Lynn Boylan (Sinn Fein) | Oireachtas source

Cuirim fáilte roimh an Aire Stáit. I am raising the issue of rodenticide poisoning of raptors, particularly barn owls. Our bird populations are collapsing due to habitat loss but also as a result of deliberate and accidental poisoning. There is no need to tell the Minister of State that our native birds of prey are key indicator species of the health of our ecosystems and they are a critical part of our natural heritage.

The recording and addressing persecution and threats to our raptors, RAPTOR, protocol, which was introduced in 2011, was welcome. It set in place a formal procedure for investigations of bird of prey deaths and it has allowed us to build up a database of information on the causes of death of raptors through the collection and handling of carcases and evidence, toxicological testing, post mortems and X-rays. The most recently available report I could find is from 2019. What is very worrying about that report is that it shows the highest number of deaths of birds of prey. Rodenticide poisons were the most prevalent poisons found in birds of prey. The RAPTOR protocol 2019 report clearly states that the protocol includes the monitoring of incidents of poisoning in species vulnerable to secondary poisoning by rodenticides. There is particular concern about the barn owl, the kestrel, the buzzard, the red kite and the long-eared owl.

The reason I raise this today is that those who are involved in wildlife rehabilitation and the Barn Owl Project are concerned that testing for secondary poisoning is not happening or is not happening at a consistent rate. In Britain, where monitoring for secondary poisoning is taking place, it has been found that 88% of barn owls are likely to have been affected by rodenticide poisoning. Ireland has a much higher rate of use of rodenticide so if it is 88% in our nearest neighbour, it is more than likely much higher in Ireland. Can the Minister of State confirm that the RAPTOR protocol is being fully implemented in terms of testing for secondary poisoning? Could he consult with his colleagues in the Department of Agriculture, Food and the Marine on the broader issue of the use of rodenticides?

We have dealt with this general issue previously. I have spoken in the House about metaldehyde in slug pellets.The real issue is that members of the public can get their hands on very dangerous chemicals. I do not doubt for a second people are doing this deliberately. In the vast majority of cases, people put out poison to kill slugs because they love their garden plants or to reduce the number of rodents about the place. However, these poisons have serious implications for wildlife. Can the Government arrange a public awareness campaign about the damage that can be done by using these poisons? For example, one cannot buy a box of cigarettes without an image on the box that shows the damage that cigarettes do to one's health. When people walk into a hardware store, we need them to know full well the possible implications of using these chemicals and offer alternatives. We know that barn owls can eat up to 1,000 rodents a year, so it would be far better for farmers to have one on their land than use rodenticide. Of course, there are inconsistencies in terms of the use of rodenticide and farmers' obligations under the Common Agricultural Policy. I look forward to hearing the response of the Minister of State.