Seanad debates
Tuesday, 25 October 2005
Salmon Fisheries Report: Statements (Resumed).
3:00 pm
Marc MacSharry (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will help myself and others recap. In welcoming the report, I was rebutting an outrageous attack by Senator Ross on the Minister of State at the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, Deputy Gallagher. There is no need to go over this ground other than to say that was not representative of most of the contributions in the House and certainly not in keeping with the recommendations of the report, which I wholeheartedly welcome. The move to a single stock management and the acknowledgement that the Department is the best body to determine how it should be done, such as through legislative improvements, management, reorganisation and the functions relating to the compensatory and set-aside schemes, are good ways forward. It is extremely important that this is not funded just by the Government or EU but that the wide variety of beneficiaries, including interest groups, conservation groups and the tourism industry, contribute to it.
The joint committee recommended: "The Department of the Environment, Heritage and Local Government should prepare a report on the predation of seals on the salmon stocks." Senator Kenneally referred to this matter previously when he mentioned that we do not have all of the facts in this situation. Following on from the Minister of State, I said we cannot take knee-jerk reactions. I would be interested to see a study carried out on the effects of seals and cormorants, as their effects on smolts heading out to sea seem to be very serious according to my own research and the report's findings. The Minister of State's referral of the report to the National Salmon Commission is a positive move. It is the most representative relevant organisation and incorporates all aspects from the Loughs Agency, all elements within the industry, the conservation groups and Fáilte Éireann.
I wish to touch on a number of issues. First and perhaps most important, more needs to be done regarding the marine survival of salmon. All the relevant agencies, including the Marine Institute, other scientific groups, the fisheries boards and the relevant Government agencies must focus on the threats to the marine survival of salmon. From my inquiries into this issue, it appears this area does not receive enough attention and more needs to be done. We all agree stocks are becoming seriously depleted. We can see that is a serious issue from the report and from all the available statistics. However, no more pressure has been put on the fishery industry during the past five years than during the previous ten years. Various actions have been taken in that period, such as shortening the netting season, anglers' quotas and tagging systems. In my view the Marine Institute must focus heavily on the survival of salmon.
We must establish what happens to the smolts en route to the feeding grounds, what happens to them at the feeding grounds and what happens to salmon on return to Irish coastal waters other than problems encountered through drift netting. If we can get answers to these questions we would be in a position to find solutions to enhance the survival of salmon. We would achieve a great deal in pursuit of protecting the fishery industry as a whole.
Protection of our inland waterways, lakes and rivers is essential. Water quality has deteriorated and the imminent water framework directive will assist in this matter. However, looking to the future and leading from the front in taking steps to improve water quality would further enhance the situation.
Habitat degradation is caused by river erosion and other factors, such as irresponsible farming which was accused of causing habitat degradation in the past. The REP scheme has improved the situation in terms of appropriate fencing and the protection of river banks. More must be done and more resources must be channelled to habitat development and restoration. This, in turn, will increase the production of juvenile salmon.
I welcome this report. It goes a considerable way towards achieving the protection of the fishery industry, to which we all aspire. The only matter for debate is how to go about it. I pay tribute to Senator Kenneally, who was a member of the sub-committee that published this report, for the all-inclusive way in which it was done. The recommendations are extremely good. I welcome the fact that the Minister of State has referred it to the Nation Salmon Commission for its recommendations. I look forward to hearing those in due course as we take this matter further.
On single stock management, I visited the Loughs Agency in Derry and toured both the Foyle and Carlingford operations. As we seek to improve the situation, perhaps we could look towards some of steps it took and seek to replicate some of its actions. I wish the Minister of State well in his endeavours on behalf of all of us.
Brian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Among such illustrious company and people with considerable expertise on all sides of the House, I feel like a small salmon because I am not as expert or as knowledgeable as my colleagues. I welcome the Minister of State to the House. I read with interest his contribution to the House last week and I congratulate the sub-committee on its report. Senators Kenneally, Dardis and Finucane were part of that committee. I congratulate them on their work to date on this issue. This has become a controversial issue of late. However, many people realise the issue has been live for the past 30 or 40 years.
The time for action is now. Salmon stocks is the serious issue in this matter. The Minister of State will send the report to the National Salmon Commission. I understand a decision might not be made until 2007 or 2008. At some time the bullet must be bitten on this issue and a decision must be made sooner rather than later.
The salmon fish is part of Irish culture. It is part of our mythology, literature, our story. If people think of a fish that is synonymous with Ireland, it is the salmon. We must frame policies to maximise the stocks throughout Ireland; this will ensure that the species continues to flourish and that tourism in coastal communities and throughout the country is nurtured and developed. No other fish goes to sea and returns to its birthplace to spawn. Given that marvellous story, which children particularly enjoy, we have a responsibility to ensure that the fish of Ireland remains strong in this country.
In many parts of the country, angling tourism is underdeveloped. People who come to fish in Ireland come to catch. I sometimes spend part of the summer in Senator Daly's county, and given that he is a former Minister with direct responsibility for this matter he would be more expert than I. Fish stock is an issue in many parts of County Clare and anglers no longer come to some parts of rural Ireland. If we are serious about developing fishing tourism and ignore the regional imbalances, we must be serious about protecting this and all fish species. Anglers who visit Ireland expect to catch fish. Recent reports on the quantity of species and volume of fish have been discouraging.
I thank Senator Kenneally for his expert advice on an issue relevant to this debate. A supermarket near my home recently claimed to sell wild salmon in the month of October. I am not sure how this could happen. Wild salmon is generally for sale in late spring and early summer. Unless these salmon showed particularly strong gill movement over September and October, getting into the River Liffey and beyond, which I doubt, there is a labelling issue here. I do not know how supermarkets and shops can continue to get away with labelling a product "wild" when it cannot be wild, because it is sold in October.
Brendan KenneallyBrian Hayes (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It was not in a tin. Labelling is important. I have also noticed the craze for organic salmon and often wonder how that can be sold as organic. Local authorities in County Dublin have launched a number of river stocking initiatives in recent years. This is welcome. Fishing is not just a gentrified activity for rural Ireland. It has been part of Dublin life for centuries. Pollution of the Liffey has curtailed the number of people who fish in Dublin. I ask the Minister of State to support the local authorities in Dublin who are trying at a preliminary level to restock the rivers and ensure that recreational fishing is enjoyed by everyone.
Action must follow debate. We must make a decision on drift netting. This problem is not recent but has developed over the past 40 or 50 years. Some fishermen, if one counts the number of salmon they catch on a regular basis, take ten times the number of salmon for which they have a licence. The licence system cannot be policed for salmon. The Minister of State has yet to decide whether he supports a compulsory or voluntary buyout. Where an industry is depleting a sustainable commodity there are examples of the Government accepting the principles of a buyout and giving compensation. If we are serious about arresting the tide of salmon stock depletion, we must instigate a buyout. My party supports a voluntary buyout to ensure that the issue of salmon stocks is addressed. The tourism revenue from this could be considerable particularly in parts of rural Ireland. It would help develop angling tourism and ensure that many towns and small villages in rural Ireland, particularly those close to rivers or potential fishing grounds, are developed to their full potential.
I accept that this is a complicated issue. The Minister recently spoke about seals, which are the major predatory competition for salmon returning to our shores. As the Minister said, we must address that issue. I am not sure what one can do about global warming, the rising tides and the ongoing seal problem, but we can do something about drift netting licences and the amount permitted to be caught. Ireland is in a minority of EU countries that still permit drift netting. I ask the Minister of State to move on the recommendations of the report and I hope a decision is made sooner rather than later and is not left to drift, excuse the pun, to the National Salmon Commission.
Martin Mansergh (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is a classic case of a debate which is not being fully acknowledged on all sides. Two substantial interests are involved, one of which wants to close down the other. Much of the debate has been unbalanced. On the views expressed in the constituency in which I live, the report refers to the small snap net fishery in the south east. I do not think anyone is suggesting that it has a serious impact on salmon reaching the spawning grounds. As an inland county, such representations as I get are from anglers' associations calling for drift netting to stop.
As legislators we must take account of the national interest as well as the local interest. We are being asked to balance the interests of people, the coastal fishermen, who obtain a very substantial part of their livelihood from fishing and which has been an industry there for generations, against those of a leisure activity. Tourism is, of course, one of our most important industries and angling is part of the tourism product.
Like the Minister, I walked past a few hundred demonstrators in Killarney at the weekend, including one or two from County Tipperary. Undoubtedly the populist approach is to treat it as an all or nothing, black or white issue but the Minister and the Government are within their rights to take a more nuanced view. Government must balance conflicting interests where each of those interests is legitimate. I believe the Minister is trying to do that, conscientiously and to the best of his ability.
It is clear from the expert material that the quantity of salmon is not solely a function of drift net fishing. Indeed, it is quite possible that if it were to stop from next year, the salmon stocks might show little difference because of other factors involved, such as pollution and seals. In addition, the science on this, as on so many other things, is imperfect. We do not fully understand the causes for fluctuations in catches. I do not wish to deny that there is prima facie a problem. This has been addressed in recent years by reductions in drift netting and it might be necessary, depending on how matters develop, to seek further reductions.
However, I believe the Minister has been a little isolated in this debate. It is easy for people living inland like me or in city constituencies to be on the side of the angels in this debate and simply write off places such as Donegal. In Donegal there is, perhaps, the highest unemployment rate in the country. In south-west Donegal, fisheries are a natural resource and the area is the capital of fishing. We do not have the right simply to make these people redundant.
There should be balance in the debate. We should acknowledge that there are many technical factors involved and we should take the trouble to try to understand them. The politically popular choice is simply to get on one's soap box and pronounce a simplistic message but if we do that, we will not do justice to the people who live around our coasts and who depend on fisheries for a living.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
A previous speaker from this side of the House was chastised for being partisan and political but I hope I will not. I hope what I have to say, which will be critical, will be seen to be founded on clear, scientific evidence and not as politically partisan. I have no reason to be partisan.
To give an example, I was extraordinarily impressed by the contribution of Senator Dardis. He spoke from the Government benches with clarity, the real passion of a committed fisherman and with honesty. That was most important. He made clear what he believed should be the solution. With regard to Senator Mansergh's contribution, one listens to people of a party political persuasion, sometimes with a degree of amusement, when they talk about the easy political choice and what is most popular with voters, as if political parties on one side of the House were immune from this. Of course, they are not. There is a political element in this debate and I accept that.
Senator Mansergh spoke about the rights of the fishermen but soon there will be no fish left anyway. That is the situation we face. The Minister said that the Government has accepted the scientific advice. That is too little, too late. According to Deputy Eamon Ryan, the Minister of State ignored scientific advice and issued a quota for 150,000 fish but only 100,000 were caught. There were insufficient numbers of fish. Salmon stocks are obviously reduced.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator should get his facts right.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
According to The Irish Times, "Minister of State Pat the Cope Gallagher has ignored developmental and scientific advice and appears determined that nothing will halt the decline in salmon stocks...". It all comes down to ending drift netting. Of course, the fishermen must be compensated but there is no point pretending there will be a fishing industry if the practice is not ended. I will quote from another scientific paper: "The TAC [total allowable catch] approach has, however, been serious compromised by two factors: the consistent failure of the Minister of the day to follow scientific advice in setting TACs....". This is not against a particular party or Minister but against all of them. They have all been afraid to grasp this nettle.
On a personal basis I have a great fondness for the Minister and he is a decent man. However, he more or less admitted that he was massaging the situation a little. He told the House: "Senators will be aware that I have already given a firm commitment to aligning the exploitation of salmon with scientific advice by 2007...". One sees shades of St. Augustine, asking the Lord to make him chaste but not just yet because there is fun to be had in the meantime. The reference to 2007 is a clear indication that the Minister is not taking the scientific advice at present. He said as much in his speech by saying we will adhere to the scientific advice in 2007, two years hence. What will the situation be then? That is the problem.
There is another matter. I base my contribution on facts and the Minister is welcome to challenge them. According to the latest scientific advice the returns of spawning salmon in 2004 were below the levels required to meet their conservation limits in 14 of the 17 Irish fishery districts. Eight of the 14 districts were so far below their conservation limits that the scientific advice was that there was no exploitable surplus of salmon. In other words, there should have been no fishing in those areas. The source of this information is a paper entitled "Provisional Catch Advice for 2005 from the Standing Scientific Committee of the National Salmon Commission to the Commission", dated 30 November 2004.
I appreciate, as a practical politician, that there is a large scale drift net industry, particularly in the Donegal area. Let us be honest — that means there is political pressure. We should strengthen the Minister's hand in dealing with this political pressure by ensuring that all sides of the House recognise the crisis with fishing stocks. There is no question that there is a crisis. It is my understanding that most of the drift net fishermen recognise they are at the end of the line and will accept a compensation package.
The Minister also said that he will not make any money available until and unless it is proved to be in the common good. What planet are we on? It has been proved time and again that it is in the common good to give these people a dignified exit from a situation where they are destroying the industry for everybody, not just for the commercial trawlers. It also affects angling, which is worth €55 million to this country and has spin-off effects for hotels, cottage industries, ghillies, boatmen, the people who supply bait and so forth. There is a strong economic argument in that regard but it is being killed. The Minister is well aware that the angling magazines are warning people away from Ireland because of the disastrous situation. We must tackle this issue directly and immediately; putting it off is useless.
The Minister gave a party political speech in which he took on the spirit of the Taoiseach, Deputy Bertie Ahern, by saying, in effect, lots done, more to do. He stated that throughout the last year the Government has done this, that and the other, but that he fully accepts that there is more to be done. First, he has not done half enough in the past and, second, he can start immediately in addressing the situation regarding fish stocks. Those are comments on the Minister of State's speech. They are not made in a personal or partisan sense, I would say so to any Minister of any party in Government because we are facing a real crisis.
One must look at the figures. Senator Mansergh stated that we do not really know and the scientific evidence is unclear. Not only is it not unclear, it is unanimous and totally unambiguous. If Senator Mansergh thinks it is the seals who are responsible for it, then I suggest he should do another doctorate in marine biology and marine science because we know that at least 70% of the salmon catch throughout the entire island comes from drift netting. That only leaves 30% to be distributed among everybody else, including the unfortunate seals who have been——
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is not the Senator Norris I know. That makes no sense whatsoever. I ask him to repeat his comments.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Some 70% of the Irish salmon taken by all methods of exploitation, including recreational angling, fall to the drift nets. I have with me the catch returns in itemised form. On top of that——
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How many did the seals consume?
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
This is the point. The Minister of State does not know, does he?
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
The Senator does not know.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I have a fairly good idea. Nothing justifies the slaughter of the seals, the way it was done against the law in Kerry. It is easy for the Minister to blame the seals for his inadequacy and finger a poor unfortunate dumb animal instead of doing what all the scientists state he should do. Over the period from 1970 to 2003, for example, the salmon catch has dropped to less than one quarter of its previous levels. That should set alarm bells ringing in even the dullest of minds and I am not suggesting for one second that the sharp person from Donegal has a dull mind. If there are some dull minds around, they need to be awoken.
The clear scientific indications are that in 59% of our rivers no salmon should be taken by any means whatever. That is what the scientists are saying. A further 27% should have severe reductions applied. This is what we are being told and this is where we need action.
If one looks at the question of growing salmon, many of the rivers that have a potential to produce juvenile salmon are on the south-east and east coasts. Here is a situation where they put drift nets right across the mouths of the rivers — it has been described to me as like having a drift net across the factory gates. The Minister of State is stopping production by allowing this method, which should be stopped.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
From where is the Senator getting that information?
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I ask the Senator to stop chirruping away; he will get his opportunity in a couple of minutes.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will give Senator Kenneally all the details and documents. I would have no difficulty in doing so. They are facts in black and white. We know it. There is no point in denying it. Why is the Minister of State in denial? We know it perfectly well. We know that bass have been affected. One must look at the position in the case of cod. Were we not all on the same side when the people in Newfoundland were fighting against the Spanish and Portuguese? Why is he singing a different tune now? We should be trying to protect what is left of our stocks. We also know that, for example, there should be proper openness and transparency in the case of our own fishermen and in terms of resources. I am sure the Minister of State could confirm — or perhaps he will express disbelief as well — that at weekends, and occasionally even in the evenings, there are no patrols.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
We have no regulations. I am delighted to hear that the salmon take the weekends off. That is another scientific fact from Fianna Fáil. That is great. Do they have bank holidays off as well?
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I could not be bothered listening to that kind of tripe.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
That will be quite enough for me. There are other matters that should be addressed such as the lack of resources for monitoring this matter. I do not mean only monitoring our own people. If they are so innocent, why do they go without navigation lights when they are about this filthy, wasteful and profligate trade of monofilament and drift netting?
Let us look at the foreign fishermen. We all know what they do and I presume the Minister of State knows also, the way they leave their nets in the sea to save time when they are going back with their catch. They catch every conceivable kind of fish and then just dump them overboard. They then cut the nets while repairing them and leave them at the bottom of the sea where they can entangle all kinds of different fish, and there is no regulation. I can read it here, that the practice of repairing these nets at sea, cutting away and dumping overboard the miles of non-bio-degradable netting retaining only the ropes, means many miles of netting ensnare fish uselessly, fish that are then dumped.
The Minister of State knows that my interest in this is not frivolous. I have been raising this matter over the past four or five years at least. No. 22, motion No. 13 on the Order Paper, in my name and supported by the other Independents, calls for what the Minister of State should address as a programme — a total ban, starting now, on mono and multi-monofilament gill and drift nets; a ban on trawling within a six mile limit; no netting of any description within one mile of the low water mark; the creation of and an increase in the protection for nursery and spawning areas; closed seasons to protect spawning fish; angling groups like the IFSA to be involved in consultation processes; a full survey of all recreational anglers to determine our economic input; an increase in minimum sizes and a reduction of quotas for commercially exploited species; increased fishery protection resources; much tighter oversight of domestic and foreign vessels as regards landings, gear, etc.; an end to the practices of marine dumping and aggregate extraction; and, an end to nuclear waste dumping. There are other issues, including the zebra mussels.
It really surprises me to hear the occasional voice — it is not yet even the majority voice in Fianna Fáil — chirruping up to protect the Spanish trawlers from my attacks. This is a national resource which we sold out during our negotiations with the European Union. At least let us protect that fragment which remains and nourish it back to some semblance of health.
I acknowledge the difficult position of the Minister of State. I encourage him to take a courageous stance. He should not keep postponing it. Otherwise he will be in an election in 2007. I ask him to act immediately. Why create this miasma about whether it is in the national good? The Minister of State knows it is in the national good. We all know it is in the national good to provide for decent fishermen so that we can continue with the salmon stocks.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
How many did the Spanish catch?
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I will give the Minister the figures tomorrow.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It will be mañana.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
It is not just what they catch. It is the amount of damage they do.
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I am always entertained by my friend and colleague, Senator Norris.
David Norris (Independent)
Link to this: Individually | In context
And I am always patronised by the Senator.
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
There he goes. I was about to pay him a more fulsome compliment in that there are people who pay to hear him. It is wonderfully refreshing that we do not have to pay to hear him in this House.
4:00 pm
Paschal Mooney (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
Long may it continue because he is theatre at its best and we really could learn a great deal from him in that regard. If I had my hat on, I would take it off to him.
Answering his argument, which was eliciting the comments and reactions from this side of the House, is like trying to separate the wheat from the chaff; I will leave that to the Minister of State to do in his own forensic and efficient way, which I hope the Senator will stay to hear.
I wish to repeat much of what has been stated already on salmon being a national asset. I approach this from a more rural perspective in that I come from a part of Ireland in the north west where for decades there has been under-capitalisation and under-investment in adequate onshore facilities to encourage a greater number of anglers to come here. The Minister of State, coming from County Donegal, is aware of the importance of angling tourism. He made the point repeatedly in his speech and he does not need to be told by advisers, by a commission or by anybody else of the importance of angling tourism, particularly in my part of the country but not exclusively so. I share his view on buyouts and whether it makes economic sense to spend an estimated €25 million, which I understand from third parties would be the cost, or is more effective to invest that money in angling tourism across the country. In the Leitrim lakeland district we have an abundance of lakes and fish but have traditionally had a problem of access and insufficient and inadequate onshore facilities for our visiting and resident anglers. I am pleased that in recent years, under the watch of the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, there has been an increase in funding in this regard, channelled through the various regional boards.
Local angling interests have expressed concern to me at possible moves towards the abolition or centralisation of the fisheries boards. That would not be a positive step. It would be a disadvantage, particularly to those of us living in Leitrim and those in the peripheral regions, primarily the west of Ireland, where there is a large lakeland environment. The Shannon Regional Fisheries Board and the Northern Regional Fisheries Board which each look after one half of County Leitrim have been doing a very good job. Will the Minister of State inform us whether there are plans or suggestions in the pipeline for centralisation of these boards? I am convinced the regional boards are a good idea. The Shannon Regional Fisheries Board has been circulating correspondence to its constituent members asking them to fight against this proposal.
I agree with much of what has been said, despite the points made by Senator Norris. We accept this is a controversial issue. A group of parliamentarians from the Faroe Islands who made a submission to the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs a few weeks ago said that their islands had never had a history of drift net fishing. They could not quite understand how we still had it here. Unlike many other Ministers who must acquaint themselves with the nuances and detail of their brief, the Minister of State comes from a fishing background and environment. He has made it clear, and I share his view, that any alignment of salmon stocks should be done on scientific advice. I am pleased he has requested the National Salmon Commission to examine the scientific dimension to this controversy and to report back to him by 2007. Some 359,002 wild salmon returned to our waters in 2004, including 191,579 spawners. Therefore, there is an abundance of salmon returning to Irish rivers.
I agree with the point made with regard to the dividing line between the importance of fishing for commercial purposes and the importance of angling tourism. I am prejudiced in this regard and come down in favour of angling tourism and those who participate in it, not only because of the value to the local economy but to the national economy also. The Minister is right when he says the trend across Europe is towards a reduction in angling. I am not sure why this is so. In the past decade people made repeated representations to me about the pollution levels on the upper River Shannon. Some photographs were sent to me showing the white foam appearing on the water in good traditional fishing areas around Rooskey and farther north. As a result of Government policy on this in recent years, the problem has dissipated. I pay tribute to people in the agricultural sector who have taken on their responsibility in this regard. However, the problem has not been totally eliminated and I suggest it is a contributory factor to the reduction in fish stocks available for angling tourism.
There has certainly been a reduction in the number of angling tourists to my part of the world and the upper Shannon region. I am sure the Minister of State is aware of the problems in the angling tourism sector. Not only does the problem affect the Exchequer, it also has an adverse impact on the bed and breakfast places where anglers traditionally stayed. With the increase in the number of hotels, as a result of tax incentives introduced by the Government over the past ten years, there is now a reduction in the number of visitors using bed and breakfast establishments.
A couple from England recently stated in a letter how much they enjoyed their time in Ireland and criticised those who referred to it as a rip-off country. The couple in question were pensioners and pointed out that in Ireland we do not pay council tax, we have free travel for the elderly and have cheaper hotels than in the United Kingdom. The writer wanted to know why people here were whingeing and whining about the country. I found the letter refreshing coming from people who had travelled around Ireland on holiday for the first time in approximately 15 years. The writer was not, therefore comparing with recent years.
The abolition of salmon drift net fishing is not the sole question. There are wider issues at both a macro and micro economic level. Real hardship is being experienced by people in the tourism sector. I hope the Minister of State will be guided by the scientific advice, but also by the needs of the people in his part of the country. I appreciate that he must look after the national interest, but as a Minister of State, a Deputy and a former MEP he has first-hand knowledge of the needs of the tourism and fishery sectors in the north west and the west. I wish him well in his deliberations. I applaud him for consulting with those in the scientific community and on the setting up of the National Salmon Commission. He has also taken note of many of the recommendations in the report. These actions will hopefully feed intothis debate and resolve the problem once and for all.
Maurice Cummins (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the report of the joint committee and the submissions made to it. I have listened with interest to the major part of this debate and the wide divergence of opinions expressed as to how we can tackle the problem.
A number of weeks ago a deputation came to my clinic in Lismore representing angling, hotel and tourism interests in the area. The group made a professional presentation and outlined the decrease in salmon stocks, in particular in the Blackwater River, over the past number of years. The same is happening in most parts of the country. This affects businesses such as services to anglers, bed and breakfast establishments, and hotels. Businesses have had to let people go.
This is a major problem. Like the Minister of State, I believe our salmon stocks are a national asset that must be conserved and protected. No matter what side of the fence one is on in this debate, we all believe there must be more conservation and protection of salmon stocks.
Pollution is a major problem in some rivers. Poaching, seals and cormorants have also been mentioned as causing a problem. There is no doubt, however, that drift netting is probably the greatest problem where salmon stocks are concerned. As previous speakers noted, my party favours a voluntary buyout or set-aside, which the Minister of State should consider at an early stage. As Senator Kenneally outlined, the vast majority of people in many areas, particularly in the south east, would avail of a voluntary cessation and buyout. This must be part of any solution to the problem.
It is estimated that salmon fishing is worth €55 million to the economy. The decline in anglers visiting Ireland from 54,000 in 1999 to 27,000 in 2004 must cause concern. It must pose a major problem for tourism interests in areas connected with angling around the country. The Minister of State mentioned that it is far more beneficial and economical to have fish caught by the rod rather than through drift netting. The livelihoods of people around the coast must be considered in any buyout, which is why Fine Gael believes any buyout should be voluntary. Telling people to stop all drift netting immediately would not be a sensible policy. We would make great strides in conservation with the reduction we would achieve if a voluntary buyout or set-aside were introduced.
Previous speakers have alluded to the coverage of angling in Ireland in international magazines, about which I am concerned. Trout and Salmon, a UK angling magazine, called us international outlaws because of our attitude to salmon. Articles like these, which tell people there is no point in visiting Ireland because there are no fish, will not encourage people to visit this country. Some visitors from Germany told me recently they were here despite reading in magazines that there were no fish left in Ireland. They enjoyed their visit but caught very few fish. Anglers read these magazines and this type of negative information about Ireland will have a devastating effect on the number of anglers visiting the country.
The Minister should immediately opt for a voluntary buyout. Most people regard waiting until 2007 to introduce a buyout as kicking to touch. What is the Government waiting for? We have had numerous reports on this issue and all it requires is a decision. The Government should not use science as a refuge in order to prevent the introduction of necessary measures. The sooner the Minister opts for the voluntary buyout and set-aside, the better it is for conservation, anglers and fishermen throughout the country.
Brendan Daly (Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I extend my deepest sympathy to Mrs. Hazel Lawlor and her family on the tragic death of Liam Lawlor at the weekend. I also extend my sympathies to his brother, Noel Lawlor, with whom I canvassed in a by-election in Dundalk many years ago.
I welcome the opportunity to speak on this issue and thank the committee for bringing the report before the House. I also thank Senator Dardis for preparing a very detailed and comprehensive report and compliment him on his speech here today. There have been so many reports on the salmon industry that it is almost impossible to keep track of them all. I recall receiving the report of the salmon review body when I was a Minister of State in 1987. This report set out what needed to be done in the area of conservation in a very comprehensive fashion. The report included a very detailed assessment of the measures taken in various countries, including the Faroe Islands and Canada, to deal with declining salmon stocks and I would recommend it to those interested in how these two countries dealt with the problem.
Declining stocks of Atlantic salmon are a problem for many countries, not just Ireland. It is significant that there were very clear indications that netting in general and drift netting, in particular, did their fair share of damage to salmon stocks in all the countries with which discussions were held in the late 1980s. I agree with Senator O'Toole's remark at the outset of the debate that anyone here or abroad who feels that the complete abolition of salmon drift net fishing will save salmon stocks is mistaken. There are other issues that are equally, if not more, relevant.
The Annageeragh River in west Clare, which flows from Doolough Lake and into the sea near Quilty, is a very important salmon and brown and white trout fishing river. The river was not affected by the decline in white trout stocks over the last number of years and has attracted many anglers in the summer. However, it is being almost totally annihilated by a water treatment plant at Doolough Lake and the fact that the model of the culvert which allows the fish to escape into the catchment has been broken down for approximately one year. A fault at the water treatment plant led to thousands of salmon and white and brown trout being wiped out in the Annageeragh River. Nobody wishes to accept any responsibility for the broken culvert. The Shannon Regional Fisheries Board does not have the money or legal power to deal with the problem, the Office of Public Works does have the statutory authority to deal with it but claims it cannot do so because it is not on the list of arterial drainage rivers and the county council does not have the money to deal with it. Drift netting is not a factor in this affair but due to the neglect of the outlets and model of the intake to allow the escape of salmon into the catchment, the river is being systematically wiped out and will be gone in approximately three to four years time.
My father, John Daly, was the chief clerk and secretary to the Limerick Fishery Board, which is now the Shannon Regional Fisheries Board, from around 1929 to 1965. I worked with the Shannon Regional Fisheries Board and was brought up in a fisheries office. I was also a member of the Shannon Board of Conservators for a considerable number of years and examined some of its records over the weekend. I learned of a major debate on the abolition of drift netting and the fact that there were approximately 300 boats fishing for salmon off the north west from the minutes of a meeting of the Shannon fishery board in 1919. Those who attended the 1919 meeting were exercised by the upcoming motorisation of the fishing boats. In other words, the boats were about to be fitted with engines. When I had ministerial responsibility for fisheries in 1982 and 1987-88, I endeavoured to talk to the drift net fishermen. I regret to say that the fishermen in question showed no interest in any form of buyout or sell-out at that time.
I have heard a representative of the Shannon netsmen on national and local radio in recent weeks, criticising the Minister and the Minister of State for their neglect of the salmon industry. He failed to tell the listeners that the 70 drift nets which have been on the River Shannon since the 1930s, when the Ardnacrusha project was completed, have been operating illegally for the last 30 or 40 years, including this year. The nets are not drift nets of the strict sense which are allowed, but fixed engines which are fixed by fishermen to take as much salmon as they possibly can. I appreciate that it is their business, but if they want to criticise our approach to the matter we are entitled to ask them where their responsibility lies. Given that they are operating what are described in the Fisheries Acts as "illegal fixed engines", rather than "drift nets", in the lower Shannon, from the mouth of the Shannon to Coonagh, it is no wonder that salmon stocks are in their current state.
I am conscious of the damage being done to salmon stocks by wildlife. It was proposed at the 1919 fisheries board meeting to which I referred to arm the approximately 1,000 people who were operating stake weirs on the River Shannon at that time, before the construction of Ardnacrusha, with guns so that they could control the river's seal population. At that time, the Shannon fishery board was also paying a bounty on otters, which can do irreparable and immeasurable damage to spawning beds in October and November. I have some sympathy for seals, which can damage catches when they get into nets, but I am not so sure about otters, which can annihilate spawning salmon when they get into spawning beds. I consider the activities of otters to be far more serious than the activities of seals.
It was also proposed at the important 1919 meeting of the fishery board to increase the bounty on mergansers to one shilling and 6 p and on cormorants to half a crown. The fishing industry on the River Shannon was thriving in 1919, when all our rivers had good salmon stocks. At the 1919 meeting, concerns were expressed about netting in the north west and the illegal activities of poachers, who are still rampant today. Those at the meeting spoke about the illegal activities of the operators of drift net fishermen who were fixing their nets to fixed engines, thereby doing immeasurable damage to stocks. Concerns were expressed about the effect on salmon stocks of the activities of otters, seals, mergansers, cormorants and other predators.
I am worried about the damage being done by the forestry sector to spawning areas in the upper tributaries of our smaller rivers. I understand that Coillte has taken steps to deal with such problems, for example by prohibiting the planting of trees within a certain distance of spawning streams. I believe that the most significant damage is being done to salmon stocks in areas where spawning is carried out. Salmon can encounter difficulties when they try to escape into catchments and to overcome various obstacles. The most important aspect of the salmon fishing sector that needs to be safeguarded is the spawning area. We need to deal with that aspect effectively by ensuring that salmon can escape into catchments and that they receive protection when they are spawning in catchments. In that way, we can reverse to a large extent the significant decline in salmon stocks over recent years.
I disagree with the comments of Senator Cummins about the proposal to initiate a voluntary buyout scheme in respect of drift nets and draft nets. If such a voluntary scheme is introduced, some fishermen will leave the sector but the remaining fishermen will fish the additional stocks which will come into the catchment area. If one removes 50 drift nets from the River Shannon, the remaining 25 drift nets will reap the benefit of that. If there is to be a buyout, I strongly suggest to the Minister of State that it should be compulsory, so that all the drift nets and draft nets will be removed from our waterways. I would be prepared to allow the compulsory process to continue for a certain length of time. I do not think three years would be long enough. One would have to allow the scheme to continue for a longer period of time so that one could examine whether it is working.
The drift net issue has to be dealt with. It would be unwise to think that salmon stocks can be miraculously saved by removing drift nets from the salmon fishing sector. A combination of issues needs to be dealt with. I am glad the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, has such great knowledge and experience of the fisheries sector. I gave him some training for a few years. I am confident that he will make the right decision when considering whether schemes should be put in place to remove drift and draft nets from the mouths of catchments. I suggest that all such nets should be removed, or none should be removed.
Paul Bradford (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I would like to say a few words as part of this important debate. I welcome the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, to the House. I recognise that he will have a difficult job in trying to resolve this issue. Ireland spends billions of euro each year, in the form of direct grant aid or tax incentives, for example, on trying to attract enterprise and industry. We need to ensure we protect our natural assets and resources, such as our salmon stocks, which help to create jobs and wealth.
The Irish salmon, which is as old as the nation, is synonymous with this country. It continues to be one of our greatest resources, despite the pressure on it. Our tourism industry, which employs tens of thousands of people, is another of our great natural resources. Earlier this afternoon, I attended a meeting of the Joint Committee on Foreign Affairs, which featured a presentation by our counterparts from Australia, who mentioned that some 125,000 Australian people visit Ireland every year. The Irish salmon is a magnetic attraction to the many tourists from Australia and other countries who come to this country to do some fishing on Irish rivers. We have an absolute economic duty to ensure that our angling industry is maintained. Like the Minister of State, all Senators need to reflect on whether angling tourism is compatible with the drift net fishing sector. The report under discussion attempts to resolve this difficult matter.
Senator Cummins and I are familiar with the important angling tradition on the River Blackwater. We have read many reports over the years about the decline in salmon stocks on the river, which is having a negative impact on tourism in the Blackwater Valley. As I am not an expert in this field, I cannot claim to know all the reasons for the pressure on salmon stocks. However, we cannot ignore the fact that drift netting is playing a major role in reducing salmon stocks on our rivers. Action must be taken. We must also recognise that many people are employed in the drift net industry. We cannot expect them to simply go away without an adequate level of compensation. I hope the Minister of State will give serious consideration to the recommendations in the report.
I agree with Senator Daly's point in regard to a buyout, be it long-term, temporary or with a set-aside option. A voluntary buyout or set-aside scheme may not work satisfactorily because it will be taken up by those who are least successful in the industry. This happened when the possibility existed for farmers to sell their milk quotas in that it was not the large farmers who sold their quotas but the less economically developed ones. A voluntary scheme would be costly for the Department and the State to operate but would not produce results because the larger drift net fishermen would stay in business.
If we see a buyout as a way out, it will have to be undertaken on a basis other than a voluntary one. We must bring all involved within the net, if Members will excuse the pun, but this will be costly. We cannot expect drift net fishermen to simply wind down operations. We must be prepared to invest funding in a proper, attractive scheme with a good financial package because, if it works and we help the conservation and further development of salmon stocks, it will produce significant benefits from a tourism and angling perspective.
In my former constituency, I know people from the drift net community and those involved in angling. I appreciate that the issues involved are not simple ones. It is not easy to square a circle and, in this case, it cannot be done. However, while a difficult choice faces the Minister, we must put at the top of the policy agenda the need to conserve salmon stocks and allow them to flourish, and to ensure that the tens of thousands of domestic anglers and tourists who come to fish our waters continue to do so. The statistics highlight the large variation in value to the economy between a salmon caught by an angler and a salmon caught in nets. Given those figures alone, we know what we must do. It is a question of putting in place a fair system. The idea of the system being introduced on a three or four-year trial basis should be considered.
I concur with Senator Daly's point with regard to a voluntary versus a compulsory scheme. While we in this country do not like the word "compulsory", a voluntary system will cost money but will not produce results. If we are in the business of spending money, we must implement a proper scheme and move towards a system which will remove the nets and allow salmon to be re-stocked in rivers, allow the angling industry to thrive and the tourism industry to recover and grow. That would be a big reward at the end of the line. However, there will be a significant cost element to compensation and the Minister of State, Deputy Gallagher, and the Minister for Finance will need to be willing to come up with the necessary funding. We cannot expect those in the drift net industry, who have been in the business for generations, to disappear without fair and equitable compensation. I hope the Minister will try to put a fair package in place.
No matter how long this debate continues, there is only one question, namely, whether we will take tough measures to conserve salmon stocks. We must be willing to do so. It is one of our oldest and greatest natural resources and we must ensure it is available for coming generations, as it has been for all generations past.
Paddy Burke (Fine Gael)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I welcome the Minister of State to the House for this important debate. As Senator Bradford stated, action needs to be taken with regard to salmon stocks. I listened to most of this debate. I was interested in the contribution of most speakers, particularly that of Senator Dardis, who made an impressive contribution. Senator Daly is correct to state that the removal of nets from river catchment areas is important and should be done immediately.
I support our party position in regard to the voluntary buyout and set-aside option. Coming from a county which offers sea angling, drift netting and has some of the greatest fishing rivers and lakes in Europe, I have seen at first hand the damage to which Senator Dardis, who is a keen angler, referred.
It is undoubtedly the case that anglers are no longer coming to Ireland. In some cases, Irish anglers are travelling to other countries in Europe and elsewhere to have the great pleasure of catching a salmon on a rod. This is disgraceful when one considers the river, lake and sea fishing available here.
Having spoken to hoteliers and restauranteurs recently, it is clear wild salmon is almost a thing of the past. Restaurants can now only buy wild salmon from drift net fishermen. If drift net fishing finishes, no wild salmon will be available because the purchase of rod-caught salmon is not allowed. The Minister of State should examine this issue. We need increased enforcement. Given proper enforcement, it might be possible for restaurants to buy fish from anglers who have caught salmon on a rod. Otherwise, we will never again have wild salmon on menus.
The issue of access to lakes is important. In my county, access is very poor and it is hard to understand how boats get onto rivers or lakes — Lough Conn and Lough Cullin in particular. Grants should be made available through local authorities, the fisheries boards or the board of works. So many agencies and vested interests are involved, it is hard to know who is responsible for access to rivers and lakes, a matter which must be examined.
There is also the issue of keeping lake levels at a certain point during the summer by temporarily removing weirs. I live close to the Castlebar lake and every year there is a constant hassle about putting the weir in place and taking it out even though it is not a large job for the local authority or fisheries board responsible. All Members agree action must be taken on salmon drift netting. The Fine Gael Party has argued for a voluntary buyout and set-aside scheme.
Pat Gallagher (Donegal South West, Fianna Fail)
Link to this: Individually | In context
I pay tribute to the sub-committee on salmon drift netting, draft netting and angling, under the chairmanship of Deputy O'Flynn and represented by Senator Kenneally and others, for its report on salmon drift netting. I only wish it were a matter of simply finding the funding for compensatory measures to resolve this problem. If it was as simple as that, we would be living in utopia.
However, as many Members pointed out, it is not as simple as that. One can get the impression little has been done when in fact much has been done over the last several years. Earlier this year at the end of a three year process, the scientists involved changed their methodology from a 50% risk assessment to 75% risk assessment, which resulted in these changes. Socio-economic factors were also taken into account. Leaving these aside, funding of X million euro, when it is decided, must be distributed in an equitable manner to all those involved by the National Salmon Commission, the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources, BIM or the fisheries boards. Some claim I favour the drift netters as there are so many of them in County Donegal. There are only 140 out of 800 as no one in Donegal, like the rest of the country, can survive solely on the income earned from drift netting. The activity is supplementing other income.
Senator Norris suggested that Senator Mansergh, after he left the Chamber, should do another doctorate, this time in microbiology. All other Members made genuine contributions. As for Senator Norris, it would be hilarious if it was not so serious. He does not need to get a PhD himself on this matter but at least he should get his facts right. To show how ludicrous his contribution was, he will tell me tomorrow how much salmon seals consume each year. It makes me remember on an occasion when salmon had escaped from a fish farm cage, an individual declared that we would not stop until every salmon was retrieved. This is going from the sublime to the ridiculous. Senator Norris's contribution was funny but this is a serious matter.
It is said that I should take a courageous decision and ban salmon drift netting now. When the history of this matter is written, it will show that such a decision would be wrong. The National Salmon Commission is representative of all stakeholders. Last Saturday in Killarney, I met those representing the commercial sector. I discussed with them the necessity for balance and to recognise the important role played by the angling tourism sector. I, along with the Minister for Arts, Sports and Tourism, Deputy O'Donoghue, received a letter from the Stop Salmon Drift Nets Now campaigners. When I explained the National Salmon Commission would examine it, I was told the commission was too balanced. We cannot discriminate positively or negatively. The commission must examine this matter. If I was to take the decision on a ban now, the criticism would be all the greater.
In Galway next week, the chairman of the National Salmon Commission will meet representatives of the Stop Salmon Drift Nets Now group and the drift net association. This is the right approach to the issue. All representatives on the commission are serious about this and are anxious to examine all reports, including the one prepared by Senator Dardis. Some bodies claim they are not represented on the commission. Unfortunately there was not enough space for all. One cannot put the pint into the half pint bottle. However, those groups will have an opportunity to make their views known to the commission, either orally or in written submission.
There is much talk about compensatory measures. However, this is not the responsibility of the State alone. Many of those who will benefit from a ban, such as those in private fisheries, have said they will make a contribution to the measures. It would be wrong of the Government alone to provide this funding. I have no hang-up on this issue. There are many in County Donegal who are anxious for the introduction of a buyout or set-aside scheme. Legally, it is not compulsory for the Government to provide one cent for a buyout. If a Minister believes such a measure must be introduced in the interests of conservation, he is entitled to do so. However, there are moral considerations in this. Whether one is an angler or a commercial fisherman, this is part of our heritage.
I am not carrying any baggage on this issue. As I said at my party's Ard-Fheis, the only baggage I have is that I am a Donegal man. Please God, I will carry that until the end of my days. I want to be fair and all sides to be treated equitably. Compensatory measures must be financed by those who will benefit from a ban. I am not sure what percentage was stated would be paid by other interests. However, we must first establish what it will cost. As the custodians of the fisheries, we must ensure they are there for future generations.
One Member suggested we may never have wild salmon on restaurant menus again. Many in the industry have produced farmed salmon that compares favourably with wild salmon. However, one should not replace the other. If we can work with scientists, we can have a sustainable fishery.
Senator Daly pointed out that we are not concentrating much on the spawning grounds. We must also concentrate on poaching, pollution and seals. It has been intimated that I condoned what happened to seals in County Kerry last year when I actually condemned it.
This is not the end of the issue of drift netting. We are coming towards a decision. I will not be the one standing in the way of expediting what is in the best interest of all involved.