Denis Naughten (Longford-Roscommon, Fine Gael)

With the agreement of the House, I wish to share time with Deputies Hayes and Twomey.

I understand that six enterprises are licensed by the Department of Agriculture and Food to keep mink. Based on 2003 figures, data provided by the CSO indicate that the value of exports of raw mink skins from this country is approximately €1.6 million. I understand that there is a single fox-rearing enterprise in the country. I am glad to acknowledge that the Minister of State, Deputy Browne, has stated that he will see this issue regulated. It is unacceptable that it has not been regulated hitherto.

The regulations covering mink farms require the Department of Agriculture and Food to license them. However, the licensing conditions are aimed mainly at protecting the environment from escaped mink rather than at issues regarding the welfare of farmed mink. I will refer to two reports examining mink welfare. In 1997, the University of Cambridge Animal Welfare Information Centre published a comprehensive literature review outlining the welfare of animals raised for their fur. It concluded that there was enough scientific evidence to show that the current level of welfare for mink on fur farms was not adequate. Mink are denied a range of behaviours on farms that would be available to them in the wild. Good welfare may be possible in the context of the captive environment, but there has been no estimation of the economic consequences of such enrichment and the effects that this might have on the feasibility of fur farming. The main thrust of the report is that if mink farming is to continue, a radical rethink of housing is urgently required.

A further report by the EU scientific committee on animal welfare in 2001 examined the extent to which species used for fur production can be regarded as domesticated. It concluded that these species, in comparison with other farm animals, have been subjected to relatively little active selection, except with respect to fur characteristics. Some research would indicate that those animals that have been responsive to breeding programmes are the ones with fearful behaviour rather than the contrary, and that should be looked into. There is a limited amount of selection for tameness and adaptability to captive environments.

Regarding the welfare of mink, the report concludes that there is an average kid mortality rate of 20%. In experimental conditions, farm mink showed strong preferences for the opportunity to swim, something not available to them in the captive environment. The report states that the typical mink cage impairs mink welfare because it does not provide for those important needs.

It is important to put in context, in light of those reports, the number of pelts produced per annum in this country — approximately 140,000 out of a total international production of 40 million. We are, therefore, a minor player in the overall scheme of things. It seems clear that to introduce adequate regulation to address the shortcomings in the current housing conditions would in all probability make fur farming completely uneconomic. Furthermore, the current regulations do not achieve their target of protecting the environment from the potential escape of mink.

Mink farms are a potential reservoir for the release of wild mink into the environment. They are savage animals, alien to our country, which will kill for the sake of it and not merely to feed. They are vicious and extremely prolific. They cause massive environmental problems and are disastrous to wildlife. They kill fish and waterfowl and prey on smaller mammals. They ravage birds' nests even though they are high off the ground. They have been reported to have attacked dogs and in one case even humans. They are also said to have attacked lambs, especially when very young. There are great problems in some parts of the country with wild mink. Many of those mink were released by accident, but others deliberately. There have been examples in the UK of alleged animal rights activists releasing mink into the environment, causing massive damage.

Another aspect has been the closure of farms. In 1999 there was a report in a local newspaper that wild mink had been ravaging the Kerry countryside since the closure of two mink farms in Waterville had resulted in the escape of the fast-breeding, ferocious animals. In west Cork, where mink farms also closed, there was an increase in the wild mink population. That population has a massive impact on fish and wildfowl stocks. As a consequence, it could have a substantial effect on the angling and shooting industries, which are a critical element in this country's tourism sector. We should develop and promote those industries since they bring employment to many of the disadvantaged communities of which the Minister of State spoke that have not benefited from tourism or economic development. I ask the Minister to examine the issue of wild mink. The problem has been ignored to date. If we want to protect and develop our tourism industry, especially in the shooting and fishing areas, we must consider this problem.

Fine Gael is intent on raising the bar when it comes to the politics of farming and food. It is only with fresh vision that Ireland can fully engage with the realities and challenges of making farming viable after decoupling. It must be more commercial and consumer-oriented so that we can compete and win on the global food market. Fur farming, however, is not part of the long-term vision for agriculture. If we want a reputation for high quality food production and high value returns, fur farming is not the way forward.

While we support the broad thrust of this Bill, we want significant changes made on Committee Stage. We are opposed to the immediate outright ban proposed in the Bill. A stay of at least seven to ten years on implementing the measures contained in the Bill should be introduced. It is imperative for several reasons. First, one cannot simply shut down the industry overnight. That could lead to the deliberate release of captive animals, with a disastrous impact on wildlife throughout the country. In the early 1960s, there were 24 fur farms in this country. Regulations were introduced in 1965, after which nine remained in business. At that point, there was a dramatic increase in the wild mink population. We cannot allow that to happen again. It is important that we adopt a structured approach. We must work with those currently in the business to wind down their operations and develop alternative enterprises that will not only benefit them but also the communities in which they are located.

It must be noted that the Department of Agriculture and Food originally promoted fur farming as an alternative enterprise. There is an onus on it to develop alternative enterprises with Teagasc. There is also a need to provide alternative employment for the staff involved. The Minister of State, Deputy Browne, mentioned the 80 full-time and 85 seasonal staff involved, many in unemployment blackspots. One example is the two farms in County Donegal, one in Glenties and one between Ardara and Killybegs. Some 30 full-time jobs are involved in that business. Those people cannot simply be thrown on the scrap heap. While it is important to examine animal welfare regulations, sometimes we forget that humans have rights too. We cannot simply abandon those people. It is critically important that we address that matter.

It is important in the interim that no new licences are issued for mink farming. We must immediately put regulations in place for fox farms because they must come under regulation. I ask the Minister for Agriculture and Food, Deputy Coughlan, to consider seriously what has been presented tonight.

See this speech in context