will be going home tonight, but this could happen tomorrow morning and we would have absolutely no idea. It could be a 50,000 fish kill or a 1,000 fish kill, but we would have no idea. That leaves the public representatives in a difficult position because they have no conclusions. I do not know if anybody wants to correct me on my summation. It sounds like another final report is coming. However, it will not contain anything different because there is no further analysis ongoing, other than some planning around restocking.
The question to the witnesses collectively is this. What is the ask of this committee? Is there anything else that we can do to help them deal with this issue, particularly regarding the deficiencies with sampling, so we do not have to be answering these questions again?
Mr. Barry Fox:
There are certainly lessons to be learned from this event - there is no question about that - and we are taking action to ensure that we address those. The Minister has been very proactive in his engagement with IFI in trying to equip us with modern legislation around these issues. I am confident that will give us additional scope. Certainly, the nature of these types of events means it is very difficult to identify the cause, given we are just attending on site when there has been an impact on fish. That is the nature of these events. Our record of being successful in 75% of these investigations is quite a success in the context of the current legislation. I agree that we have lessons to learn from this and we will have to implement protocols to ensure we can address those.
Dr. Rick Officer:
I would agree regarding the approach of working together with our colleagues in the other agencies. There is one definitive point, which is that we did not find disease. While we have identified a potential chemical irritant, we cannot identify where that came from, but we have been definitive that it was not disease. That point need not be glossed over here.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is no good when 32,000 fish are dead. Is there any closing comment from Cork County Council?
Mr. Conor Arnold:
This whole situation has been indicative of the base load of pollution in the river being at an exceptionally high level. All it took was one pollution incident to drive this over the edge and cause a fish kill of this magnitude. We have the EPA sitting here, giving us numerous examples of breaches of its licences. It took one incident to cause this. How many times are we going to let it happen again?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Thank you. I thank everybody for attending what was a long session. The transcript of the meeting will be published on the Oireachtas website. I presume that is okay with the witnesses. I thank everybody for participating.