I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 1:—
Section 9. In sub-section (8), page 7, line 41, the word "of" deleted where it secondly occurs and the word "for" substituted therefor.
Fisheries Bill, 1938—From the Seanad.
Will the Minister say what it is about?
It has been circulated. It is a verbal amendment, to put in the word "for" for "of". Any Deputy can read that.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 2:—
Section 29. In sub-section (1), the words "Whenever the Minister is satisfied that there is not in a fishing weir a free gap constructed in accordance with Section 9 of the Salmon Fishery (Ireland) Act, 1863" deleted and the following words:—"Whenever, notwithstanding any decision made by the Special Commissioners under the provisions of the Salmon Fishery (Ireland) Act, 1863, or any court of competent jurisdiction prior to the passing of this Act, the Minister is satisfied that there is not in a fishing weir a gap in accordance with Section 9 of that Act" substituted therefor.
A similar amendment was discussed here and in the Seanad and the effect is with this sub-section inserted the Minister can order the owner of a weir to make alterations notwithstanding the fact that the weir was considered to be all right under sub-section (9) of the Act of 1863. A number of Deputies advocated the advisability of this amendment but I resisted it successfully. I was not so successful in the Seanad and I advise the Dáil to accept the amendment.
This is the famous Lismore case.
That is what was in mind.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 3:—
Section 29. In sub-section (2), the word "constructed" deleted in lines 14 and 23.
This amendment is consequential to amendment No. 2.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 4:—
Section 29. Before sub-section (9), the following new sub-section inserted:—
(9) This section shall not apply in respect of any fishing weir which was the subject of an order under Section 11 of the Salmon Fishery (Ireland) Act, 1863.
This is also consequential in so far as it excludes certain weirs from amendment No. 2. It excludes them under Section 11 of the Act of 1863. It refers to weirs on rivers less than 40 feet wide.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 5:—
Section 33. In sub-section (5), page 20, line 10, before the word "use" the words "erection and" inserted.
This is an expansion of the wording of the section. It not only gives the Minister the right to use but to erect and use.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 6:—
Section 34, Before sub-section (4), the following new sub-section inserted:—
(4) Nothing in this section shall be construed as precluding the use by the Minister of traps for the capture of fish for the purpose of artificial propagation.
This is the same as No. 5 amendment. It is a verbal expansion which gives the Minister power for certain purposes as well as using the weirs.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 7:—
Section 38. At the end of the section the following new sub-section added:—
(5) Where a person, being a common carrier, is charged under this section with the offence of having in his possession or control any salmon or trout unlawfully captured, it shall be a good defence to such charge for such person to prove—
(a) that he had such salmon or trout in his possession or control as a common carrier and not otherwise, and
(b) that at the time at which such salmon or trout was accepted by him for carriage, the consignor thereof delivered to him a certificate in writing signed by such consignor to the effect that such salmon or trout was lawfully captured.
This amendment was put in at the instance of the carrying companies. From my point of view it is a good amendment because the companies must first satisfy themselves that the fish they propose to carry were caught in a legal way.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 8:—
Section 44. In sub-section (1), page 26, line 37, the word "their" deleted and the word "its" substituted therefor.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 9:—
Section 59. In sub-section (8), page 34, line 24, after the word "under" the following inserted:—"sub-section (3),".
This is a mere verbal expansion of the section.
Question put and agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 10:—
Section 67. In sub-section (2), paragraph (a) deleted and the following paragraph substituted therefor:—
(a) the arbitrator shall have regard primarily to—
(i) in case such fishery was used during the transition period, the profits of such fishery during the transition period,
(ii) in case such fishery was not used during the transition period, the sum which in the opinion of the arbitrator would have been the profits of such fishery if such fishery had been used during the transition period;
A question arose in the Seanad that had not occurred to anyone in the Dáil, that the owner of a fishery by ceasing netting thereby enhanced the value of the fishery for angling. Under the Bill he could not get compensation even though possession would be taken by the Minister. This is to cover such a case. The position was that such fisheries would naturally be taken over but no compensation would be paid. It appeared unfair to the owners who might have voluntarily relinquished netting in order to increase the value of the fisheries. We can pay on this basis.
Does this relate only to salmon fishing?
It only deals with estuaries and fishing weirs.
It does not deal with shell-fish or mussel or oyster beds?
No; only salmon and trout.
Is there any compulsory power in the Minister to acquire oyster beds?
There is not. I should have mentioned in reply to the Deputy's previous question that it would not naturally refer to oyster beds because it is related to the section dealing with netting.
Is there any power vested in the Minister to acquire an oyster or mussel bed?
No, he need not.
Has he power to do so?
No, only the estuarine fisheries, salmon and trout, and weirs.
Question agreed to.
I move that the Committee agree with the Seanad in amendment No. 11:—
Section 73. In sub-section (7), page 42, lines 56 and 61, the word "sum" deleted and the word "payment" substituted therefor.
This amendment was requested by the Land Commission. In the Land Acts the word "payment" is used in this connection instead of the word "sum".
There is no nigger in this wood pile?
No, it is merely a change of words.
Question agreed to.
Agreement with Seanad amendments reported. Message to be sent to the Seanad accordingly.