Oireachtas Joint and Select Committees
Tuesday, 30 June 2026
Joint Oireachtas Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs
Impact of Water Quality and Pollution on Sea and Inland Fisheries: Discussion
2:00 am
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have received apologies from Deputies Scanlon and Ward. This is a joint meeting of the Joint Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs and the Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy. I am grateful to my counterpart on the Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy, Deputy Ó Muirí, and his colleagues for working with us on this joint meeting.
Before we move to the substantial topic of today's meeting, I wish to bring the witnesses' attention the note on privilege. Witnesses giving evidence from within the parliamentary precincts are protected by absolute privilege in respect of the evidence they give to this committee. This means that a witness has a full defence against any defamation action for anything said at a committee meeting. However, witnesses are expected not to abuse this privilege, and may be directed to cease giving evidence on an issue at my direction as Chair. Witnesses should follow the direction of the Chair in this regard and are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect that, as is reasonable, no adverse commentary should be made against an identifiable person or entity. Privilege against defamation does not apply to the publication by witnesses outside the proceedings held by the committee of any matters arising from the proceedings.
I advise members of both committees of the constitutional requirements that they must be physically present within the confines of the Leinster House complex in order to participate in public meetings. I will not allow members to participate where they are not adhering to this constitutional requirement. Therefore, a member who attempts to participate from outside the precincts will be asked to leave the meeting. I ask any members who participate via Microsoft Teams that, prior to making their contribution, they confirm verbally to me that they are on the grounds of the Leinster House campus.
Members are reminded of the long-standing parliamentary practice to the effect 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 the 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, and it is imperative that the comply with any such direction.
The agenda for today's meeting is the impact of pollution on water quality in inland and sea fisheries. This is a matter that falls under the remit of both committees, which is why we are approaching in one joint meeting of the two committees. The meeting will take place in a split-session format of two parts. This initial session will continue until about 12.15 p.m. We will then take a short recess.
We are joined by Dr. Elaine McGoff and Dr. Puneeta Sreenivas from Sustainable Water Network, Ms. Karin Dubsky and Ms. Katie Smirnova from the Irish Environmental Network and Mr. Martin McEnroe and Mr. Fergal Bell from the Angling Council of Ireland.
The opening statements have been forwarded to members. They have been circulated. I will allow two minutes to give a summary per set of witnesses, if that is okay. If they could summarise the open statement, we can get through and into the questions and answers. I will proceed in the order that I have read out the witnesses: Sustainable Water Network first, then the Irish Environmental Network, IEN, and then the Angling Council of Ireland.
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
I am the head of advocacy with An Taisce. An Taisce is a member of the Sustainable Water Network, SWAN. I am joined here today by Dr. Sreenivas, who is a freshwater policy officer with SWAN.
Fisheries, like all other aspects of the aquatic ecosystem, depend on clean water. It is the foundation on which ecosystems are built. As nutrient pollution increases, we lose our most sensitive species and the whole food web begins to unravel.
Agriculture is the primary driver of recent declines because of nutrient pollution and the nitrates directive has been in place for over 30 years, yet the State still cannot clearly demonstrate that the measures are capable of delivering. This is compounded by poor compliance, with 43% non-compliance reported with the good agricultural practice regulations last year. We see similar serious compliance issues when it comes to Uisce Éireann’s discharge licences. A large number of pollution events stem from maintenance issues and there should be a zero tolerance approach to this with swift legal sanctions.
Hydromorphology is an another issue the committee may not be familiar with. It is essentially changes to the physical structure of a water body, and these changes can have quite fundamental impacts on how that water body functions.
To compound all of these issues, we have climate change induced heatwaves and droughts which will also negatively impact on our already stressed water bodies. Even at existing levels of pollution and degradation, we are likely to see increased fish kills because they are combined with heatwaves and droughts.
There is a systemic failure at a State level to properly plan for all of these issues. The current plan for water relies on generic measures with no indication if they will or will not fix a problem, and many water bodies have no targeted measures in place at all.
Our recommendations are that we need evidenced-based measures targeted at a water body or sub-catchment scale. We also need far better compliance with the regulations. This applies to the good agricultural practice, GAP, regulations for farmers but also to Uisce Éireann, for compliance with its discharge licences, and to private industry. The Arterial Drainage Act reflects the thinking of a previous and outdated era and we are calling for it to be reformed.
We need to move away from making plans to write plans to seeing evidence-based action implemented on the ground. Until we do that, our water bodies will continue to disimprove.
Ms Katie Smirnova:
I thank the Cathaoirleach and committee members. The Irish Environmental Network encompasses 41 national NGOs. Our advocacy coalition, the Environmental Pillar, was established in 2009 by the Irish Government as an independent national social partner to engage in public debate and policymaking. Ms Karin Dubsky, director of Coastwatch and a marine ecologist, and I are here today to discuss solutions which, if implemented and funded appropriately, can make a significant difference to water quality.
In agriculture, the risk of nutrient pollution should inform a field's carrying capacity, and actions such as riparian buffer zones should be spatially targeted based on nutrient flow pathways. The catchment-based approach and a greater adoption of nature-based solutions would also help.
Ireland has finally embarked on integrated catchment management, but greater funding, policy coherence and active collaboration between Departments is needed to break down silos and support action on the ground. Most importantly, there needs to be stronger regulation and staff resources to monitor and enforce other industries too, such as construction in our mines and quarries.
Frustration increases when known issues are not dealt with. One example, as mentioned, was Uisce Éireann's wastewater licence breaches and continued discharge of poorly treated sewage due to infrastructure, operational and maintenance issues. The same applies to Ireland's almost half a million septic tanks. Last year, 59% of systems failed inspection, with risk to human health and the environment. The EPA reports inconsistent enforcement across local authorities.
To address chemical pollution, we need an easier choice architecture for organic farming. Simultaneously, we need chemicals, such as glyphostate herbicide, to be banned from use for aesthetic purposes such gardening or landscaping. These pollutants may have a profound impact on marine ecosystems but we have huge data gaps. A coherent, ecologically sound and well-managed network of marine protected areas could help. However, regulation must be underpinned by clearly defined responsibilities for effective management and enforcement and the impacts of marine litter, from capturing ghost nets to extremely concerning micro-litter from plastic, must be addressed too. Gabhaim buíochas leis an gcoiste for its time.
Mr. Fergal Bell:
I thank the Chairperson, Deputies and Senators for inviting the Angling Council of Ireland national governing body to address the committee today on the impact of pollution and water quality on inland fisheries and transitional waters.
Ireland's waters are facing increasing environmental pressures. According to the EPA, only 52% of Ireland's rivers, lakes, estuaries and coastal waters are currently in satisfactory ecological condition. Agriculture remains the most significant pressure on water quality nationally, while approximately 70% of estuarine and transitional waters are in unsatisfactory condition.
Atlantic salmon provide perhaps the clearest example of environmental decline. Historical estimates suggest that approximately 1.7 million to 2 million adult salmon returned annually to Irish rivers during the 1970s. Current estimates suggest annual returns of fewer than 150,000 to 250,000 fish, representing a decline of approximately 90% over five decades. Sea trout populations have experienced similar pressures. Aquatic invertebrates such as mayflies, stoneflies and caddisflies, which form the basis of freshwater food chains, have also declined in rivers impacted by nutrient enrichment, sedimentation and habitat degradation. Salmonids and aquatic invertebrates are internationally recognised indicator species, and their decline serves as a warning that wider ecological deterioration is occurring.
Fish kills continue to be a serious indicator of declining water quality in Ireland. Inland Fisheries Ireland's landmark report, Fish Kills in Ireland – History, Current Status and Recovery, identified 2,107 fish kill events in Irish rivers and lakes between 1969 and 2022, with spatial data available for 1,738 individual water bodies. Fish kills were recorded in every county in Ireland, demonstrating that water pollution is a national issue rather than a localised problem. Agriculture was identified as the most commonly known cause of fish kills, followed by eutrophication, industrial activities, municipal discharges, mining and construction-related pollution. Between January 2023 and July 2024 alone, Inland Fisheries Ireland recorded 30 fish kill incidents resulting in the deaths of almost 19,000 fish, including Atlantic salmon, trout, eel and lamprey. The ecological consequences of these incidents can persist for years or even decades. Major fish kills can destroy entire year classes of fish, damage spawning stocks and disrupt the invertebrate communities upon which fish populations depend. Recent events on rivers such as the Blackwater and Glyde demonstrate the scale of damage that can occur when pollution incidents are not prevented.
The significant pressures-----
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. Bell. The document has been circulated to members. We will keep it at that and we will start our questions and answers.
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will call Deputy Whitmore first. The Deputy indicated. I will remind members to indicate and I will call them in the order that I see them. I will keep it to five-minute slots for the time being, given the number of witnesses.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for coming in today and for their presentations. It is important that we are having this joint meeting today because there are so many interactions between these areas. It is a very complex issue and it is important that we do not deal with it independently from other parts of the Oireachtas. It is good to have the two committees here today as well.
My first question is for An Taisce and IEN. Dr. McGoff talked of generic measures. We have had the nitrates derogation for 30 years. There have been measures that have been put in place. The question is why those measures are not working. Can Dr. McGoff go into that in a little more detail, such as how we move away from those generic measures and what would need to be done to see results at a farm level because we have seen it go the other way?
In relation to the anglers, ultimately they are at the coalface. When there is a fish kill, it is always anglers who identify it first. They are the ones making the calls to the EPA and Inland fisheries Ireland. Can the witnesses go through what gaps they have seen to date? Will the new protocols being put in place help deal with this? We had a lot of discussion about this in the committee as well. There were major gaps in how the Blackwater was dealt with. Will the new protocols being put in place assist in dealing with these fish kills when they are identified?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
In relation to fish kills, you have to look at the number of rivers and lakes we have and the number of staff on the ground to try to protect those rivers and lakes. We have 2,429 rivers, 224 lakes, 80 transitional water bodies, 45 coastal water bodies and 125 groundwaters. The EPA has responsibility for the licensing of industry and some large agriculture. Inland Fisheries Ireland, IFI, has somewhere in the region of 300 staff in total. If you take office staff and some scientific staff out of it, you are possibly left with between 150 or 170 staff on the ground to monitor and look after all of this water. There are the other State agencies. The local authority waters programme, LAWPRO, is under a new name now, which I cannot remember. LAWPRO does not have any teeth. It generally goes out and looks at the invertebrates and water quality and talks to farmers. If it sees something wrong, it has to notify the IFI or the EPA. It cannot do the work itself. Anglers on the ground are getting scarcer because over half of our rivers are closed. A club I am a member of has lost 40 members this year. We contribute in the region of €1.8 million per year to the IFI and the conservation fund. Half of that goes into the IFI or the Department takes it. The other 50% - €800,000 to €1 million per year - has been primarily used up to now for barrier removal. I see that the IFI has announced today €870,000 for works on rivers. It does not mention anything about the angling community contributing to that. That is wrong. That should not be happening.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In other countries, the angling community is part of the monitoring and is a lot a more involved in fisheries. Does Mr. McEnroe feel that anglers here are not included as much as they could be?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
Absolutely. We had a system in place approximately 20 years ago where we had regional fishery boards. Those were done away with. We were making a contribution to the South-western Trout and Coarse Fish Development Society, of which I was chairman. I spent a number of years doing instream feeder work with the local angling clubs. That system is gone. At this point in time, anglers do not have any input into what is happening on the rivers except when they go out on the river, which a lot of them are not doing any more because there is no salmon there or the rivers are closed down. We are effectively out of the system.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Were anglers involved in the development of the protocol between the different agencies for when a fish kill happened?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
They were not involved in that at all.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My first question is for SWAN. Dr. McGoff mentioned the Arterial Drainage Act as a contributory factor to the issues. Will she elaborate on that? Where does she see that falling down or where are the flaws in it?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
The Arterial Drainage Act is from the 1940s and is the legislation of a bygone era. Since it was enacted, we have had the habitats and water framework directives, which have really high requirements for ecological protection. The Arterial Drainage Act forces bodies like the Office of Public Works, OPW, to maintain the rivers in the state they were in when first dredged in the 1940s, but things have moved on. The Act was brought in to get water off land as quickly as possible and bring more farming land into operation. However, when you look at more recent legislation like the nature restoration law and even the climate Act, they almost run counter to the entire ambition of the Arterial Drainage Act.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is it that the Arterial Drainage Act does not take those elements, including ecological ones, into consideration? What is it about? How would Dr. McGoff characterise it?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
From our perspective, the Act is not properly assessed for water framework directive compliance or habitats directive compliance. It is keeping rivers in a permanently unnatural state. It takes water off the land but shifts flooding further downstream. In terms of a climate-stressed future, it is not particularly helpful because a lot of that flooding ends up in towns like Enniscorthy. There are a lot of questions about the adequacy of the Arterial Drainage Act, and it needs to undergo a review.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Irish Environmental Network mentioned Uisce Éireann in particular. Uisce Éireann receives substantial State funding and should be subject to enforcement. Clearly, it is not if it is in breach. What is going on there? Where is it falling down on the enforcement side?
Ms Katie Smirnova:
There have been 35 prosecutions with Uisce Éireann but many of the issues can be divided into two categories. The major infrastructure upgrades are costly and require significant investment over multiple years. There are also operational and maintenance issues that my colleague may go into more detail on. Those are less costly. They are things like machinery being run to the point of failure rather than preventative measures being taken for reasons of maintenance.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will the witnesses give us an example of a substantial prosecution related to environmental impact, particularly water impact?
Ms Karin Dubsky:
I have a tiny one. The issue is there is not enough enforcement. Often, it is just logging of incidents rather than action being taken when they happen. My own tiny stream was running past my house with a sewage treatment plant above it. It was managed beautifully with the community and Wexford County Council until Uisce Éireann took over. The first thing Uisce Éireann did was remove the tertiary treatment stage, which was the reed bed. When we asked what it was doing, it told us to wait and that it was doing a better job. It was not a better job. We now only have secondary treatment. There have been umpteen discharges. We have no collaboration. We do not even get a warning when there is a discharge. We used to have eels directly in front of my house. Now, the quality has deteriorated significantly. The only other thing that happened was that our stream did not officially exist any more until last week when we objected and said it did exist.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there enforcement action pending in respect of any of that specific example, or are these just decisions that Uisce Éireann is taking that are gradually causing a deterioration?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Nobody else is following up on Uisce Éireann.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Angling Council identified aquaculture as the first issue. We have already had speakers on the nitrates action programme. Is there anything missing that Mr. McEnroe would point at to reverse the decline in fish stocks? What is it about the nitrates side that is not yet working?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
The nitrates and phosphates come together in an estuary. The committee should not forget that all of these estuaries with fish farms on them have to deal with all of the pollution coming down their rivers. We can take the Waterford Estuary as an example. You have the Barrow, Nore and Suir running into it. You have large river systems carrying a lot of pollutants into it. The fish cages themselves are carrying a lot of pollution. They put a lot of nitrates into the feed, and it creates a lot of sea lice. The problem with sea lice is that juvenile salmon and sea trout generally stay around the coast, so they are getting infected all the time with sea lice and are being eaten. Sea trout populations have been virtually wiped out in parts of the country.
Juvenile salmon have to navigate through those cages. Sea lice attach themselves to them and they are not able to get out to sea because the fins and scales are eaten off them. They die on the way out. Despite all the scientific evidence-----
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am going to move to the next question. I am sure there will be an opportunity to pick up on that again. To be fair everyone, I will move to Senator Boyle. The Senator has five minutes.
Manus Boyle (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank everybody for coming in. It is great to see the joined-up thinking between the two committees.
Dr. McGoff mentioned climate change and heatwaves. Where are we going to make progress on that moving forward? It has been stated that more heatwaves will be coming down the line. With climate change, we have bluefin tuna and all kinds of tuna coming past our coasts. That was not the case in previous decades and it is down to climate change. How are fish going react to that, especially those in our rivers?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
This really underscores the need to improve the resilience of our rivers. Some 52% of surface water bodies are polluted. They are stressed systems and are just about hanging in there. Then we have heatwaves, which push things over the edge. That is when we get fish kills. If we had a diverse system with nice vegetation, not arterially drained water bodies, if we had natural water bodies that function in a natural way and are not filled with nitrates, phosphates and other pollutants, there would be much greater resilience. Heat events would occur, but the fish would have cool places where they could hide. There would be more oxygen in the water and they would have more invertebrates to feed on. Building that resilience is absolutely key.
There is plenty we can to do try to prevent climate change getting worse. However, we have baked in a certain amount of heat that is coming our way. The reaction to that should absolutely be to maximise ecological resilience to cope with the changes that are already baked in.
Manus Boyle (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The fish kill on the Blackwater was a very public case. What happens in instances such as that? Why does it take so long to get anything done? What are the penalties for the people who pollute our rivers? We often see RTÉ coverage of fish kills. After a couple of weeks, the attention dies away and nobody talks about what happened. Are court cases ongoing at the moment? Will people be brought to task?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
There is a critical lack of joined-up thinking and enforcement. The Blackwater incident highlighted the silos that exist. For example, IFI would only do certain things and the EPA could only do certain things. Everyone was sticking strictly to their mandate. We had one or two days at the beginning, just after the fish kill, where we failed to identify what had caused it. That was a major failing. I hope there have been learnings from what happened.
When a court case is taken by the likes of IFI, the fines that the District Court and the Circuit Court can impose are quite low. It is like a slap on the wrist essentially. Often, those being fined give a donation to a local angling group or environmental group. That does not fix the river. They need to be forced to pay to repair the damage they have done. We really need to make the penalties for this sort of crime much more serious in order to try to prevent fish kills from happening. At the moment, it is almost as though they are built into the business model. It is probably as cheap to pay the fines as it is to prevent the pollution going into the water.
Manus Boyle (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Bell stated earlier that the impact on our rivers can be felt for decades. Is there any follow-up in that regard? Do people just do what they want?
Mr. Fergal Bell:
In regard to the most recent fish kill on the River Glyde, the members of Dee and Glyde Development Association were devastated that this happened. There was a bit of a delay in getting IFI involved. It might have been able to mitigate some of the fish that was killed. Unfortunately, that did not happen in time. It was found out quite quickly where the pollution incident occurred. As colleagues said, the fines are quite low. The people involved in causing this pollution should be made to pay substantially to restore the river system. The River Glyde could take between three and six years to recover from the incident to which I refer. Some of the salmon in it were quite big, up to 80 cm in length. They were killed off. Salmon are under enough pressure without this happening. All the other types of fish are also affected. We cannot forget them. That river was starting to come back recently. As I said, the Dee and Glyde Development Association was looking after the river very well and keeping an eye on it. We in the Federation of Pike Angling Clubs held pike fishing competitions on the river in the autumn. There was a great head of pike, salmon and sea trout in the river. Unfortunately, this incident has put it back at least five or six years. I hope the river will recover substantially over the next couple of years. The clubs are the eyes and ears and they should be more involved as a co-ordinated effort to try to stop or mitigate against pollution incidents.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for coming in and for their presentations. My first question is for the Irish Environmental Network. Dr. McGoff highlighted the benefits of the network of well-managed marine protected areas. Our committee will likely be carrying out pre-legislative scrutiny in this area over the coming months. What features does the Irish Environmental Network want to see in the legislation to underpin marine protected areas in Ireland?
Ms Karin Dubsky:
I love that question. We would love to see MPAs being well managed with the local community where there is a management team at the top, including the local community, where they say what the risks are and how would we act, just like what happens with planned trials for oil pollution responses. Lifeguards do not just go out on the beach, they carry out tests. Before an incident happens, we need to know what we are going to do and where we are going to monitor. Monitoring by means of using citizen science, particularly for inshore MPAs, would be very important. In that case, the safety protection agency for shellfish waters carries out a ground survey all around an estuary every five or six years and checks the whereabouts of inflows that could be polluted. The next survey happens five or six years later. The local community needs to have a good alert-and-halt system in order to manage wisely both for nature and for the likes of native oyster fishermen. Our inshore areas should be class A. We should be able to get top price for our fish. That works when there is coherent management in circumstances where it is known who is going to act and when and where it is done completely differently from what happens with special areas of conservation and special protection areas. We need management plans that take pollution and warming waters into account.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The next question is for the Angling Council of Ireland. Will Mr. McEnroe repeat the number of fish he believes were going up the rivers in the 1970s? Was it 1.7 million?
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It is pretty frightening that the number is down to-----
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Will Mr. McEnroe expand on the role played by anglers in protecting Ireland's waterways? Is there a structure in place whereby indicators of pollution events observed by anglers can be escalated to the relevant authorities? Is there a protocol? How is the Angling Council of Ireland funded? How can it provide substantial funds to IFI - Mr. McEnroe said that, not me - an that this is not recognised?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
On funding, we work closely with Sports Ireland. Unfortunately, IFI applied for the dormant accounts funding. We were promised that part of money would be handed over to us in order that we would be able to employ four or five people, one in each region.
That has not happened. The first tranche of funding was €1.2 million. That did not work out and some of it had to be sent back to the Department. In 2024, they got €800,000. We received none of that funding despite looking for it as well. I do not know where it was spent. We have no idea where it was spent. It was spent on some projects belonging to IFI. We received none of it. Any funding we get, we get from Sport Ireland. That is relatively small money. It is in the region of €30,000 a year to do that.
In relation to protocols, I am chairman of the Angling Council of Ireland. I am on the phone full-time getting reports of incidents around the country. A day does not go by where I do not hear of an incident of some kind of a fish kill or pollution that has not been recorded, so I would notify the local fishery staff. There is one thing about the IFI staff. I could not talk highly enough about them. It is more a vocation for those boys than it is a job. The staff in IFI are absolutely excellent at their job, and they are constantly on the go. They cannot work at night or in the evening time, however. They are not allowed to bring their vehicles home. When an incident happens, you cannot call them because most of them turn off their phones and have no vehicle to get out to examine what the report is. That is something that needs to be looked at by IFI.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses for coming today. Worryingly, we had confirmation in relation to the River Blackwater mass kill of fish that no culprit was identified. I still find that really disturbing that nobody was held responsible for such an ecological disaster. We have issues in Dungarvan in terms of the shellfish fishery there. We do not have clarity about what is causing those issues. We dealt with this last week. Obviously we have the EPA, Uisce Éireann, local authorities and Inland Fisheries Ireland. I want to get a sense of what is failing. What is happening here? It does not look like anybody is in the helicopter with a big picture and the power to enforce. I know there are groups there, but not everybody is at the table. Not all the stakeholders are at the table. I want to get a sense from all the witnesses to take me through the landscape as it is right now. Why is it failing in so many instances? What needs to change? Obviously some of those people will appear before the committee next. We need to have a real sense of it. If the witnesses were in our seats, what questions would they ask the witnesses who are coming in next?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
I ask the Deputy to look at the systems and where those mussel farms are and that. I had a briefing at the EPA conference two weeks ago from a person in the industry. At times, he is losing up to 60% of his stocks because of pollution. If you take any of the big river systems going out into the estuaries, such as Cork Estuary, Shannon Estuary, Waterford Estuary or Dublin Bay, a lot of pollution is coming down them. Silt is coming from the likes of the Shannon and Bord na Móna or the private peat developers in that region. There is a massive build-up of silt on the bed of the River Shannon - up to 6 ft deep at this point in time - that will never be removed. The water quality going down the estuaries is gathering at the estuaries and that is where the farms are. They are not able to filter all the pollutants, such as nitrates, phosphates and everything else, that are coming down the system. That is a large part of the problem. That was identified at the EPA meeting two weeks ago.
Ms Karin Dubsky:
We have focused on our rivers. Our estuaries have deteriorated most. A total of 70% of our estuaries are now not at "Good" status. They are supposed to be. They are deteriorating further. Estuaries are the cradles of an awful lot of our inshore fish or the route which fish have to go through. If we do not attend to our estuaries, we have lost it. I also raise our inshore bays and so on. Why are there no fines for pollution incidents like the Dunmore East stream, where the bleach was put in so that it would get a blue flag for its bathing water? The stream was polluted. Faecal pollution can be killed by bleach. You can put bleach in and the stream is squeaky clean, but it is actually totally illegal under the water pollution Act, which is now 50 years old. Why is the water pollution Act not used for other, avoidable little bits and pieces?
Our estuaries are full of little slipways and sea steps. In many of those, they are using bleach and that causes localised death to all marine organisms. These are things which are totally avoidable. Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council has been absolutely fantastic at retrofitting and not using bleach. Some other local authorities have been too. These are little things which have a cumulative effect with the heating of water. The biggest problem is warming water in our estuaries. Why are EPA licences not revised so that there is a halt to putting cooling water out into an estuary when the organisms are already absolutely struggling? A company like the SSE power station is keeping to its licence. I am not saying it is in breach of its licence. What is wrong is the licence. In the Elbe Estuary, the licence stipulates that when the seeping water goes above a certain temperature, they must close down. Either they can do their cleaning at that stage, or they change over to a more expensive internal recycling. We are allowing this to continue.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank our witnesses. I have a general point in relation to the Arterial Drainage Act. I know Dr. McGoff criticised the water action plan in her opening statement, and rightly so, but there are good measures in there too. One of them is a review of the Arterial Drainage Act. We have consistently called on the Government to begin that process. I think it is going to take a bit of time and it is important. Separately, the issues around the inspection regime, increasing the number of inspection officers and the inspection regime more generally for farming is important. It goes back to the point Mr. McEnroe made about the anglers not having a role. There is the establishment of community catchment forums. There are many river trusts out there already doing good work, including the River Nore in my home county of Kilkenny. They should be seen as the go-to groups in terms of monitoring and management.
I was out on the Barrow with Jim Harding. There was an article in the Irish Examiner yesterday about sedimentation in river tributaries. This is about salmon spawning more generally. There seems to be a hardening of the beds of the rivers coming from surface run-offs. Hydrocarbons and other materials are coming off road surfaces. Perhaps Mr. McEnroe might comment on that because it was certainly very pronounced from what I saw.
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
It is certainly a massive issue. There is little or no management of our feeder streams any more. When arterial drainage works are done on a river, which has been done since 1965 or around that time, where the big drag lines come in and instead of a narrow meandering stream, it now becomes 4 ft, 5 ft or 8 ft wide.
That wall slowed down the water.
The use of nitrates and phosphates on land increased. It allowed much more vegetation to grow on the banks of the river and closed it, so that the next year they had to come in with a dragline again and try to clean out the rivers instead of narrowing them and putting in the proper beds. The silt that is coming off the banks of those rivers is going into and settling in the gravel beds. When the salmon or trout come up to spawn, they are not able to work that gravel to make their redds. That is a large part of what is happening.
The last injection of funding we got was over 25 years ago. It was called the tourism operational programme. We used that to a great degree on in-stream feeder work. The former Minister, Dr. Michael Woods, then promised us a further £40 or £50 million. We never got that money and no injection of money has come from the State since. Small feeder streams that feed the bigger systems were allowed to deteriorate to the extent that they have. There was a person in the IFI who used to say that we were no longer the doers, but the enablers. That was the IFI's thinking. It is not getting involved in feeder stream work. The experience of the staff within the IFI who were qualified in developing feeder streams has been lost. They are no longer there to a great extent. We need to get that knowledge back whereby a person can look at a river, be able to read it, know what needs to be done with it - what spawning gravel needs to go in, what raking of the riverbeds needs to be done and what stocks of fish are in the river - and look at the invertebrates in the river, be it the mayfly, stone fly or whatever, to feed the value that is in that river. We need a person who is able to evaluate the value of that river.
I will not delay members much longer. Professor Martin O'Grady did a survey of Lough Ree and its feeder streams. This involved a genetic study of those streams and a netting survey of the lake itself. He was able to identify exactly what feeder stream was producing what amount of fish for the lake. He found that 40% of the fish went up the River Camlin system at the top end of the lake, 40% goes up the River Inny system, and 2% goes up a smaller feeder stream. The study team was able to know exactly what was in it. In the case of one river that was not producing any fish, the teams was able to go in and identify what the problem with it was. The angling clubs, the ESB and the county councils went in and we started developing the feeder streams. We identified that there were not sufficient stocks going up those feeder streams. We monitored the feeder streams for four years. We put fish traps on them. We got permission to build a small trout hatchery on them to try to bump up the stocks within the river in question. When the stocks increased, the hatchery was closed down. That is what we are up against and what needs to be done.
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Mr. McEnroe. I wish to let members know there will be a second round. There are a number of other speakers here.
I am going to put some questions myself, as I will have to hand over the Chair for a short period. The rationale behind having this meeting is precisely the interconnectedness of our freshwater systems and coastal waters, namely, our maritime environment. That is why it is important that the two committees have come together to discuss this issue. Our estuaries are where these the two systems interact. That is where we can sometimes, but not always, find the culprits impacting the environment in both.
I have a question for SWAN on the impact of industrial pollution. We have heard about nitrates from agriculture. There is cross-party agreement on the issue of sewage and Uisce Éireann. Certainly, it was a matter discussed at length at our committee last week. There is much to discuss in terms of industrial pollution, in particular run off. We all accept that enforcement needs to be better and that we need a more responsive regime of investigation and enforcement, but aside from that, what can be done? Are there technologies we could look at that mitigate some of that, particularly industrial pollution and run off from other human activities around our rivers and estuaries?
Dr. Puneeta Sreenivas:
When we speak about industrial pollution, there is a whole suite of pollutants there. We do not even know what some of their impacts are yet because they are not fully studied. However, there are technologies being used in other member states to counter that. There is also the introduction of the polluter pays principle, forcing the industries to pay higher tariffs for the amount of pollution they are causing. We could expect them to pay for the restoration of the damage they are causing.
Nature-based solutions are one of the things that could be used as a polishing at the end, like a tertiary treatment, or even a pre-treatment for industries before the discharge goes for further treatment. Making it expensive to treat industrial discharges might incentivise them to be more innovative and use those technologies, for example, nature-based solutions. There are enough scientific studies to show that technologies like constructed wetlands or even rain gardens remove not just nutrients, but also other pollutants like hydrocarbons and heavy metals. Anything with a soil matrix is able to remove more complex things like hydrocarbons and heavy metals. Increasing how much industries have to pay to get their discharge treated might incentivise them and push them to use these more innovative technologies.
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I address the same question to the Irish Environmental Network.
Ms Katie Smirnova:
I will supplement what Dr. Sreenivas mentioned about nature-based solutions. Nature-based solutions are one of the potential measures on offer, but one of the biggest barriers to implementing them is that there is very little research in Ireland or other countries on how they manage chemical pollution, particularly in regard to industry. It is important that, when we are talking about nature-based solutions like constructed wetlands, we have the research to say what they do and do not do. We do not want industrial facilities putting in solutions that are fantastic and have great co-benefits for biodiversity but do not necessarily solve the chemical pollution element.
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is interesting additional information.
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have only 40 seconds and I have one question for the Angling Council of Ireland. I apologise to Ms Dubsky.
I live in west County Waterford and the crisis that occurred on the River Blackwater - that mass mortality event - was really frustrating, albeit it happened upriver in County Cork, or so we suspect. It has impacted on the river system and on the coastal waters around it. To what extent do we need a rapid reaction approach? Mr. McEnroe mentioned the fact that IFI staff, who are very diligent and do their work excellently, did not have the resources, direction or ability to do what needs to be done to identify pollution before evidence is dissipated or moved downstream. Can I have his thoughts on that. please?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
I understand that the IFI has a new protocol out at the moment. I have not seen or read it yet. I will wait to read it. From an angler's perspective, we are not on the rivers as much as we used to be. There are many issues happening on the rivers and if something happens at night, we have nobody to ring or talk to. There is a hotline number but when we are responded to, it is the day after or two days after. When we had regional fishery boards, there was a director in each region and 15 or 20 people on each board from different cohorts.
We need to get back to where we were. The system that is in Inland Fisheries Ireland at the moment is not fit for purpose. In our mind, it is not fit for purpose.
Conor McGuinness (Waterford, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
This will be the first opportunity that the Joint Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs has had to engage with IFI. No doubt that point and more will be put to it in the second half of this meeting. Unfortunately, I have another meeting to go to, but Deputy Ó Muirí will chair the remainder of the meeting. I will hopefully be back before the end of the meeting.
Alice-Mary Higgins (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am interested. I am going to try to avoid topics that have been discussed previously such as nitrates. Witnesses might touch on phosphates, which have not had as much of a focus. I would like to talk to SWN and the IEN on two things. The first is the water framework directive. We have talked about its non-implementation. There are also very worrying signals about its potential change or dilution at EU level. Could the witnesses comment on what message we should be sending in terms of the water framework directive and ensuring that it is strengthened and implemented rather than diluted? We met with the Commissioner previously on that.
I raise hydromorphology as it relates to sediment. What are the physical changes to rivers and streams, not just what is going into them but in terms of the impact on that? Could the witnesses comment on that and the need for it to be addressed more robustly?
I was very struck by the temperature piece. Even on the climate committee, it may not have given enough focus to it. On the point about rules in relation to receiving water temperature, which was an interesting factor, could the witnesses comment on the temperature piece? I feel like we may not be getting enough analysis on water temperature but it has serious impacts. What are practical measures that could be done on it? I am struck by the effect of planting and trees and what this can contribute to lowering water temperature. That is another example. There is potentially a big difference between a concrete basin and something that is shadowed by trees when it comes to water temperature, which has so many knock-on effects.
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
I can address the point on the water framework directive and I will pass to my colleagues for the other points. We also met with the Commissioner when she was over. Our message is that we depend hugely on European laws to protect nature in Ireland. If the water framework directive is weakened, we would have serious concerns about the ramifications for Irish water bodies. Even with the water framework directive in place as is, we know that over 50% of our rivers and lakes are polluted. The issue in Ireland and in a lot of other member states from what we have heard is implementation. Ireland has failed to properly implement the water framework directive. There are numerous infringement actions against us from the European Commission for failures to implement and properly transpose the water framework directive. Even our latest river basin management plan states that for 30% of water bodies it has no idea what is happening and no plan to fix them. It is a plan to fail. Before the Government goes tinkering with the water framework directive and saying it is too hard, step one is whether we can first try to properly implement it. That is our strong message.
The other message we gave to the Commissioner is that Irish people care deeply about water quality. When the EPA does the surveys on climate change in the Irish mind, water pollution consistently comes out on top as the main concern that people have. Over and above drought, flooding and climate change, water pollution is their main concern. This is a critical issue for the Irish people. I will pass to Dr. Sreenivas to talk about hydromorphology.
Dr. Puneeta Sreenivas:
In regards hydromorphology, we should be considering it as a key pressure within the water framework directive. I know it has a bit of a stepchild treatment when it comes to the water framework directive. Even if we do improve all of the other pressures and try to improve chemical quality of the waters, it will not be enough because if you are continuing to dredge, channelise or remove the sediments, putting more sediment into what are essentially living and breathing systems, it will not be able to function the way it is intended. The issue with the Arterial Drainage Act and the reason we are calling for it to be reformed or completely overhauled is because it is doing more harm than good. I understand that it does provide some amount of flood protection, but there are other ways of providing the same amount of flood protection. We are removing riparian buffers where there should be riparian buffers and we are removing shade in the name of following that Act. That also plays into the temperature piece. If shade is removed from next to rivers, it will bring up temperatures. That is not what fish want. Ms Dubsky can follow on regarding the temperature aspect.
Ms Karin Dubsky:
What can be done on temperature is to watch and not add extra pressures. We should reduce the nutrients, but there are several large-scale industrial ground seaweed applications before MARA now. The trees on land are like the brown seaweed forests in the sea. If you cut those, it is the same with the sea grass, the fish cannot go there for shade. Therefore, it is important that this is taken into account. At the moment, this criterion is not taken into account.
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
My views are the same as those of Dr. McGoff. It is temperature. The extraction of water from small feeder streams is a huge concern to us. Farmers are doing it now. Industry is doing it. I refer to the increase in the amount of water taken in Dublin during the fine spell of weather. It is the same in the countryside. Farmers will want water to feed their cattle, so they use the feeder streams to do that. That is a huge concern.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have four speakers remaining. I am conscious of the clock. We are trying to finish by 12.20 p.m. I call Deputy Maxwell. He will be followed by Seanadóir Noonan, Deputy Cahill and Deputy Clendennen.
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will be quick with my two questions so that I can get a reply. There has been a lot of talk about the nitrates derogation, farmers and agriculture polluting. Has anybody anything good to say? Farmers know it is a serious issue, but farmers and the farming organisations have stepped up to the plate and are trying to meet. They know water quality is very important. The message going out if one were to listen to the proceedings so far is that farmers are the big cause here. Yes, we have a problem with agriculture, but I think farmers are stepping up to the plate and putting in processes to try to eliminate that. I think we need to give them some credit. Dr. McGoff was very vocal that the nitrates derogation should not have been extended. I supported the extension, but we need to give the farmers who are doing their bit around the country some credit.
I think Mr. McEnroe of the Angling Council of Ireland said the IFI is doing a great job. I would disagree in parts. The day it was in here before-----
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The day IFI was before the Public Accounts Committee told a story of how it is handling things. The IFI has closed the trout hatcheries. Is the last one is ready to close?
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is the one in Oughterard staying open? There was word that it was going to close.
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. McEnroe's reading is that hatchery in Oughterard is staying open for stocking going into the future.
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
There are two frames of thought on this. If we were to listen to the scientists, and I mean every scientist, I have not spoken to a scientist who would agree with a hatchery. They say it weakens the stocks and no fish from a hatchery will survive in the wild. That is a scientific analysis of what is happening there. There is only one hatchery that I know of that is left working and that is the one in Oughterard.
Why we got the hatchery in the first place was we were able to identify, by putting fish traps on our feeder streams, what fish was going up to spawn. We put on the fish traps for four months in the year and we looked at the wetted area of those feeder streams. We were able to evaluate that there were not enough stocks going up to spawn and there were not enough juvenile fish from electrofishing in the rivers either. That is why we got permission to put in the hatchery. The hatchery was put in. We worked it with IFI staff and we released those unfed fry into the same feeder streams as the broodstock came out of. We tried to catch the peers together, strip them and put the eggs into the hatchery. After seven or eight years, they said that that was enough, we were not to be working it anymore, and we had to close it down.
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That Oughterard one is not an IFI fishery.
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The IFI has closed all its hatcheries.
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
Can I address the Deputy's first question? To be clear, we would not be laying the blame at the feet of farmers. I would say farmers are following policy advice. They could be farming to an absolute tee, following all of the rules, but the rules are not fit for purpose. For example, the nitrates action programme is meant to be preventing nitrate pollution to water bodies. Their own assessment says that we should probably gather some evidence to see if these measures are working. This is after 30 years of the nitrates directive and after six nitrates action programmes.
Farmers are jumping through so many environmental hoops. What we would say is that the Government is failing both water quality and farmers because it is getting them to do an awful lot of these things. They are paying out of their own pocket to do it but the effectiveness of the measures has never been tested. When it comes to nitrogen, we know from the science that those measures are ineffective. I would say farmers are not the problem here. The measures and the plans are the problem.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have two quick questions. On that point Dr. McGoff made in relation to the nitrates directive, it is clear that it has to go and it has to be replaced by scientifically proven measures that will actually work.
I have a broader question to all of the witnesses. We have had two of the biggest fish kills in the history of the State at a time when environmental regulation has never been more stringent. Looking at the bigger picture, what needs to change in our approach to water quality more general?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
I would say we need to start valuing water and treating it like a critical resource. It is falling between lots of different stools. There are so many different bodies involved. They are all doing great work but they are not collaborating effectively. The Blackwater fish kill was quite a clear example of that. A lot of things fell between the stools.
No matter how good the regulation is and no matter how good the compliance is, you will still have things like slurry tanks bursting and you will end up with fish kills. What we should be focusing on is improving the overall resilience and making sure that as many water bodies as possible are reaching their legal good status under the water framework directive.
Fish kills are unfortunate. They will likely always happen, but let us work on bringing up the baseline because at the moment it is at an incredibly low level so that when you have these catastrophic fish kills, it has a much bigger impact than it might otherwise have.
Ms Katie Smirnova:
It goes back to some of the previous questions as well. In regard to the bigger picture, the fact we are operating in silos is the major barrier. Specifically, in terms of job descriptions and people whose role is to connect those dots, usually the staff working with agencies and on the ground are already stretched and working within their own limited capacity, and there is no one whose responsibility it is to reach further out. They do not have the time to build relationships with other staff. Oftentimes within organisations people do not know what their colleagues sitting across the table from them are doing, never mind what the remit of other organisations and agencies are. At a high level, that would be a major gap. We need resourcing for people whose job it is specifically to figure out who is who, who is doing what and whose responsibility it is.
That extends down to the community forums, that Senator Noonan mentioned. Oftentimes, it is those community groups, the river trusts on the ground, that are building relationships with the landowners and the angling associations. What they are struggling with, as are many other sectors, is staff turnover and a lack of multi-annual funding. A lot of those river trusts are doing great work with volunteers. The volunteers are stretched. Even if they have a staff member, oftentimes that staff member may only have job security for one year. Understandably, that staff member may choose to move to a role that offers more security. When that person leaves, because they had already been so stretched in their role, there is usually no contingency plan for sharing the relationships and all of the local knowledge they built up in that role. Multi-annual funding for those catchment forums, the community trusts, is needed to make sure that local knowledge is not lost. As the anglers pointed out earlier, they are at the coalface and it is very important that we have staff on the ground who have security to keep that going.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Ms Smirnova. That is an important point.
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
From the anglers' point of view, staff and enforcement is the issue. You need feet on the ground to identify the potential pollutants from an industry, farm effluent or whatever. With the amount of water that we have in this country, there are not enough people on the ground.
The other thing that I failed to mention which is dear to my own heart is the problem we are getting with invasive species. It is changing the whole ecosystems of lakes and river systems. We have 34 different invasive species now on the Shannon. The latest one that we got late last year is a shrimp called the demon shrimp. There are two of them. There is the killer shrimp and the demon shrimp. If the killer shrimp comes in, he will absolutely wipe out invertebrates and juvenile fish. The demon shrimp are bad, but they are not as bad.
We have another weed that came in last year. It is called the starry stonewort. It is spreading right throughout the bed of the lakes on the Shannon. Something needs to be done drastically, not particularly on trying to control what is in the system but on what is outside the system that is ready to come in. We need protection at our ports and airports.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does Ms Dubsky want to make a brief comment? We are tight on time.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Ms Dubsky.
Michael Cahill (Kerry, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Ireland is experiencing an ever-worsening water quality crisis. Sadly, we have seen that in recent times with two of the biggest fish kills, two of the biggest disasters, in the River Glyde and the Blackwater. It is happening too often and it is worrying. What degree of water sampling is carried out and how often?
I believe there is a need for more grants for septic tanks, both replacement and upgrades. They are available in certain locations but not everywhere. They are expensive, especially for the elderly. There is a need for more.
In regard to urban wastewater and sewerage, it is putting pressure on our water system. It is known in towns and villages all over the country that many are not working and that they are seeping. Do the witnesses have any figures? I am thinking about my own county and my own village of Glenbeigh.
The wastewater treatment facility there has been at capacity for over 25 years now. In Kerry, we have more than 40 villages without sewers. It is hard to believe it in this day and age. I know that treatment plants are very expensive and take a long time from being given the green light to construction being completed. You are talking about a ten-year process, but there are other, cheaper means, in the context of constructed wetlands and so on, and I think Irish Water should be rolling those out more regularly.
Regarding Uisce Éireann, it obviously has a huge role here. There are significant gaps all over the country regarding what it is doing to assist in this area. What is the witnesses' opinion of Uisce Éireann, what it is doing, and, more importantly, what it is not doing?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There are a couple of questions here. The first is about water sampling. The witnesses might not directly sample, but they probably have a view on water sampling and strategy.
Ms Karin Dubsky:
We are running a course at the moment, as Coastwatch, on getting fishermen and people who are on the water on estuaries, in particular, accredited so that they can take water samples. We in Coastwatch, over the last 30-odd years, used to do microbe sampling for faecal contamination. We do not do it now, but we do nitrate sampling. The issue in estuaries, where we want to act fast, is that a fisherman or even a kayaker may see something, take the sample, and report it, but the sample is discarded because it is not taken by somebody who is officially accredited. We need to change that because that is a moment in time where you can catch something. We are starting this on a pilot basis with the same scientist who is teaching local authorities, so we hope that will be an improvement.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The second point was septic tank seepage. Are there any views on that?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
Registered septic tanks are somewhere in the region of 500,000. We have no idea what is not registered. A total of 121,200 samples were taken last year, and there was up to a 60% failure rate on those. Out of the 500,000, 300,000 would have failed. That is significant. We know the pressures that are on many households today. Some cannot pay their ESB bill or put enough food on the table. If they have an issue with a septic tank and it will cost in the region of €10,000 to €15,000 to remedy the septic tank, those people do not have that money. Money needs to be put up front or the local authorities need to do it and then pay the contractor so the work will be done.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am sorry to cut Mr. McEnroe off. We are tight on time. We spoke about Irish Water already. Have the witnesses any further commentary about Irish Water?
Ms Katie Smirnova:
Regarding septic tanks, one other issue is that there is a big geographical inequality with enforcement. In 2025, 90% of cases were taken by just four local authorities: Wexford, Kerry, Mayo and Limerick. Uisce Éireann has teams which are coming together as part of a community of practice for nature-based solutions to try to accelerate the delivery of actions like constructed wetlands. Movement is happening and they are also engaging with community groups. In Kerry, Deputy Cahill's county, there is a community group called Knocknagoshel Environmental and Angling Association. It received funding from the local authority waters programme, LAWPRO, community water development fund to create a design for a constructed wetland for their local wastewater treatment facility. There is movement but it needs to be accelerated and scaled up.
Dr. Puneeta Sreenivas:
Avoidable pollution is happening from urban wastewater treatment and Uisce Éireann. Of the 59% of failures of licensed discharges from Uisce Éireann, 40% were operational and maintenance issues. This is completely avoidable. It just means that somebody has not done his or her job properly or has failed to maintain particular equipment at the right time. There should really be a zero tolerance approach to things like this.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I do not want to repeat what other speakers have alluded to regarding fish kills. One question is about what needs to change, but how long does it take to restore depleting stocks?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
If you take a river system with juvenile fish in it, there are this year's stocks, which are known as the zero group, and last year's fish. A juvenile salmon will spend two to three years in a feeding area. There are broodstock too. If you kill the fish that lay the eggs, the first and second year class are wiped out. It could be five to seven years before recruitment comes back.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding a sustainable water network, we talk about the high status, blue dot, and the decline we have seen in recent years, down to 10% of rivers now. To protect what we have or improve those that have declined, is there any financial model or framework for what would be required in budgets to address it?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
It would depend on what the pressure is. You need to go water body by water body. In some of those water bodies, forestry is a pressure, including Coillte plantations. The science would tell us that the solution for freshwater pearl mussel is clearly to convert those areas back to open peatland and to get the trees out of there. In other areas, it might be septic tanks, so obviously the cost would be the grants to improve those septic tanks. In other cases, it is agriculture. My answer is that it really depends on what the pressure is. They are the best of the best. Once we have lost them, it is very hard to get them back. We should be going water body by water body and figuring out what needs to happen and what funding needs to go into it.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have heard some reference to IFI as an enabler. Who is the implementer and what sort of budgets do we put behind that implementer?
Dr. Elaine McGoff:
Ultimately, this should come from the Department of housing and the river basin management plan, which is the master plan for water quality, but instead what we have seen for forestry is that the main measure is to write a sectoral plan for forestry, which itself will not have any water body specific measures. I would say there is a failing in the master plan. They are in the middle of beginning to write their fourth river basin management plan. We really need to see action on the ground instead of plans to make plans.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Dr. McGoff referred to making plans to write more plans. How many plans and subplans are sitting on shelves which have not been implemented?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Over the last ten years, how many have there been and who would Dr. McGoff attribute most of them to?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Obviously when they produce or publish a plan, they meet in advance together in order to publish that.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Who should be that cohesive part?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On angling, we talked about the decline of hatcheries.
Deputy Maxwell referenced it. When the witnesses see an issue out on the water, and we have talked before at the committee about fish kills, what is happening that it takes two days to return a phone call?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I will ask that question but I want to get Mr. McEnroe's view. Is it the case there is no credit to phone back?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How many staff would Mr. McEnroe have one-to-one contact with during that 9-5 period? Would he have one point of contact? Should it be shift work? Should there be someone on call?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does Mr. McEnroe get a sense there are resources at present to have staff on call overnight in case of an emergency, for argument's sake?
Mr. Martin McEnroe:
I do not know what budget the IFI has at the moment. However, the numbers of staff have certainly dropped from over 500 to just over 300, so it is a question of how that number of rivers and lakes can be protected. Do not forget we have the ESB in the middle of all of this. The ESB runs about a third of the rivers in this country. It runs the fishing rights on the River Shannon. It has no protection staff on the River Shannon. IFI has to do the bit that is being done.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On behalf of the two committees, I thank all our witnesses for coming in for the first part of this session. I thank them for their evidence. I propose that we suspend the meeting briefly now to allow witnesses to withdraw and to invite in our next set of witnesses.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
This is a joint meeting of the Joint Committee on Fisheries and Maritime Affairs and the Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy. I am grateful to my counterpart on the Joint Committee on Climate, Environment and Energy, Deputy Ó Muirí, and his colleagues for working with us on this joint meeting.
I wish to restate briefly that witnesses should not abuse parliamentary privilege, should not make charges that harm the good name of any identifiable person or entity and should follow the direction of the Comhchathaoirleach in this regard.
This is the second session today. For this session we are joined by representatives of the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, SFPA, Ms Louise Murphy, authority member, and Ms Adrienne Patterson, executive manager for operations. We are also joined by representatives of the following public bodies that are parties to the interagency working group on the protocols in response to fish kill events: from Inland Fisheries Ireland, Dr. Eamonn Kelly, chief executive officer, Mr. Barry Fox, head of operations, and Ms Fiona Kelly, head of policy and risk; from the Marine Institute, Dr. Jamie Downes, section manager, fish health unit; from the Environmental Protection Agency: Mr. Patrick Byrne, director, and Mr. Noel Byrne, programme manager; and from the River Basin Management Service, Mr. Anthony Coleman, director of services and Mr. Barry Deane, regional co-ordinator. The opening statements have been forwarded to members. I propose to allow witnesses five minutes to read them into the record. We will then go straight to questions and answers. There are two opening statements. We start with the opening statement from the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority, SFPA, followed by the IFI delivering one single opening statement on behalf of the interagency group.
Ms Louise Murphy:
I thank the Comhchathaoirleach for the invitation to appear before both of the Oireachtas joint committees today. I am an authority member of the Sea-Fisheries Protection Authority and I am joined today by my colleague, Ms Adrienne Patterson, executive manager for operations. We welcome the opportunity to outline the role of the SFPA from a seafood safety perspective and in particular the areas within our remit pertaining to the production of safe seafood. The SFPA is an independent, statutory non-commercial public body established under the provisions of the Sea-Fisheries and Maritime Jurisdiction Act 2006 and under the aegis of the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine. It is Ireland's competent authority for seafood safety and sea fisheries protection. For our seafood safety functions, we operate under a service contract with the Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI.
The SFPA's role in relation to the safety of shellfish for human consumption includes the management of the national shellfish microbiological monitoring and classification programme, the annual review and classification of aquaculture production areas, the completion of sanitary surveys for each production area, and the investigation and management of seafood safety incidents and complaints. Environmental water quality management, pollution enforcement and fish kill investigation do not fall under the remit of the SFPA nor does the SFPA have an advisory role in relation to water quality.
Protecting seafood safety is crucial not only to the reputation of Ireland's seafood offering both at home and abroad but ultimately for the health and well-being of consumers of Irish seafood products. The SFPA is responsible for the implementation of classification and biotoxin sampling plans to ensure that products are safe for human consumption. The SFPA manages the national shellfish microbiological monitoring and classification programme. This programme facilitates the sampling of shellfish for a variety of toxins and E.coli levels to ensure they are within the regulatory limits for safe seafood. E.coli levels are an indicator of the quality of the water that shellfish are grown in.
Annually, the SFPA reviews the classification status of production areas. This is done collaboratively with industry as well as other State bodies, including the FSAI and the Marine Institute. The annual classification of production areas takes into account the monitoring data from the previous three years. In the 2025 annual review, 144 classifications across 61 production areas were assessed with over 4,800 E.coli results analysed across the three-year review period. The SFPA also conducts sanitary surveys of classified production areas under EU regulations. A sanitary survey identifies the potential contamination at outflow sources in a production area, including wastewater infrastructure, agricultural inputs and urban drainage which could be a source of pollution.
A sanitary survey also assists the SFPA to identify the most appropriate sampling points for each production area. Findings from each sanitary survey are shared with relevant agencies and producers, as is the annual classification review of production areas, and relevant publications are available on the SFPA website. The SFPA's role is to investigate all seafood incidents and verify traceability and food business operator controls. Where unsafe product is on the market, the SFPA verifies that recalls and withdrawals are carried out efficiently and effectively.
The SFPA's role is to protect public health by ensuring that shellfish harvested from Ireland's classified production areas are safe for human consumption, and we respond to food safety incidents when water quality or other factors may have given rise to risk. We are committed to working with all relevant agencies within our statutory remit. My colleague and I look forward to any further questions the committees may have.
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
I will start by introducing my IFI colleagues, Mr. Barry Fox and Ms Fiona Kelly. Also in attendance are Mr. Pat Byrne and MR. Noel Byrne from the EPA, Mr. Jamie Downes from the Marine Institute, and Mr. Anthony Coleman and Mr. Barry Deane from the River Basin Management Service which was formerly the local authority waters programme, LAWPRO.
Following the devastating Blackwater fish kill event in 2025, IFI was tasked by the Minister of State, Deputy Dooley, with convening an interagency working group to develop a national protocol for co-ordinating the response to significant fish mortality events in freshwater.
This technical group, which also included the local government sector, the National Parks and Wildlife Service, NPWS, the HSE, the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine, and Uisce Éireann, met a number of times between February and May 2026 and the protocol was ratified by all agencies involved by 18 June 2026. It identifies that a range of organisations have a full or partial remit in the management of the aquatic resource in Ireland.
The principal function of IFI is the protection, management and conservation of the inland fisheries and sea angling resource. IFI is responsible for co-ordinating protocol implementation and investigating the cause and source of fish mortalities. The EPA has a wide range of responsibilities, including the regulation of large-scale industrial and waste facilities and urban wastewater discharges. There are currently just over 800 industrial and waste facilities and over 1,000 urban wastewater discharges authorised by the EPA. The EPA’s primary role in an investigation into fish mortalities is 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 31 local authorities are the public bodies responsible for governing and providing services at a county and city level. In the event of a significant fish kill, the relevant local authority will investigate local authority-regulated sites and activities in the catchment of a fish kill, including site inspection, examination of records, sampling of discharges and ambient sampling downstream of discharges, and undertake appropriate enforcement actions, including the recovery of associated costs, where sufficient prosecutorial evidence is established.
The river basin management service is a national local authority shared service funded by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage. It works on behalf of the 31 local authorities to protect and restore good water quality in Ireland’s rivers, lakes, estuaries, ground and coastal waters through co-ordination, catchment science and local community engagement. In the event of a significant fish mortality event, the service will provide catchment science support to the local authority sector and the significant incident investigation group as required.
The Marine Institute is the competent authority for aquatic animal health and is also the national reference laboratory for aquatic animal diseases. It provides scientific and technical support in fish kill investigations where the cause is undetermined or where there is suspicion of disease involvement.
The protocol sets out a clear framework for co-ordinating and communicating the timely response thorough investigation and accurate documentation of significant fish mortality events in a consistent and effective manner. Through ratifying the protocol, all parties are committed to working closely together to deliver on these commitments.
Healthy freshwater and marine ecosystems are essential for people and nature. The main causes of decline in water quality are reported as excess nutrients from agriculture and poorly treated urban and domestic wastewater; impacts to the physical habitat condition of waterways through, for example, land drainage, dredging and the presence of barriers such as dams, weirs and culverts; and run off of sediment, nutrients and other contaminants from land use practices, including forestry operations, hard surfaces in urban environments and agriculture.
The Water Action Plan 2024, published by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage, sets out the approach in place and the measures being implemented across all sectors to protect and restore water quality. Every sector has a role to play. The river basin management service co-ordinates the implementation of the water action plan at regional and local levels on behalf of the local authority sector. Significant pressures on water quality in prioritised areas for action are identified through catchment science and referrals are made to relevant agencies to address them through appropriate mitigation. The service continues to engage and support local community groups through its annual funding programmes and initiatives, allocating €2.4 million in water quality-related projects in 2026. The farming for water European innovation partnership, EIP, will see in excess of €50 million of targeted agricultural mitigation measures implemented to address water quality issues by the end of 2029. As part of the national strategy on nature-based management of urban rainwater and urban surface water discharges, the service will administer the associated local authority fund, of which €4.5 million was allocated in 2026 to address urban run off pressures.
Under the water action plan, €35 million has been committed to IFI by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage to support delivery of the national barrier mitigation programme. IFI also delivers restoration programmes in sensitive catchments in collaboration with other State agencies and stakeholders. Examples of these are the €8.2 million PEACEPLUS catchment action for local management, CALM, project to enhance water quality and ecosystem health in cross-Border river catchments. In addition, the €5.1 million PEACEPLUS for the love of our waters, FLOW, project will address the declining water quality in target catchment areas attributable to agricultural pressures and wastewater discharge.
I thank members for their time and interest in this very important topic. We are happy to answer questions and provide further details.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have had a major discussion about fish kills, the difficulties in the Blackwater and the operation of the different agencies and it was very clear that a silo approach was being taken by the agencies. IFI works to its own mandate, which is understandable, but the point of the protocol was to bring everyone together to ensure that there was proper communication and everyone could work together to either identify the source of the pollution or prevent it in future. Since the Blackwater event, we have had another fish kill in the River Glyde. It was a bit more clear cut as to the cause of that. I am trying to ascertain something about this protocol. It was not officially launched at that stage, but IFI had been through the process and the document would have been drafted. Will Dr. Kelly tell me when IFI was first notified about the River Glyde and when IFI went on site?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
I need to be very cautious at the outset. This is a live investigation and I do not wish to say anything in a way that may prejudice future court proceedings, so I am going to be extremely limited in what I can say about the Glyde. That is not an attempt to avoid being helpful to the committee. I do not think any of us here today want to potentially prejudice court proceedings. What I would say is that we received a report on 2 June, Tuesday, and we were on scene within 20 minutes. The investigation proceeded at that point. I will not go much further than that at this point, if that is okay.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
There is no problem with that. We do not want to jeopardise any case.
Will Dr. Kelly step me through the changes under the protocol? What has changed compared with what would have happened with the Blackwater, if we use that as an example? We all know what happened with the Blackwater, who attended when and what samples were taken. If the Blackwater event was to happen now, what would this new protocol mean?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
We have adjusted our internal procedures to align them now and lead into the implementation of the protocol, so if we get a report now, the first thing the senior fisheries environmental officer will do is report that up the line. Once there is a report of a fish kill, that gets notified to the regional director and the head of operations. The next calls are to the local authority and the EPA to alert them to a report of a fish kill and that IFI is moving to establish and verify the facts on the ground. IFI will then go out and do that. If we verify, we will form a judgment as to the scale and significance of it. What we have identified in our own internal standard operating procedures at this point is that, within a matter of three hours, a judgment needs to be made. If the source has not been found at that point, we trigger the protocol. If we do find the source, a judgment is made by the officer on the ground that is communicated back up to the head of operations and also to the river basin district, RBD, director, and they will then make a judgment as to whether it is a significant event.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Essentially, the first three hours are spent trying to identify. Are any samples taken in the first three hours?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
To be very clear, and the Blackwater is a useful example, it took the officer an hour and 20 minutes to get to the site of the report, and then there was a period of time spent trying to verify the facts on the ground. That could take a couple of hours, so there is a judgment that has to be exercised on the ground and it is based on a lot of experience. That is the approach. The Joint Research Centre, JRC, report talked about the magic period of time.
That is one of the outcomes of the protocol. We approach it from the point of view of assuming it is significant and working back to verify. If we cannot do it within that window of time then the protocol gets triggered.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank the witnesses. Is LAWPRO no more? Has it been rebranded?
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
LAWPRO probably rolled off the tongue easier.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Absolutely. From our previous session, we know about the big fish kills. We heard about those two big high-profile fish kills. Is there be a situation where there is the number of smaller fish kills and other events is under-reported. Does IFI have any indication of what the scale of the latter might be? Perhaps some of them might happen on streams and smaller rivers and are not reported. Is there any indication as to what the scale might be?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
The short answer is that I probably would not have an indication of the scale under-reporting. I know it exists. From our perspective, since 2022 we have had somewhere in the order of 98 fish kills reported to us. We have had six this year so far. From being up on the Glyde and talking with the local angling association, we know that there were other fish kills of a more minor nature that would not necessarily have been reported. We know that happens. We respond to all fish kill reports. They can range in scale from something extremely local to something of the scale of what happened on the Blackwater and everything in between. The difficulty for us is that there is no typical event. There are probably categories of events, but you need to get on-site to understand the location-specific challenges. That can be quite complex, such as in the case of Blackwater, for example. You need to get on-site and assess those. That is the real challenge. However, in terms of under-reporting, the short answer is that I could not put a scale on it.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
One of the objectives of the water action plan is the establishment of community catchment forums. What stage is that at? How do those forums interact with existing river trusts?
Mr. Barry Deane:
Community catchment forums are currently being piloted in the five pilot catchments identified under the water action plan. All of those were established in November of last year. We were delighted with the level of interest among community groups. The groups range from Tidy Towns to community development forums and the larger rivers trusts. We are delighted to see a huge range of stakeholders involved. They are now formally established, and 89 members have been nominated by their local communities to participate in that. We are already starting to see the level of engagement ramp up. They have recently gone through a consultation process with the EPA. It was informative from the EPA's perspective to get feedback from local communities. The purpose of the pilot is to try to involve those in the catchment forums in the process more in terms of integrated catchment management planning. We are starting the evaluation process for that in September. The entire pilot runs for just over two years but the hope is that this will inform the framework for the future roll-out of pilot catchment community forums across the country.
Malcolm Noonan (Green Party)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a quick supplementary. Are the existing river trusts be seen as a default or will they morph into these community catchment forums? How are they recognised formally?
Mr. Barry Deane:
The rivers trusts would be critical partners in circumstances where they agree to come on board as part of the individual forums. We have already seen them take substantial roles within those forums and we would like to encourage that. It is to give all groups as opposed to just rivers trusts and environmental NGOs the opportunity to be involved. The beauty of the forum is that it is quite broad. We see the rivers trusts as being critical to this as it moves forward.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I acknowledge the work of LAWPRO. I worked with it during my time as a councillor. Some of its work with local communities is welcome and beneficial. When we see blue dot catchments in such decline, it is obvious that we need to do more advocacy and promotion in communities than ever before. There was some overlap with local authorities in the past. Is that totally finished now, or how do the witnesses see it going forward?
Mr. Anthony Coleman:
The river basin management service is a shared service to support all 31 local authorities. We are there to help our colleagues when there are particular incidents. For example, in the context of the protocol we have catchment scientists available to go out and take samples and to work with colleagues where they may not have sufficient resources at the time, given the scale of what is involved. We also support the community engagement side. That is a key part of our role in building up the community catchment forums and administering funding to support groups locally to protect their local water bodies. We also work with colleagues in the local authorities through the use of action trackers in terms of what they have responsibility for as part of their statutory functions. The other softer areas under the water framework directive are community engagement and catchment science work.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In the context of IFI, the state of play at the moment is that we are seeing more fish kills and depleted stocks. We had reports earlier that it takes 48 hours to get a response if you phone in with a query. What was IFI's budget over the past five years? What were it in 2020 versus 2025?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The number of staff has decreased. Is that correct?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How do they manage metrics? Do they have any dashboards to engage with communities in order to see what the level of customer service is like?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How do they do that?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Do they have metrics in the context of identifying preventative action? We have heard about fish kills in the past. If an angling club is waiting two days for a response, how do they address that issue?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are there staff who can call out to sites 24 hours per day?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
To be clear, we have staff working 24-7 and they are attached to the hotline. I have just been around the country meeting all the staff. We understand that there are occasional difficulties with the level of information provided via the hotline and with and our capacity to be able to identify particular locations. Those are issues we are dealing with and that we will come back to look at. We want that hotline to be highly functional and it has been a huge help for us.
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Does the ESB have a level of responsibility for rivers and waterways in Ireland?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How often do they meet with the ESB, particularly in view of the type of stakeholder it is?
John Clendennen (Offaly, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are there any challenges that have been identified and that could be high risk in nature?
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank everyone for coming in. In Dr. Kelly's statement, he said, "IFI is responsible for co-ordinating protocol implementation and investigating the cause and source of fish mortalities." Following on from what Deputy Clendennen said, Dr. Kelly said IFI has staff 24 hours a day. In the previous session we heard from the head of the angling council that there is no one after dark to investigate, there is not enough staff, most staff turn off their phones and there are not enough vehicles. That is from the head of the angling council and I know it myself from being in Monaghan around fishing in lakes. How does Dr. Kelly reconcile what we heard from the head of the angling council and my own experience that staff are not there at night and they do not have vehicles? In 2023, IFI had 436 vehicles in its fleet. How many does it have today? Has that decreased? There is a €35 million budget and when IFI was at the Committee of Public Accounts last December, we saw the omnishambles Inland Fisheries Ireland is and how its finances have been over the past ten or 12 years. What does Dr. Kelly have to say to that?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
The information the Deputy provided is not available to me. We have staff working 24-7. Enforcement is undertaken on night-time patrols. I am not aware of particular issues in relation to availability of vehicles to enforcement staff. This is not information I can reconcile with the facts as I know them.
On the Deputy's other remarks, I appreciate we have a journey ahead to renew the confidence of the public in our management of resources but we are committed to doing that. We are committed to working closely with the sector as we make that journey. I have met the angling council already. I am due to meet other representatives in the coming weeks. I have reached out and made those invitations. I am very keen to hear their observations. That is not something I have heard to date but my door will be open to engaging with the sector. We will re-establish the national inland fisheries forum which will provide a more structured basis on which we can engage. That will be initiated in the next few weeks following a board decision last week. That is as much as I can say about that at the moment.
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I brought up hatcheries in the previous session. IFI closed the hatcheries it ran. People have discussed it with me. I suppose there is scientific evidence Dr. Kelly will bring but does IFI now intend, with no Irish hatcheries, to import fish from abroad for stocking? What will the policy be going forward to supplement stocks in our lakes and rivers?
Mr. Barry Fox:
Our policy is we do not stock fish that are not native to those systems. It is all about natural production within the catchment. Our focus is on restoring habitat to ensure juvenile production is at its optimum. The reality is if we do not have the conditions for our own native fish to survive, anything you stock into a system would suffer the same fate. It is all about water quality and natural production, ensuring the habitat is available to the fish to product.
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
What will be done in the short-term to medium-term if we do not have a hatchery before those systems get to an adequate state of play to bring on the fish population?
David Maxwell (Cavan-Monaghan, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Any catchment anywhere in the country.
Mr. Barry Fox:
It is work we undertake on an annual basis. We do habitat assessments of major catchments. The important catchments get a lot of our focus. We do a significant amount of restoration locally - not at scale, unfortunately, because we do not currently have the funding for that but it is a focus of the organisation to ensure habitats are able to product significant numbers of juvenile fish.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I said in the earlier session that we have the Blackwater debacle and we do not know what actually caused the devastating loss of fish there. In this committee we have also dealt with issues in Dungarvan Bay. How do all of the agencies before us today co-operate with one another? Is there an overarching body? The issue is not just about rivers, it is about estuaries and bays as well. We know the range of issues that have contributed to the frankly devastating pollution and loss of fish. We know what happened to the salmon population - a 90% decline from its heyday in the seventies. It is an iconic species of the Irish people. There is a range of reasons. How do the agencies talk to one another? Which is ultimately responsible for the water quality of our rivers? Are the witnesses satisfied there is a proper inter-agency approach? Anyone who wants to answer can do so.
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
I can start and then pass on to colleagues. The simple reality from our perspective is we all have our own legal framework and statutory roles within which we function. Beyond that, in order to implement our own obligations we collaborate, an example being the protocol which provides a framework within which, in a specific context, we can collaborate and mobilise resources in conjunction with the other relevant parties. As it moves more broadly, for example, into various EU directives such as the water framework directive, there will be a series of co-ordination groups or collaboration groups that will be run typically by the EPA or the Department in the context of the water action plan which co-ordinates activities at those levels. For example, we participate in the environmental compliance and enforcement group. There are others that deal with agricultural inspections. There are networks and forums in the system that allow the various statutory bodies to co-ordinate and engage with one another. I suspect some of my colleagues will add more substance to that.
Mr. Anthony Coleman:
In terms of co-ordination, the river basin management service plays a role. Under the current river basin management plan, governance structures are set out at different levels. We operate in five regions. In each, there are regional operational committees which we support. They involve all of the relevant agencies and groups. There could be up to 30 agencies. That is the multitude involved in the water space. That group, as its name reflects, is operational. It is people on the ground. They come together on a quarterly basis. We track the actions assigned under the water action plan. There are a number of actions assigned to different sectors and agencies, local authorities and so on. They are reported back up along the line to the next level of governance right up to the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage and the water advisory unit. At the next level up there are also the agencies involved in technical and policy areas and so on. At the top there is the water policy advisory committee, WPAC, with the relevant Government Departments dealing with any issues that arise at the operational committee. There is a multitude of things, whether legislation or a change in policy. That is fed back up to the WPAC.
It is then up to the relevant Department to take those on board and see whether new legislation or a change in policy or approach needs to be examined. That falls under the water directive framework governance structures.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I call Deputy Pat the Cope Gallagher.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is my time up?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The Deputy's time is up. Does he have a quick question?
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My question is about the testimony from the Sustainable Water Network, SWAN, earlier. It just does not think the water action plan is fit for purpose in terms of targets and science. We see the EPA's report every year. It would require a long response, so I will revisit this later.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We will come back around. I call Deputy Pat the Cope Gallagher.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I apologise as I had to attend to some matters that were just as important. Can I ask the SFPA, and possibly Ms Patterson, about the recently agreed protocol on fish kill events that do not apply to fish kills at sea? Perhaps it could be outlined what structures - if any - are in place in order to ensure relevant State agencies can collaborate on issues of common concern to both inland and sea fisheries? As an example, if there is a pollution event in a river that enters the sea, what co-ordination happens between the authorities with responsibilities for inland and sea fisheries?
Ms Louise Murphy:
I thank the Deputy. I can start off and I might bring in my colleague. In the opening statement, I mentioned the SFPA's role with water quality is limited to the food safety perspective. Within our statutory remit, we look at everything through that food safety lens. We co-operate with other State agencies on fish kill investigations and share data with other agencies, if it is needed, to support their work in those areas. That includes the EPA when it comes to wastewater and its regulatory work in that area. However, it does not formally sit within our remit. I will ask my colleague, Ms Patterson, to come in with a few further points on that.
Ms Adrienne Patterson:
I thank the Deputy for the question. The SFPA's role is very much limited to ensuring the food produced in Irish waters is safe to be put on the market. As such, we do not take any environmental samples. We take samples of product and they are tested. However, some of the tests we run will be relevant for other agencies which deal with water pollution and water quality. That data is shared and is made available on our website.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
From the time the tests are carried out, how much time does the SFPA need? Is it days, hours or if there is urgency with it, can it be dealt with urgently?
Ms Adrienne Patterson:
When the samples are taken for analysis, the test results are due back roughly 48 hours after the sample has arrived at the laboratory. Once we know there is an elevated result, we act immediately. We contact the producers and processors to ensure that food does not get placed on the market. An investigation is then undertaken as to the potential source and reason for the elevated result.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Are there SFPA laboratories at various locations around the country?
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Therefore, the SFPA subcontracts to the Marine Institute and it provides the SFPA with the results. Who provides the certificate to the exporter?
Ms Adrienne Patterson:
It does not necessarily work that way. The exporter does not get a certificate, as such. The exporter is advised of the results and that comes directly from the laboratory which identifies the issue. The SFPA and the processor is also notified and we also consult with the processor or producer, depending on what the product is.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
How does the exporter prove the quality of the fish is up to standard if it does not have a certificate to state that?
Ms Adrienne Patterson:
We get a copy of the laboratory analysis results. They are either within the regulatory limits or are not within the regulatory limits. We then share that with the processor but processors, under their food safety management plan, have to also undertake their own sampling analysis on a regular basis to ensure the product they are placing on the market is fit for human consumption.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Ms Patterson.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a couple of questions. To continue in that vein, who looks after the environmental issues of the sea fisheries? The SFPA effectively looks after food quality and is sampling for food quality. Who has the remit for the broader environmental issues, because they will be there, for sea fisheries? Whose remit is that under?
Ms Louise Murphy:
Is it a combination of the State agencies around this table. We recently had a stranding of fish in Portmarnock. The SFPA liaised with the local authority, Fingal County Council, in that regard. As I said, our role is limited to looking at the safety of shellfish for human consumption through that food safety lens. That is the food safety data set we work with in the SFPA. I am not sure if any colleagues around the table want to come in on that.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
If a shellfish is causing a broader ecological knock-on issue, which is certainly possible, which agency picks that up in terms of identifying and dealing with that?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
The EPA carries out water quality monitoring in everything from rivers and lakes to estuaries. That is done in co-ordination under the water framework directive. That looks at the status of water bodies and that would be shared with all of the other relevant parties as well. We also look at any discharges into those water bodies and they would be considered in terms of the impact and setting correct and relevant emission limit values on their discharges to that water body. That could be for wastewater or industrial discharges.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Okay. In relation to the IFI and the issue that has come up a couple of times here today about out of hours activity, availability, access and being on the front foot, there is clearly a perception out there that the IFI has work to do to deal with that. I am just raising it and I think the IFI is aware of that. Based on the consultation that was talked about of going around the communities and engaging with them, that is a means of addressing that. Does the IFI accept that perception is out there?
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
Clearly, if it is being articulated in here, that is the perception. As I understand it, the reality is very different. We have environmental officers who work 24-7 and are on call 24-7. If we are notified of a fish kill event, they are the people who get the call and move immediately. Aside from those, the enforcement operations are 24-7, 365 days a year operations. That is the reality. If we have to overcome that and if the perception is otherwise, that is a challenge I can certainly take up and we will engage on that.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That would be worthwhile. On the other side of overfishing, is overfishing a factor as well? All of the discussion is about the IFI but is there an overfishing dimension to this, in general? Where are we on that?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Yes.
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
There will be stocks that are under pressure and there is no doubt about that. People will be aware that the Minister has asked for a review of the salmon management framework. That is something we are working on intensively at the moment. The reality is there are many rivers at the moment that are struggling with their conservation limits and sustainability in that regard. In relation to enforcement and protection, we continuously are bringing prosecutions for fisheries offences. That is an ongoing part of our work and we will continue to do that. Yes, there are specific challenges in certain areas but it is something we continue to pursue 24-7.
In terms of specific stocks from an operational perspective, I do not think we could necessarily drill beyond that. Obviously, the key stocks of salmon and trout are all areas we are watching and managing.
It is a slightly different situation with some of the other coarse fish, but we are constantly enforcing and protecting.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I return to the earlier discussion about the timing. Under the new protocol, it is expected to have someone from IFI on site within three hours. What is their responsibility? Is it to identify the site if there is a physical discharge?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I am not being rude now but when that person is on site, what do they do?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can they take water samples?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is it one or a number of individuals who would be on site?
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
That is really key. While time is spent identifying a site, that may not happen, as was the case in the Blackwater. It is important that a parallel process is happening - analysis of the water as well as identifying the site. I have some sympathy for IFI because we are all expecting it to resolve something that has already happened. We know what the problems with water quality are. They relate to agriculture and industrial wastewater treatment. Unless the State comes to terms with tackling those problems, we are asking IFI to be in a position to stop these fish kills, which is really difficult to do. Would it be advisable or would IFI consider having a continuous monitoring system on particular high-risk sites that could set an alarm if there is a discharge or a reduction in oxygen, temperature or whatever, depending on the pollutant? Would that be worthwhile as part of this protocol?
Earlier we heard the anglers tell us that they were not involved in the development of this protocol, which is a missed opportunity. I get pictures of fish. At 5 a.m. on the day after, I received pictures from the Glyde. The anglers are the people who are there on site and are usually doing the reporting. There is a missed opportunity not to involve them in the protocol.
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
I will deal with the last point first. The protocol is a way for these statutory bodies which are leading on the various aspects of the investigation to be able to liaise with each other and to mobilise resources to conduct those responsibilities. It is appropriate that that group developed the protocol. Obviously, it is dependent on the public and dependent in a large part on anglers. We have warranted water keepers as well. We rely on the early reporting and that is why we take anything on the hotline seriously.
I ask the Deputy to remind me of her earlier point as it has escaped my mind.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
It was about continuous water monitoring.
Dr. Eamonn Kelly:
There is a lot of activity and a lot of different types of water monitoring in rivers, lakes and freshwater generally. In relation to WFD monitoring, we have various stations on key rivers which we are using to monitor water quality. Other bodies are doing the same and the Departments co-ordinate this. From their perspective, there is a need to understand and map that landscape to identify where there might be gaps and how we might complement existing investments to make the best use of any further investment that would be required here. Part of the JRC recommendations was to look at mapping out risk areas, and that is something we are looking at in the development plan.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Is there one website where people can clearly see all the real-time monitoring by all the different State agencies?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
The EPA has all the water framework directive monitoring stations available on its website with monitoring results. From a chemical point of view, they may well be monitored four to 12 times a year. For biological, it may well be every three years. There are different frequencies depending on the nature of sampling and analysis undertaken. That information is available on our website.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Would the EPA as standard monitor-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Final question, Deputy.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Regarding high risk-risk industries, we can see the national priority list and we know the companies that are frequent flyers on that. Does the EPA have any monitoring stations downstream of those to give real-time information and act as a warning system in case something goes wrong?
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
For industrial and municipal wastewater discharging, the focus is on monitoring prior to discharge to the rivers. There are continuous monitors on the discharge point to the river. That is captured and recorded on site. That is the immediate way of identifying non-compliance or deviations at the site. Equally, that will immediately notify the wastewater operator of something going wrong in terms of the treatment plant.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I call an Teachta-----
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Can I just make one-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We are way over time.
Jennifer Whitmore (Wicklow, Social Democrats)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Part of the problem is that-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We can come back to it. I call an Teachta Mac Lochlainn.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I wish to revisit the concerns of SWAN about the action plan. Its submission stated:
Every year we get a report from the EPA talking about how water quality has flatlined, and in many cases disimproved. This should not come as a surprise to anyone, because the plans are not relying on the science, the Water Action Plan is sorely lacking in ambition and targeted waterbody measures, and compliance with the regulations is relatively low.
I would like a response on that. I also have a follow-up question for Dr. Downes from the Marine Institute.
Mr. Patrick Byrne:
The plan is ambitious. There are targets under the water framework directive. I wish to address the point about flatlining in terms of water quality. If we delve into the figures there, it shows improvement in some areas but, unfortunately, they are offset by declines in others. The most recent reports show that, where there is concentrated effort dealing with issues such as agriculture and septic tanks, there have been improvements. Unfortunately, in other areas when there are not sufficient resources to continue to monitor those areas, they have been offset by declines.
Regarding plans, we are in the third cycle and preparing for the fourth cycle river basin management plan. There is more visibility of what is happening on the ground and what each agency or local authority is doing. For example, the catchment management plan, which will be done at scale, will show exactly how many septic tank inspections and farm inspections the local authorities have done. That will be overlaid. It will be fully visible to the public. Areas that require more focus and attention will be prioritised in the next plan. We are progressing to the stage where there needs to be more accountability and focus on those areas.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
In fairness, I acknowledge that SWAN also praised the EPA service. It is not too happy with the plan but happy with the EPA service.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
We have had a number of sessions where we have had environmental campaigners advocating for salmon farming to be brought inland. Representatives of the salmon farming sector spoke to us about the organic nature of their produce and the testing and rigorous examination of that.
Would the Marine Institute be responsible for the salmon farming operations?
Dr. Jamie Downes:
Yes, parts of it. My direct remit is fish health. We regulate the industry on fish health and the EU regulations there. The Marine Institute as a whole carries out various monitoring of salmon and aquaculture and that. With regard to the conversations that have been had within this committee, the monitoring we have carried out has shown the water quality around salmon farms does not exceed anything that is found in the background. It is highly unlikely to have any effect on water framework directive classification of the bays around salmon farming. Benthic analysis has shown that 84% of benthic assessments were acceptable. For the three that were not, amelioration plans were put in place and further monitoring to ensure they were brought back into good acceptable states.
Bringing aquaculture on land is a conversation where there are many misconceptions. Recirculation aquaculture, particularly in terms of the full production of salmon, is still at concept stage. There are places that are doing it, but that is being done in high population areas where logistics and transport of final product is immediate. For full production on land, it obviously could not be accredited as organic in Ireland. That is not acceptable in the regulations. Obviously then, there is a high energy requirement for recirculation. There are some aspects of that regarding hatchery and freshwater production that you see in the likes of Faro or in Norway, where smolt are being produced on land at a greater size, which has the potential ability to reduce the amount-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Apologies, I am just conscious of time.
Pádraig Mac Lochlainn (Donegal, Sinn Fein)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I thank Dr. Downes for that, and in fairness, there cannot be a short answer given. It was a comprehensive answer, and I appreciate that.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Go raibh maith ag gach duine agus as na ceisteanna ar fad. I want to raise something close to home in Dublin Bay North, which I have been referencing constantly. Last week, I visited the Green Ocean Foundation's oyster restoration sites. I am aware they are in Malahide, with some in Howth, but there is a large one in Dún Laoghaire. If you look at the historical maps of Dublin Bay, which are very interesting to map to current maps, in the area where I grew up, there were these oyster farms in Dublin Bay before they were wiped out by overfishing, dredging and pollution. It is great to see now that, 200 years later, people are bringing them back. There are floating oyster gardens established in Dún Laoghaire, and the science behind it is striking. As many here will know, a single oyster can filter nearly 200 litres of seawater a day. It strips out nitrates, nutrients and lets that sunlight back into the seabed so seagrass and biodiversity can recover. New York ran a model recently and it is now seeing whales come back into the harbour. It has restored a million oysters since 2014, and the results are speaking for themselves.
It is not just an ecological story but also a public health and amenity story. We have heard other people speak about how much the water in the area I represent and across Ireland has been polluted. However, this is a nature-based solution that is working right now. I would always push for a solution that is not only restoring nature but working with it, be it flood defence or relieving the nitrates and particles that reduce the sunlight in our water.
We had a thriving native oyster fishery before it was destroyed, and community-led pilots have now proven the model is working here and elsewhere. Why is there still no dedicated State funding stream or scale-up programme for native oyster restoration? If there is, I apologise, but would the witnesses have any statements relating to native oysters being used as a natural way to remove pollutants from the water for swimmers, fisheries or anything like that?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
The answer for the funding stream would be with the Department. We probably will not get that answer here, but the EPA is here, which would have some interaction with this on the estuary side.
Mr. Anthony Coleman:
The Deputy referred to nature-based solutions, which is something that comes under our remit. Recently, we were allocated funding by the Department of Housing, Local Government and Heritage for urban-based solution projects to support local authorities in putting in things like rain gardens and swales and so on to stop those pollutants coming from the urban setting and going into the bay. It is stopping it at the source. You have a lot of pollutants that come off roadways and that, but not specifically in the oyster area. However, ultimately, it would protect that environment, so that national programme is being rolled out now. Dublin City Council and the local authorities within the greater Dublin area have been very proactive in many of these projects.
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Mr. Coleman would have nothing against it then, as an EPA statement, for native oysters to be used as a natural way of removing filters.
Dr. Jamie Downes:
The Marine Institute is carrying out some projects with regard to native oyster restoration. Shellfish and shellfish aquaculture provide great ecosystem services for clearing the water. As regards some of the native oysters and where that can happen, many of our bays are infected with bonamia, which probably restricts the movements and ability of the native oysters to-----
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Sorry, what was the name Dr. Downes mentioned there?
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Would Tralee be one of the cleanest bays then?
Barry Heneghan (Dublin Bay North, Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
My apologies.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I have a final question. The whole sampling side of things, for this committee, is a vexed issue because the IFI is like the fire brigade. If it gets a call about a dead fish, it shows up and then has all the clean up work to do, etc., around what caused it and prosecution or whatever. However, on one level, it is too late because the kill has already happened, but there is the issue that we are not clear on when it comes to water sampling. I am talking about a clear, positive, comprehensive water sampling programme across all our water bodies that is continuous and regular and maybe involves citizen scientists, some of whom we have in the audience, and pulling all that information together and acting on it on a more continuous basis. I understand what the witnesses have to do, but it is not that frequent with regard to what they are collecting. Could I get the witnesses' views on water sampling and whether we should be going down that road?
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
I understand that. The witnesses also have the tool set in place, but it is probably just infrequent would be our sense.
Mr. Anthony Coleman:
The area of continuous monitoring is challenging. Under several programmes we run, such as the farming for water EIP project, we have installed continuous monitoring equipment in a couple of sites.
For example, in the Blackwater subcatchment, we have two continuous nitrate monitors; one put in by ourselves, and another put in by Teagasc. That is continually monitoring and getting a lot of data on the nitrates side. The other site is Lady's Island, which I am sure members will be well aware is a site under a lot of pressure. We recently commissioned the installation of a water sense intelligence monitoring system. That will provide ongoing, continuous data over the next couple of years.
Part of the challenge is those systems are quite expensive because they need to be maintained, are very sensitive and so on. For example, in that site in Wexford, you are looking at possibly €1,000 per month just to maintain it. However, the technology will evolve over time, and it is to be hoped those types of monitors will reduce and we can have that system.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
Do we feel that is where we need to go? Does Mr. Coleman feel that would add value?
Mr. Anthony Coleman:
Absolutely. It is to be hoped technology will advance to the stage where we can have more of these. The Chair also referenced citizen science. That is an area which we support. We are assisting in the roll-out of a national citizen science strategy and training community groups. They are on the ground, they are lovely, and they are interested. We are building up that database as part of it.
Naoise Ó Muirí (Dublin Bay North, Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context | Oireachtas source
On behalf of the two committees, I thank all the witnesses for their contributions to today's meeting.